Posted on 07/08/2013 3:14:54 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
Elizabeth Mooney, that was her name.
A Russian language class at the UH has nothing to do directly with Zero, since neither of his parents attended it. I already replied that HI was rife with commies in those days.
Instead of dangling all these quesions why not tell what you (think you) know.
Saves time and energy, both of which are in short supply.
You are batting 0% so far.
How-ever, it might be a good idea to keep in mind that the East West Centre wasn't opened until late 1961 iirc. Check Wiki.
No one has come forward to identify any of the students, or say they met the kenyan student and his friend Anne/USA there, but it's possible the girl he was photographed sitting next to at the Nachmanoffs did attend a Russian Class.
How-ever, she was NOT Stanley Ann Dunham.
Elizabeth Mooney was instrumental in bringing the kenyan student to Hawaii, after he was rejected for the first airlift, which landed at Idlewild in September 1959.
The kenyan student was by then already in Hawaii, he arrived in New York in August.
SALLY JACOBS WRITES/INTERESTING LINK
Sounds like someone on this thread ate something filled with a rancid substance?
Ann supposedly met Obama in a Russian language class, one of two classes that we know Ann took at the University of Hawaii in the fall semester of 1960. The meeting story, however, comes from Dreams and is therefore unreliable. Sally Jacobs, in her book, The Other Barack, makes reference to “Barack Obama’s transcript from the University of Hawaii, Syracuse University, Frank C. Laubach Collection.” The transcript would show us if Obama Sr. took the same Russian class that Ann did. When I requested the same records that Sally Jacobs had seen, Nicole Dittrich, the Reading Room supervisor, informed me that “...Obama Sr.’s Hawaii transcript[s are] currently missing from our collection.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_case_against_barack_obama_sr.html
If all you want to do is play coy and don’t want to provide any information, I don’t want to waste my time any more.
Thanks very much for all the info. I finally remembered Mooney’s last name, wasn’t she involved in some “literacy” outreach organization? I assume she was a leftist.
How...fortuitous. And like everything else in the myth. No evidence. All removed/scrubbed/falsified/photoshopped/locked up tight.
It’s all there in the Sally Jacobs book excerpt.
The Laubach Literacy Group were his sponsors and Frank Laubach was ‘nearest relative’ as shown on the immigration docs.
The kenyan was in NO WAY connected to the first airlift. He apparently applied, but was not accepted.
Probably not accepted due to being on that UK intelligence list.
I suspect that about 90% of all elected and appointed government officials have been tainted ,knowingly or surreptitiously with money from organizations/people like Soros ex. Roberts. Such government persons cannot live in the open with such information out in the public.
You’ll never see a transcript for the kenyan or Ann - because if they did attend a Russian Class, they didn’t attend at the same time, or together; and an actual transcript from the U of HI would show Ann’s maiden name wasn’t Dunham.
And I imagine it’s a little late to produce more forgeries.
Remember what Kiri Tith said? He knew Ann, but he had no idea that she had a relationship with the kenyan, nor married him and had a child. So Kiri knew Ann, but she wasn’t Stanley Ann Dunham.
Why is Biden a problem?
Born in Scranton, PA, which ratified the Constitution on December 12, 1787. At least 35 years old. Resident of Delaware for fourteen years prior to 2008.
In 2012, received 329 votes from Electors for Vice President of the United States, chosen as prescribed by the Legislatures of 26 States. (He also received 3 votes of Electors for DC chosen as prescribed by Congress). Said electoral votes were opened and counted as prescribed by Article II, Amendment XII, and the Electoral Vote Act of 1887, without objection.
Joseph Robinette Biden is, therefore, qualified and has been legally and Constitutionally elected Vice President of the United States, and, should the office of President be vacant (however vacated), the office would devolve on him as specified in Article II.
If a person empties their mind of preconceived notions, it’s clear who his parents AREN’T. And then you start to wonder who his parents ARE.
Well, you've put your finger on one of the problems with letting voters elect electors who choose presidents. How could we prevent crack-heads from voting? Regular mandatory drug tests for everyone? We won't tolerate that kind of thing. So, it's probably just a problem that will always be with us.
And, may the Lord bless you and yours. ;-)
You’re a slimy little viper but not as dangerous as you esteem yourself to be.
The Constitution is not supposed to be undone by a simple majority vote. That’s why we even HAVE a Supreme Court - because there are some things that a simple majority cannot do. And the Twentieth Amendment is clear that even though the electoral system can elect somebody unqualified, that unqualified person cannot then ACT AS PRESIDENT. A society of ignoramuses can vote however they want, but if it’s unconstitutional the courts are supposed to be there to overturn it. When the Constitution is at stake, there is supposed to be a pop-up that says, “That action requires a Constitutional amendment. A simple majority is not authorized to make those changes.”
We were never meant to be at the mercy of the stupid or evil among us. We were supposed to have a FOUNDATION that doesn’t shift with each new wind.
I would be OK with Biden as president- just tell him to play ball or he gets the same treatment as Obama
And appoint someone WE want as VP
Then do it to him anyway- its time we played hardball
We don't all agree about the meaning of NBC. It's just not obvious to many people that both of a candidate's parents must have been a citizen at the time of the candidate's birth for the candidate to qualify as a NBC. Just for example, Ann Coulter (Michigan law): TED CRUZ CAN RUN FOR PRESIDENT!. Ted Cruz (Harvard law) seems to consider himself a NBC. These people are not "stupid or evil" "ignoramuses" who just don't understand your argument. They just disagree with you about interpretations of the term NBC. And, that's okay. It's an inherently uncertain matter.
We don't all agree about the power and role of the Supreme Court. Many of us do not believe that it is the proper role of the Supreme Court to monopolize the interpretation of our Constitution. For example, please take the time to read Jefferson's 1820 letter to William Jarvis. ("You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.")
The Constitution describes the procedures we are to follow when we select presidents. There is nothing in the text of the Constitution to support the idea that the Supreme Court has been delegated the power to screen presidential candidates. It just isn't there, anywhere. So, you really shouldn't be surprised or distressed by the Supreme Court's failure to adopt your definition of NBC, disqualify candidates who don't conform to your definition and remove from office people you deem to be usurpers or pretenders.
You are within your rights as a voter to decide that Ted Cruz does not meet your definition of a NBC and your vote can reflect that opinion. But, for your own sanity, please try to accept that other people may reasonably disagree with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.