Posted on 11/15/2008 6:48:02 PM PST by palmer
Obama may have a foreign parent. But he also has a foreign view of the United States Constitution, and of his obligation to abide by it.
>It doesn’t look like anything else on the document.
It’s in a different font. While the main part of the document is in Helvetica, the certificate number isn’t (look at the downward stroke on the 1 and notice how it slopes more than Helvetica) - the “This copy serves...” at the bottom is in the same font as the certificate number.
After reading 2000 out of the 6000+ post thread, I was pretty familiar, but obviously will never be to the level you are. If this trip to Kenya was all figured out in early July, why didn't Berg have affidavits before recently (i.e. for his lower court case)?
Would that be a certain octogenarian of Hungarian origin?
One thing that just occured to me is how this Birth Certificate thing could really comprimise a president. Can you imagine the black-mail a foreign country could hold over our president, if they have solid and undeniable proof that he was born in another country? They could take it to the floor of the UN like Hugo Chevez did, and would at the very least, extremly embarass our nation and harm the office of the presidency. grief, what a horrible thought. Obama, please give us proof you are who you say you are.
If nothing else, doesn’t that settle the “certificate of live birth not being the same as the birth certificate” thing?
I will leave you to do the search that people have already done. But you can start here...
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/proclamations/04771.html
Under the law, Zero would have had to register any of the six days starting with July 28th, 1980 . His registration is roundstamped on July 29th, 1980 and he signed it on July 30, 1980
The only reason this story has legs is that Obama, rather than producing the basic documents you did for your part time, he has chosen to pay many thousands of dollars to lawyers to prevent him having to disclose them
When an inaccuracy is posted, that does not change it into a truthful statement.
Uh, calling welfare a tax cut is not exactly honest.
Palmer has been palming something, I reckon.
I post about certain facts so that you can improve your case. I realize I go beyond that (e.g. questioning the evidence of the Kenya trip). I also pointed out that Polarik did a poor job analyzing of the factcheck certificate that I have linked, and I just pinged him now too. But you consider that attack on you and Polarik as support for Obama? Do you think you would have a better case if I didn't point out the deficiencies in your case?
A man must be registered to be eligible for jobs in the Executive Branch of the Federal government and the U.S. Postal Service. Proof of registration is required only for men born after December 31, 1959.
http://www.sss.gov/FSbenefits.htm
exactly.
Probably because all the other basic facts of the case were legally sufficient to force Obama to just simply SHOW US his birth certificate. After the charade presented by the lower court judge (a Clinton appointee), he was forced to provide additional concrete evidence and he had the actual one-on-one interview with the grandmother. Geez, dude, just how dedicated to providing Obama with cover are you? Rahm, is that you?
Thanks. And what's your opinion of the copy of the birth certificate on the KOS site?
Thanks, Lucy. I think Palmer is a paid operative for Obama or the DNC. A paid operative would need to discredit Polarik as quickly as possible, and, sure enough, that’s where he’s going. Eventually, Palmer will make some kind of mistake.
Read FactCheck’s defense of Obama on the 2nd Amendment for an idea how dishonest these folks are.
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.