Posted on 03/01/2010 3:51:30 AM PST by patlin
There are many in the press today caricaturing me as a "conspiracy theorist" simply because I, like millions of other Americans, insist on actually seeing proof of Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility.
I've never alleged a conspiracy. Obama was given a free pass by an opponent who had his own eligibility issues. Not much of a conspiracy necessary – especially with Obama accountable only to a fawning press and scared-of-their-shadows Republicans.
But "conspiracy theorist" is an easy epithet to hurl.
One good question to ask, the next time you hear someone call me that name, is this: "Who is Joseph Farah conspiring with?"
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
You're just ticked that you called Birthers cranks when Jim Rob is one and I pinged him. Get over it.
The twenty-first President of the United States, Chester Arthur, was a British subject at the time of his birth, and it is respectfully submitted that he was therefore not a "natural born citizen" of the United States. Whether under laws of 1829 he was even a "citizen" would be better known to this Honorable Court than to Applicant. It was further revealed that in 1880 Chester Arthur perpetrated a fraud which concealed his Vice Presidential eligibility dilemma by uttering various lies about his father's emigration from Ireland, his father's age, and his parents' residence in Canada. It's important for Applicant to show that Chester Arthur's birth as a British subject was concealed by Chester so that the Court does not take this fact as precedent as to the issue of whether Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President. Quite the opposite, it appears Chester Arthur's intentional obfuscation of family history is evidence his British birth caused him to believe he was ineligible for the office of Vice President. But this isn't the first time Chester Arthur has been accused of being a British subject. During the 1880 Presidential campaign, a man named A.P. Hinman alleged that Arthur was born in Ireland or Canada. Hinman lobbied the press for support while searching relentlessly for Chester Arthur's birth records but never found them. Perhaps, because all of the attention had been focused on that issue, history has previously neglected to reveal the issue of William Arthur's failure to naturalize before Chester was born. The definitive biography of Chester Arthur's life is “Gentleman Boss” by Thomas Reeves. Since Chester Arthur burned his papers around the time of his death, this biography fills many gaps with interviews of family members and authentic documents such as the Arthur family Bible. "Gentleman Boss” establishes, on page 4, that Chester Arthur’s father William was born in Ireland, 1796, and emigrated to Canada in 1818 or 1819. His mother Malvina was born in Vermont. His parents met in Canada and were married in 1821. They had their first child, Regina, in Dunham, Canada on March 8, 1822. By no later than 1824, the Arthur family had moved to Burlington, Vermont. Chester Arthur was their fifth child, and he was born in Fairfield, Vermont on October 5, 1829. From “Gentleman Boss”, page 202 and 203: “…Hinman was hired, apparently by democrats, to explore rumors that Arthur had been born in a foreign country, was not a natural-born citizen of the United States, and was thus, by the Constitution, ineligible for the vice-presidency. By mid-August, Hinman was claiming that Arthur was born in Ireland and had been brought to the United States by his father when he was fourteen. Arthur denied the charge and said that his mother was a New Englander who had never left her native country — a statement every member of the Arthur family knew was untrue.” In the Brooklyn Eagle newspaper, an article containing an interview with Chester Arthur regarding Hinman’s accusations was published on August 13, 1880. In that article, Chester Arthur defended himself as follows: “My father, the late Rev. William Arthur, D.D., was of Scotch blood, and was a native of the North of Ireland. He came to this country when he was eighteen years of age, and resided here several years before he was married.” This was another blatant lie. His father emigrated from Ireland to Canada at the age of 22 or 23. William Arthur didn’t come to the United States until sometime between March 1822 - when his first child was born in Dunham, Canada - and March 1824 - when his second child was born in Burlington, Vermont. The youngest he could have been when he came to Vermont was 26. On August 16, 1880 Chester Arthur told the Brooklyn Eagle newspaper that at the time of his birth, his father was forty years old. Another blatant lie. His father would have been only thirty-three years old when Chester was born. In that same article he lied that his father settled in Vermont and reiterated the lie that William came here at the age of eighteen. This age discrepancy was exposed in the August 19, 1880 edition of the Brooklyn Eagle in an article written by Hinman . It's also important to note that Chester Arthur changed his year of birth, according to Reeves, sometime between 1870 and 1880, from 1829 to 1830. He also burned his personal papers near the time he died. Chester Arthur's attempt to obfuscate family history during the 1880 campaign provides context that he believed his birth as a British subject made him ineligible to the office of Vice President.
Evidently with the other items going into his Presidential Library. Such items will be conspicuously absent from the Barry Soetoro presidential library.
We saw Orly speak yesterday at a Biker Freedom Rally in Deland, FL - she’s saying Leo’s case is THE one that the court will not be able to throw out even though a few judges will try (as has happened).
She mentioned having just recently made another appeal filing but I have not taken the time to look into what she filed.
She did talk about Obama’s multiple SS #’s and that was a huge shock to people there. They had no idea he was using one of a man born in 1890 and given out in CT or of the multiple other ones he’s used over the years.
I got to talk to her for a few minutes before she spoke but she didn’t have time to get into anything in depth.
You don’t speak for FR. But this guy does.
Post 131
To: pissant
Release the long form!
131 posted on Friday, February 12, 2010 8:28:17 PM by Jim Robinson (JUST VOTE THEM OUT! teapartyexpress.org) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
Game, set, match! Knocked that one out of the park DJ!
Thanks to the Boss. :-)
ooops, your arguments running out of steam?
Now you're sinking to deflection to some one who isn't even a topic of this thread?
Why do you defend obama?
Deflect, deflect, deflect, obot troll alert!!
I thought you would be long gone by now
Clue, we're not debating Bush's NBC status, we're debating your masters status.
BTW, wiggy, Bush's parentS were citizens, obammies communist daddy wasn't
Damn I love that line!
Mind if I use it when you're not available?
Yes you are. Arthur's father was British at the time of his birth. He later naturalized, so there is absolutely nothing Arthur could have done to cover that up as naturalization records are public.
The fact that Arthur tried to cover up other things, like his age, doesn't mean he tried to cover up his father's lack of citizenship at the time of his birth.
The link is in post 47. Try reading 167 too. I know, you guys don't like facts.
I did. Unfortunately, like most things written by birthers, those posts don't have much in the way of facts. Just lots of innuendo and speculation.
You're just ticked that you called Birthers cranks when Jim Rob is one and I pinged him. Get over it.
I stand by my statement that birthers are cranks. I really don't care whether Jim is one of them (I suspect he's not), and I really don't care whether or not you ping him.
I suspect he probably doesn't like getting pinged every five minutes about this issue, either.
The natural born status of other presidents is self-evident.
That is a very HIGH standard of proof. Why? Answer: Because it means armies of citizens are ready and willing to testify before God about the background of natural born citizen president.
Obama can not present this high standard of having fellow citizens testify before God for him. Therefore....We are politely asking ( using the rule of law) for him to present the lesser standard of certified documentation and asking courts to rule on his natural born status.
And...Some of the Obama Believers are citing Chester Arthur. Hey! Arthur wriggled and squirmed and managed to get with it. Why shouldn't Obama?
It is **EXACTLY** for this reason that they use Arthur as a precedent that we ABSOLUTELY MUST NOT LET OBAMA SET ANY PRECIDENTS FOR FUTURE PRESIDENTS EITHER!!!!
( Yes, I am shouting. I get testy when it comes to the Constitution.)
News flash, wiggie, I want you to keep this quiet though, I wouldn't want it to get out....are you ready?
Okay, here goes, now keep this low and to yourself...
GEORGE BUSH ISN'T THE POTUS ANYMORE
Be my guest. There are many that are foolish to believe that men would risk their lives and their families only to let it all be handed to someone with divided loyalties.
The after-birthers are **BELIEVERS***! It's like a cargo cult.
Cue the song by the Monkees, “I'm a Believer!”
And then I saw Obama’s face
Now I'm a believer
Not a trace
Of doubt in my mind
I'm in love
I'm a believer
I couldn't leave Obama
If I tried
like most things written by birthers, those posts don't have much in the way of facts.
Wasn't a post. 47 was a link to a court brief so I know that you looked at NOTHING.
I suspect he probably doesn't like getting pinged every five minutes about this issue, either.
Then you suspect wrong.
BM for later study.
I hear you :)
This is called "deflection". There was never any question that Bush is NBC. It's also a trick used by trolls to redefine the debate. The question is about Bam.
Though some here still will not get it, wiggy and ari being two of them
Thank 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.