Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

REASONS WHY OBAMA WILL NEITHER PUBLICLY SPEAK ABOUT WHERE HE WAS BORN NOR PRODUCE HIS ORIGINAL BC
Mario Apuzzo, Esq. ^ | January 3, 2008 | Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

Posted on 01/03/2009 1:58:35 PM PST by Puzo1

Provides the reasons why Obama refuses to either speak publicly about where he was born or to produce his original birth certificate


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: bho2008; birthcertificate; certifigate; constitution; eligibility; naturalborncitizen; obama; obamatruthfile; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-187 next last
To: bronxboy
Barak Obama has been declared eligible to be president In your dreams, maybe. He has not been declared eligible by any stretch of the imagination, and he has already proven that he is not a natural-born citizen.

There is no proof that he was born here.

His father, a British subject, was not born here, and Obama acquired British citizenship at birth.

His mother was ineligible to pass along her US citizenship to Obama at birth, if she, in fact had US citizenship, but

There is no proof that his mother was a US citizen at the time of his birth, either.

The only evidence he has provided in support of his claim to be a US citizen and natural-born is a forged identification document.

The "natural-born" crap, as you derisively call it, is called the Constitution: it is the Law of the Land and the President must swear an Oath to protect, preserve, and to defend it.

Anyone who violates this Oath is a traitor.

Anyone who seeks to destroy the Constitution is a traitor.

Anyone who seeks to subvert or weaken the Constitution is a traitor.

You would be better served to learn about the Constitution and US History then to continue making these bogus, irrelevant arguments.

121 posted on 01/04/2009 10:32:10 AM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
SCOTUS Calendar:

Jan 9. Conference on Berg's writ of certiori

Jan 16: Conference on Berg's injunction to stay the certification of Obama as President until Obama proves his Constitutional eligibility.

122 posted on 01/04/2009 10:37:31 AM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coachm
Do you believe it possible that he can be forced to show the actual birth certificate prior to Jan 20?

Yes.

123 posted on 01/04/2009 10:38:15 AM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: quintr
I do not understand why each and every taxpayer/voter in the United States is denied “standing” by the Supreme Court

We did not have standing because Obama was not officially elected as President. By Friday, everyone will have standing.

124 posted on 01/04/2009 10:40:08 AM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Born In America
I suspect there are bigger players who are calling the shots.

There are and they are called, "Democrats." The term, "working across the aisle," is a euphemism for kissing butt. With both Houses of Congress in control of the Democrats, the Republicans have to play nice, or go into time-out until 2010.

125 posted on 01/04/2009 10:45:23 AM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy

Just being a citizen is not a high enough level to meet what the framers aimed for in president. I can see why this is confusing to a liberal mindset ... if the Constitution is to be transmogrified into a ‘living document’ to suit liberals, it must evolve as the dumbed-down mob demands. Some numbnut liberals have to be insulted to make them come back to rational for a short spell. But, as you evidence, it doesn’t last long.


126 posted on 01/04/2009 10:48:33 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: unspun

Punaciously excellent.


127 posted on 01/04/2009 10:58:02 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy

You’re not only not the sharpest knife in the drawer - you appear to be a rolling pin.


128 posted on 01/04/2009 1:17:47 PM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

Sharp/intelligent people don’t need to stoop to name calling...nothing to add to the discussion. Why bother?


129 posted on 01/04/2009 1:32:45 PM PST by bronxboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy

We could still use it to claim his illegitimacy. The way they did to Bush after 2000. Obama can play Mr. President all he wants — I’ll never see it that way and he’ll never get my respect. Any good judge of character could see through his facade.


130 posted on 01/04/2009 1:38:48 PM PST by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy
Why bother?

Well you can't debate a rolling pin. It just parrots the same responses over and over no mater how many people prove it wrong, nor how great the empirical evidence that it is wrong.

Rolling pins aren't known for their sharp wit.

All you can do is to point out to it and to others - "hey, that's a rolling pin".

131 posted on 01/04/2009 1:50:27 PM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Polarik

I wouldn’t call you a traitor...however you are twisting the constitution for no purpose. It won’t work.


132 posted on 01/04/2009 1:54:06 PM PST by bronxboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

I guess your post is an example of what you believe passes for ‘wit’...my advice is ...keep your day job!


133 posted on 01/04/2009 2:08:21 PM PST by bronxboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka

Sorry - I meant father’s/parent’s religion listing. So, you’re saying that has never been listed on any bc in the US. Are you also then saying that you suspect there is nothing at all to hide? I really do suspect the reason for obscuring this matter has more to do with a link to the Muslim background of Obama.


134 posted on 01/04/2009 3:15:16 PM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy
I wouldn’t call you a traitor...

Why would you? I've already recited my Oath of Allegiance to this Country and pledged to support and defend the Constitution, and the laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

...however you are twisting the constitution for no purpose. It won’t work.

Do you even know what is in the Oath? Can Obama honestly recite this now?

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

Which part of "not showing his birth certificate," is he demonstrating support and defense of the Constitution and laws of the United States of America?

135 posted on 01/04/2009 3:17:37 PM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Polarik

I don’t think there is any real doubt Obama was born in Hawaii...so this settles it for me. He was born in this country-it’s my opinion.


136 posted on 01/04/2009 3:19:01 PM PST by bronxboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
Are you also then saying that you suspect there is nothing at all to hide?

I'm saying that his birth certificate doesn't say he was a Mohammedan. (I like to use that term since it annoys them, and I think of that set of beliefs as a heresy, like Arianism.)

He may be hiding something, or he may have the type of personality that says, “If you are an a$$h&*e I refuse to cooperate with you if I can get away with it,” and he thinks all Republicans/conservatives are a$$h&*es automatically. So he's yanking our chain by not asking Hawaii to release the birth certificate. I personally believe both to be the case, but I don't know anything more than anyone else.

137 posted on 01/04/2009 4:05:24 PM PST by Cheburashka (Liberalism: a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: bronxboy
I don’t think there is any real doubt Obama was born in Hawaii...so this settles it for me. He was born in this country-it’s my opinion.

And I won't begrudge you to have an opinion. I have one, too.

Regardless of our opinions, however, the fact remains that he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to prevent anyone from ever seeing his original birth certificate and knowing where he was born and to whom.

138 posted on 01/04/2009 4:17:36 PM PST by Polarik (Polarik's Principle:" A forgery created to prove a claim will repudiate that claim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Polarik

Polarik, who is bankrolling this nonsense you (or the committee of you) you post.


139 posted on 01/04/2009 4:25:03 PM PST by MilspecRob (Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Polarik

Look- I appreciate your concern for the constitution. I wish more people were concerned. Obama would not have been elected. We may disagree but I mean no disrespect.


140 posted on 01/04/2009 5:04:26 PM PST by bronxboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-187 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson