Posted on 08/01/2009 1:38:58 PM PDT by presidio9
There's Red America, Blue America and Tinfoil Helmet America. And it looks like the third camp is enormously larger than anyone feared.
A new poll, commissioned by the liberal Web site Daily Kos found that fully 11% of Americans think that Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States. And another 12% said that they are unsure.
The doubters are heavily concentrated in the Republican Party, according to pollsters. An amazing 58% of the surveyed Republicans questioned whether Obama, in fact, entered the world in Hawaii.
What this means: Millions of Americans suspect or are convinced that Obama, son of a Kenyan father, is not a citizen and thus cannot legitimately serve as President. And no Hawaiian birth certificate or newspaper announcement from the time will convince them otherwise.
Who are these people? They're the ones whose feet are not planted on U.S. soil - or any soil.
You obviously make a good point.
BO’s brother said he wasn’t born in the USA.
Geez.
talking point
LOL
talking point
LOL
talking point
LOL
talking point
LOL
STFU already Head over to the DUmp.
See post #193, IIRC
When Barry graduated from High School in 1979 he was named Barry Soetoro. When his mother obtained her dicorce from Lolo Soetoro in 1980 her documents claim there were two children in the marriage, one over 18 who required educational funding. In 1980 Barry would have been at least 18, perhaps turned nineteen as Barry Soetoro. He entered college the same month he turned 19, so it is likely he entered college as Barry Soetoro. He used his Indonesian citizenship to sign up for college so at the very least he was proclaiming dual citizenship with that act and thus abrogated his possible natural born status by affirming his stepfather’s adoption of him. When did Barry Soetoro legally change his name so that he could lie on the application to the IL Bar swearing he had used no other name than Barack Hussein Obama?
I wonder when the oligarchy will abandon him in order to protect their own hides? What about the every day civil servants who surround and back the Waguu beef eather? When will they protect themselves and abandon him? Yes, that includes any FBI and Secret Service guys and gals who may be reading this. Do you have your doubts?
EVERY TIMER SOMEONE POSTS SOMETHING IMPORTANT S.T.(AKA:LOL!) WILL POST SOME BLATHER THAT TAKES A WHOLE PAGE — PUSHING THE USEFUL POST TO THE BACK.
TROLL BEHAVIOR!
STE=Q
_____________________________
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Look at the long spaces between them. I think the mods should stop this. It’s a deliberate attempt to move things to other pages.
add condescending, arrogant, full of herself and beyond conceited to your mentioned nauseating. she’s probably just some wet behind the ears, snot nosed kid trying to play with the adults here. don’t let obama lovers like her bother ya moji.
My salute to you for troll of the year
(_!_)
____________
*snort* possibly but it saquin might be a close second.
Does this post by star traveler sound like a fellow conservative or does it sound like a troll making fun of conservatives?
________________________________________________________
“I think you have to be more accurate than that and more in tune with the reality of the situation.
When you say “no one will trust him” — what you actually mean is that no conservative will trust him. As it turns out, the liberals have already trusted him and elected him by about 10 million more of them than us. So, it’s not the “no one” that you are claiming...
And another consideration in that “trust” factor that you bring up — just remember, if Obama did show his birth certificate right now and sent a copy to every conservative — I don’t think a single conservative would be trusting him...
In other words — if he *does not* show his birth certificate, no conservative will trust him — and — if he *does* show his birth certificate no conservative will trust him.
The trust won’t happen *no matter what he does*....
“Trust” is a *non-factor* as far as conservatives are concerned (i.e., they won’t “trust” no matter what), and thus it’s *not compelling* for him....”
yep, a damn troll, one that thinks they are so much better and smarter than everyone else here.
You are absolutely right - in the absence of proper action by our elected reps to do their duty, it falls to the people - and many of the people, me included, are legitimately demanding proof of Obama’s eligibility to serve in office of president under the US Constitution. Anybody questioning the peoples’ authority to act in the face of their elected officials’ neglect of duty is a traitor to this country - and ought to and will be treated as such by the people.
I have no idea what StarTraveler is or what planet she is from, but she certainly is no Conservative.
You said — Whatever it takes, but we as citizens, would be derelict in our duty if we do not compel him to comply with the Constitution, and that’s why we are birthers.
—
You’ve got two different kinds of “compel” here — the one you’re talking about and the one I’m talking about.
Now, you’ve been saying that you’re going to keep compeling him, and that’s the “political kind” (as I call it). That’s the kind that has been going on for over a year now. It started before the election, continued right up to the election, and then, at the very election itself, and then after the election and then, all the way up to now — as we speak today.
That’s been the political compelling. You talk to people, let them know the facts, write letters, holler and yell, get on radio programs, send e-mail to others, write to your Congressmen, post on forums all over the place, call up state officials, research material, write long tomes on Obama is not qualified, and so on and so forth.
And since we are not looking at the birth certificate, presently, after all this time (of one year passing by) and since Obama was elected and since Obama is in office now — that has *obviously* not worked (again... we’re not looking at the birth certificate right now).
Now, the other kind of compel is the legal kind. And there are *two avenues* here. One avenue is the court cases and lawyers pursuing it. The other avenue is state legislation, legally “compelling” a candidate to show his birth certificate.
The one avenue, of the court cases is failing (it “has failed”, “is failing” and after one year of it, it obviously will continue failing). That avenue is where a whole slew of court cases were put forth, different places, different people, different rationale and different venues and even through different levels of the court system, all the way through *many* at the Supreme Court level. And, as we sit here speaking, no court case has brought any birth certificate forward. We are not looking at it.
The other avenue of getting a state law where the candidate is legally required to show his birth certificate or else he cannot be placed on the ballot — has yet to even be promoted by any significant movement. What has happened thus far, has been *under the radar* and hardly anyone knows about it, barely any FReepers talk about it, hardly any news reports come out about it — and even so — four states have started the process. And with *no one pushing it* in the public, I can imagine that these four states are going to go nowhere with it. But, just the fact that they have even made it into the legislature is amazing for being so far under the radar.
Once a state gets the legislation in place in which a candidate cannot be placed on the ballot — then — it’s not a matter of someone “going to court” to get something done. It’s that a candidate has to do something himself, or he just doesn’t get registered on the ballot in that state. That a *completely different legal matter*...
And I’ll guarantee you, that if five states (just a mere five out of 50 states) got that legislation in their states, no candidate could afford to lose five states off the ballot and expect to win the national election. “Problem solved”...
—
(1) So, the “political compelling” that you’re talking about — no birth certificate after one year of trying.
(2) The “legal compelling” in court cases — no birth certificate after one year of trying.
(3) The “legal compelling” through state law — *IF* it is enacted — candidate is *not on the ballot* until birth certificate is shown.
You say #1 — nothing happening after a year. Others say #2 — nothing happening after a year. I say #3 — birth certificate *guaranteed* or else candidate is *not on ballot*.
So, when are you going to jump in on #3? ... :-)
You said — Constitution? That old thing? Seems to be his/her response every time it’s pointed out that the requirement to be president has to be proved.
—
You haven’t seen me say that. What I’ve said is that *no one* that I’ve ever seen has said that they disregard the three requirements of the Constitution. Everyone in this discussion has *always* upheld those three Constitutional requirements for office.
And here’s the Constitution for you...., the *basics* of the Constitution on this qualifications issue...
And yes, there is a Constitution, it’s to follow — and here is what it says, in regards to qualifications. The Constitution says that a candidate must be the following in order to qualify for the office. The candidate must ...
*be* 35 years or older
*be* a resident 14 years or more
*be* a natural born citizen
And Obama has sworn under oath that he *is* (as the Constitution says he must *be*)...
It does not say what is necessary to show it, prove it or what any means for “vetting” is. That’s up to the states themselves to vet and make sure that the candidates meet the qualifications.
And what they have done is sworn an oath that they are qualified..., Obama has, the other candidates have and they have in the past...
—
And in addition the State of Hawaii says that he *is* exactly what the Constitution says he must *be*...
http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‘i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
This shows that there is no Constitutional issue or question. So, when there is no Constitutional issue at problem here with the Qualifications for office, why would the Supreme Court get involved? Which is why they didn’t get involved.
—
And if you want to get Obama to show his birth certificate, you’re going to have to get a state law to that effect, which is what I’ve been proposing since the election.
And you’ll notice that no one is saying to ignore the Constitution...
You said — The fact that ANYONE has any legitimate and unanswered questions about his eligibility means that he has “failed to qualify”.
—
Well, I’ll guarantee you won’t find that one in the Constitution... LOL...
I guess no one wanted to take credit for writing this crap so they called it an editorial.
I’ll get back with you on what you are saying... I think this needs to be taken care of... the state legislation.
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.