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 said — I know, but we’ll set him straight, look how much he’s learned tonight
—
Well, you must not have been following me for very long, then... LOL..
I’ve been posting the same message from the time of the election. It was obvious from that time forward. There is *no legal requirement* for a candidate to produce his birth certificate. No one has been able to comple him through either court cases or the political process. Therefore, if candidate will not be put on the ballot in a state *unless* he shows his birth certificate — this will solve the problem...
Same message from the beginning...
You said — It will be great if this goes someplace. We can live through the next three years if we know the BO is not coming back.
—
If just *half the effort* were put into getting state legislation passed — as I’ve seen in all the posting on the birth certificate issue — we would have 20 states guaranteed! LOL...
Now, the question — is — can we even get FReepers to work for state legislation when so many seem to be *stuck* on “he ought to do this” — instead of — “we will make it legally required”....
I don’t know how to get some people *unstuck* from that mentality, which only has them “chasing their tails” and nothing much more.
I guess we can only try...
When I asked — so ... are you now ready to try the state law making it mandatory, or else he cannot be on the ballot in that state?
You said in reply — As George Bush would say, “Never mis-underestimate the power of the people”
—
And I can’t figure out whether that means that you are going to work for state legislation to make it *legally required* — or — if you are going to only work to “compel” Obama in the same fashion you’ve been doing for the last year.
Can you tell me if you’re going to help us work for state legislation? It’s like I’ve already said — this thing has been “flying under the radar” with the states and the general public. So, it would be nice to have people *working* on their states to get this going by getting people organized and calling legislators and following up and reporting back here about it...
Is that going to be you? Or are you just going to continue “compelling” in the same way?
You said — Furthermore under the Constitution, citizens have what lawyers call “an implied cause of action” that they must ensure that candidates running for the office of President are in fact eligible, and that’s what we are doing since the people we trusted to do it, apparently have not, nor will not.
—
When you say, “that’s what we’re doing...” — I’m guessing you mean the same kind of “compelling” that has gotten you nowhere, thus far in the last one year, on seeing the birth certificate.
And what I’m asking is if you’re going to help work on the state legislation to get a state law passed which will require a candidate to show a birth certificate or his name will not be on the state ballot?
You said — That’s the reason that “he’s not *legally* required to show actual proof of eligibility” argument is flawed.
—
That statement that there is *no legal requirement* for a candidate to show his birth certificate isn’t an “argument” — it’s a statement of *fact*... LOL...
In fact, they all consist of mere “statements of reality” in that they are either true or they are not. So, let’s go down the list...
(1) There is no legal requirement for a candidate to show a birth certificate. [true or not true; if true, show the law...]
(2) No one has been able to get Obama to show his birth certificate in over one year of trying, through both a whole slew of court cases and also through political persuasion. [true or not true; if not true, then show the birth certificate...]
(3) States control their own laws for who can be placed on the ballot in that state (true or not true; if not true, the show federal laws that specificy that states cannot do this and the federal laws of who goes on the ballot in each state...]
And so, since #1, #2, and #3 are obviously true, then this is a *conclusion* that a state can make a law which legally requires showing a birth certificate or the candidate cannot be placed on the ballot in that state.
Numbers 1, 2 and 3 are not “arguments” — they are the *statements of reality* that govern this very issue, the Obama birth certificate issue.
I see you’ve given up talking about the Obama birth certificate issue now... :-)
You said — THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON!
—
Ummm... I think they know what’s going on....
(1) There is no legal requirement for a candidate to show a birth certificate. [true or not true; if true, show the law...]
(2) No one has been able to get Obama to show his birth certificate in over one year of trying, through both a whole slew of court cases and also through political persuasion. [true or not true; if not true, then show the birth certificate...]
(3) States control their own laws for who can be placed on the ballot in that state (true or not true; if not true, the show federal laws that specificy that states cannot do this and the federal laws of who goes on the ballot in each state...]
And so, since #1, #2, and #3 are obviously true, then this is a *conclusion* that a state can make a law which legally requires showing a birth certificate or the candidate cannot be placed on the ballot in that state.
—
If they don’t know that — they should...
You said — Actually, it isn’t “flawed”, it’s not true. See post 156 where I show the language plainly stated in the Constitution that REQUIRES that the President elect show proof of eligibility to Congress BEFORE being allowed to be named President. No proof, no Presidency.
—
Ummmm..., if it’s so REQUIRED and so obvious... why didn’t it happen... (that’s called a “reality check”...).
And furthermore, if this wasn’t done (like you say) and thus “no Presidency” — then “Who is President right now?”....
Please excuse me for laughing at these assertions... LOL...
You said — saying the same thing over and over.
—
That’s odd, I always thought it was the other people I’ve been replying to, who were saying the same things over and over again...
You sure don’t keep up on these things, do you... :-)
I could have sworn that it was you telling me I was wrong when I was posting that he sure seemed like a fraud to me, when it first started.... but maybe that was someone else...
‘Birth certificate’ seller vanishes into thin air
Dubious eBay character dodges agent, lawyer, verification team
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104495
WND also launched an investigation into “colmado_naranja,” which led through several online aliases and reported collaborators, including Dawnella Wilson, “InspectorSmith” and, eventually, Lucas Smith, a former resident of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, who still claims to have possession of the document.
...
“I’m going to have to meet with my attorney before we can go any further,” Smith told WND in a phone interview. “I’d rather have a middle man go between WorldNetDaily and myself.”
Smith did then authorize a public relations agent to speak on his behalf and hire an attorney, but after several unsuccessful attempts to get Smith to offer any proof of the document’s authenticity, the agent has since withdrawn his representation, fearing that the alleged birth certificate sale may have merely been a money-grabbing fraud.
The agent, Sean Boyer, is a Pennsylvania businessman who contacted Smith through eBay. He told WND his goal was simply to help bring the alleged document into the light for possible verification.
WND negotiated with Boyer on how best to coax further information from Smith and worked behind the scenes to prepare processes for authenticating or disproving any document Smith might produce.
“The Obama birth certificate that I listed on eBay was not a hoax. I repeat, NOT A HOAX,” Smith insisted.
When pressed to produce evidence of his claims, however, Smith told WND in an email, “I won’t be bullied into posting a video. I won’t adhere to any time deadline.”
“I stated I wa
s going to make a video and then go to WND and Joseph Farah, but I never gave a timeline for that,” Smith told WND over the phone. “In retrospect, I shouldn’t have mentioned that.”
Smith’s hesitancy to cooperate eventually cost him the support of his agent and lawyer, too.
“Smith has broken promise after promise to deliver on his claims,” Boyer told WND.
“On Sunday, July 19, it had been five days without a response from Smith, after a number of attempts had been made to contact him by email and phone messages,” Boyer said. “Smith may be stalling for time as he attempts to sell whatever he may have privately through contacts that he told me he was able to develop while advertizing on eBay. Consequently, [Smith’s attorney] and I agreed to withdraw our representation of Smith, and he has been notified by email to that effect.”
Obama BC eBay seller bigtime scammer ( actually mentally ill it seems)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2284400/posts
—
(make sure to read all the links her, the guy is certifiably isane)
This person appears to be a big time scammer On July 2nd, 2009 salsero96 says: A fter searching for information on this person colmado_naranja on eBay, or Inspector Smith on Youtube...
It appears to be LUCAS SMITH as described in this photo on CBS news site: (you can compare his picture to the pictures on eBay)
http://www.cbsnews.com/2301-500142_162-4179689-1.html
If you search his name and city/state, you will get his address... http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_en___US319&um=1&q=%22Lucas%20Smith%22%20Cedar%20Rapids%2C%20Iowa&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=iw Lucas Smith (319) 362-0354 1626 5th Ave SE, Cedar Rapids, IA 52403
If you search for his address you will find a myspace page stating that the house has had sightings of the virgin mary and will be up for sale soon on eBay... http://www.myspace.com/houseforsalevirginmary
Here in that same myspace profile, you will find a picture displaying a similar ebay username:
http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=433779327&albumID=481404&imageID=3980456
Also, I ‘m not sure if this is the same person, but there was an incident here: http://blog.syracuse.com/news/2008/01/oswego_county_centerpiece_0116.html In late 2002, a man from Cedar Rapids, Iowa, sent an e-mail to the family. The man, who called himself Lucas Smith, said he was 23 years old and had emigrated from Russia five years earlier. He had seen the Web site and, Smith said, he wanted to help. The Wilsons stopped searching for a donor. Smith passed all of the medical, physical and psychological tests. They thought he was going to save their son’s life. Then, on May 3, 2003, Smith sent Jim Wilson Sr. an e-mail saying he wanted to be compensated for donating his kidney. Wilson said they would pay his airfare, but because it was illegal to receive money for an organ donation, they wouldn’t give him any other cash. Five months after holding out a lifeline, Lucas Smith disappeared. Login or register to post comments
Houses and Birth Certificates For Sale: At a Little Red and Orange Corner Store
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2284872/posts
—
For 6th time, eBay ‘birth certificate’ seller erased
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2284369/posts
You said — Why isn’t the Constitutional requirement not regarded as law by you?
—
It is — and — it is by anyone else, too... no one has disputed that...
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...
They all look accurate to me... and also to other FReepers too, who also agree with the situation in that there is *no legal requirement* for a candidate to show his birth certificate...
Here is what is plainly obvious to number of other FReepers...
(1) There is no legal requirement for a candidate to show a birth certificate. [true or not true; if true, show the law...]
(2) No one has been able to get Obama to show his birth certificate in over one year of trying, through both a whole slew of court cases and also through political persuasion. [true or not true; if not true, then show the birth certificate...]
(3) States control their own laws for who can be placed on the ballot in that state (true or not true; if not true, the show federal laws that specificy that states cannot do this and the federal laws of who goes on the ballot in each state...]
And so, since #1, #2, and #3 are obviously true, then this is a *conclusion* that a state can make a law which legally requires showing a birth certificate or the candidate cannot be placed on the ballot in that state.
It all looks pretty straightforward to me... and to others...
You said — You have to be getting real tired of defending Obroma.
—
That’s where you’ve missed the entire point. This isn’t a defense of Obama, it’s a way to have the birth certificate shown.
It goes like this...
First we see that there is no legal requirement for a candidate to show a birth certificate. [true or not true; if true, show the law...]
Then next we see that no one has been able to get Obama to show his birth certificate in over one year of trying, through both a whole slew of court cases and also through political persuasion. [true or not true; if not true, then show the birth certificate...]
And thirdly we see that states control their own laws for who can be placed on the ballot in that state (true or not true; if not true, the show federal laws that specificy that states cannot do this and the federal laws of who goes on the ballot in each state...]
From the above, and since #1, #2, and #3 are obviously true, then this is a *conclusion* that a state can make a law which legally requires showing a birth certificate or the candidate cannot be placed on the ballot in that state.
It’s really straightforward and the *guaranteed* way to get the birth certificate...
You said — It’s a deliberate attempt to move things to other pages.
—
No, it works like this... you reply to me and I read what you said and then I reply to you...
What you’ll find is that if you had not posted in several places to me, I wouldn’t have been posting to you... that’s the way it works on a forum... LOL....
I look at a thread, I post comments to some people in it and then that’s it for me. BUT, all of a sudden, I get some people posting to me... and then I reply. It shouldn’t be too much of a surprise as that’s how forums work.
I’ve always told people that the best they can do is simply not repy to me and I basically won’t reply to them... but everyone wants to say something to me, and then we all get into a discussion... (surprise!).... :-)
I wish I was that young again and wet behind the ears... LOL... But, alas... the doctors say I’m in good shape for how old I’m in, but I still feel old... :-)
I appreciate your genuine concern, but I’m not going anywhere... I just got back from eating and am ready to roll again... “Let’s roll” (I think that’s a famous saying... ) LOL...
You said — Does this post by star traveler sound like a fellow conservative or does it sound like a troll making fun of conservatives?
—
That’s a dose of reality — in that some conservatives seem to think that they have some kind of “hold” on Obama in order to “gain our trust”... but it doesn’t exist. So, that’s proposing something that simply does not work.
Obama knows that..., the liberals and the leftists know that — and if they know that, then the conservatives *should know that*...
Again the fact that Obama and all the other liberals knows that when a conservative says, “If you don’t do this, you won’t have my trust!” They hear that and they say, “Sure, no matter what Obama would do, he would *never* have your trust!”
Thus, conservatives who say this are *not convincing* Obama or the liberals to do anything like show the birth certificate.
And that’s why the *only thing* that will work is a state law that requires a candidate to show his birth certificate or else he cannot be on the ballot. That has *nothing at all* — to do with “trust”...
Ummm... have you heard what the Free Republic definition of troll is? It’s really simple and works for everyone. It’s like this...
— A troll is someone who doesn’t agree with my opinion and has the audacity to say so! —
Yep, that’s it, and it works for 100% of the FReepers on this board. And I can tell it works for you, too... LOL...
You said — ... but she certainly is no Conservative.
—
Ummm... so you’re saying that voting for Palin/McCain and Bush and Bush (twice) and Bush again (way back then) and Reagan... doesn’t count, eh? LOL...
Because that’s who I voted for...
You’ve got a weird sense of who someone who is *not* a conservative, votes for...
And I would believe that?
Bwwwaaaahhhahahahahahaha, NOT
Go play with the little girls and boys at the DUmp, they miss you.
See ya troll
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.