Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Obama "Birth Certificate" Scandal
aim.org ^ | 02 September 2009 | staff

Posted on 09/03/2009 12:58:54 PM PDT by kellynla

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-166 next last
To: danamco
Thank you...
81 posted on 09/03/2009 4:55:58 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: danamco
Ah yes, let us not forget the “he was adopted in Indonesia” contingent. They also will not go away, be settled, and will have nothing at all resolved by the release of the long form.

Them, along with the nativist contingent, and the fraudsters; and it looks like only a veeeeery veeeery small subset of birthers would actually be satisfied by the release of the long form birth certificate.

82 posted on 09/03/2009 4:59:52 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Bet a “steak” with you?

yeaaaaaaaaaa right!

You reneged the last time...

I won't make the same "missteak" twice.

Now run along junior and quit bothering me with your incorrect legal opinions

83 posted on 09/03/2009 5:00:10 PM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Submit your invoice for 'services rendered' to:

'0bama for America'
1600 Robert Mugabe Blvd
Washington DC 20016

Spend that stimulus money in good health!
84 posted on 09/03/2009 5:01:12 PM PDT by mkjessup ("Just Say No" to the illegal 0bamunist Regime of Occupation. The 'Dear Comrade' can Kiss My Ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
C’mon Kelly, dont be too hard on N-S, my impression is that they’ve got their legal briefs in a wad, know what I mean?

Of course we do.

85 posted on 09/03/2009 5:01:18 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nufsed
Will you be picketing the court house begging the judge to throw the case out?

There won't be any need to.

86 posted on 09/03/2009 5:01:51 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Our nervous hand-wringing pal, 'Non-Sequitur', the one who thinks they're a lawyer (that was a subtle pun).

As opposed to you two, a pair of legal eagles yourselves?

87 posted on 09/03/2009 5:02:48 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

The hearing is not the last effort. The quest to get to the truth will go on, even after he dies of old age. Just look at it as job security for people like you who don’t care about truth or who are naive.


88 posted on 09/03/2009 5:05:09 PM PDT by nufsed (Release the birth certificate, passport, and school records.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Yeah, because anyone who points out reality MUST be working for the other side.

Sorry charlie. I don't like 0bama one single bit; but it is either a lie or a delusion to say that release of the long form makes this all go away.

89 posted on 09/03/2009 5:07:56 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
You reneged the last time...

Not at all. My proposal was if the case is thrown out at any time then I win. If the case continues through trial and goes to the jury, if there is a jury, or the judge, if it's a bench trial, then you win regardless of verdict. I'll stand by that and take you up on it at any time. However I never said it would be dismissed on the 8th. I don't expect it to be since neither side has a motion for dismissal before the judge at present. That'll come later.

So there it is, for all to see. Who's the chicken, excuse me, who's the cow-ward, now? Pun intended, since we're talking steaks and all.

90 posted on 09/03/2009 5:08:22 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
You sound like the kind of officer who would have been more than happy to swear personal allegiance to der Fuehrer.

You would be mistaken. My oath was to the support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I also swore that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. And that I took that obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. And that I would well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I entered. Nothing about loyalty to an individual or a political party. Regardless of what you may want it to.

91 posted on 09/03/2009 5:11:39 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

My God, thanks for that information. I did not know that. I guess that explains some things huh? WHO would have ever believed we would see this day? Not me. Nothing but nothing is surprising anymore. CO


92 posted on 09/03/2009 5:12:59 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (Conservatism is to a country what an antibiotic is to an infection - Healing!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Soldier
why he probably picked that day and morning to do it, to distract any media from paying attention to anything negative about him.

Unfortunately, nothing "negative' is going to happen at that hearing to anyone but Orly Taitz.

93 posted on 09/03/2009 5:15:03 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
In other words, the SCOTUS was either bought off, or intimidated by forces far more sinister than we can imagine.

...or just thought the Birther cases were nonsense.

Incidentally, there is nothing unethical about the Supreme Court justices meeting with Obama when there were cases pending before it against him. It would only be unethical if they discussed the cases. Remember when Justice Scalia went hunting with Vice President Cheney while a case against Cheney was pending before the Court? And that was a real case, one the Court had agreed to hear. The cases against Obama were "pending" only in the sense that petitions asking the Court to hear those cases had been filed; none of those petitions were granted (or even got one vote).

94 posted on 09/03/2009 5:22:36 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Incidentally, there is nothing unethical about the Supreme Court justices meeting with Obama when there were cases pending before it against him. It would only be unethical if they discussed the cases.

Oh I'm sure that never happened (snort-chuckle-gag).
95 posted on 09/03/2009 5:24:50 PM PDT by mkjessup ("Just Say No" to the illegal 0bamunist Regime of Occupation. The 'Dear Comrade' can Kiss My Ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: nufsed
The hearing is not the last effort.

No it is not. I expect that the judge will deal with the motions before the bench and then set another date for the next step, which will probably be the defense's response to the plaintiff. That's when I expect the the government will move to dismiss due to lack of standing, and shortly after that the judge will have to decide to grant the request or move forward. Based on the track record of birther cases to date I expect he'll dismiss.

96 posted on 09/03/2009 5:25:01 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Oh I'm sure that never happened (snort-chuckle-gag).

I'm sure it didn't. The whole birther issue is regarded in legal circles-- even conservative legal circles (like the Federalist Society)-- as pure crackpottery. The fact that none of the petitions got even one vote to hear the case speaks volumes.

97 posted on 09/03/2009 5:26:49 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: danamco
Honduras did it!!!

Then move to Honduras. I don't know if their Constitution gives the military the authority to over throw the civilian government. I do know that our's does not.

98 posted on 09/03/2009 5:26:56 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Gosh Perry, did Paul Drake get that info to you?


99 posted on 09/03/2009 5:27:11 PM PDT by mkjessup ("Just Say No" to the illegal 0bamunist Regime of Occupation. The 'Dear Comrade' can Kiss My Ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

So as you see it, we should just dismiss the whole issue, never raise it again, and forget about the one underlying fact, that of all of 0bama’s 43 predecessors, not ONE of them went to these sorts of lengths to conceal the origins of their birth, their school records, medical records, travel history, etc.

Right?


100 posted on 09/03/2009 5:28:27 PM PDT by mkjessup ("Just Say No" to the illegal 0bamunist Regime of Occupation. The 'Dear Comrade' can Kiss My Ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-166 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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