Skip to comments.
"Birther" Infomercial Hits the Airwaves
CBS News ^
| 9/25/09
| Stephanie Condon
Posted on 09/25/2009 2:15:17 PM PDT by nickcarraway
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 281-294 next last
To: wintertime
Some need to research and see if there is , if any, microfilm of that announcement in other cities.
81
posted on
09/25/2009 4:21:28 PM PDT
by
American Constitutionalist
(There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
To: Spaulding; HKMk23
If our Constitution has meaning, Obama is not a legitimate president. To be able to choose the Articles and Amendments which are affective renders the U.S. an oligarchy.Bump!
82
posted on
09/25/2009 4:23:44 PM PDT
by
fanfan
(Why did they bury Barry's past?)
To: Two Kids' Dad
"0bamas lawyers have gone to court and gotten all kinds of cases dismissed for whatever spurious reasons, and not even once have they presented any birth-related documents?" No, Obama's lawyers have been called into court because other people have sued. They have responded to those suits following standard procedure. Not one case has made it to a phase where evidence would be called for.
"If 0bama was born in Hawaii and his (Daily Kos) COLB was legit, a reasonable person would think that would be one of the first pieces of evidence submitted to the court. Since none of his lawyers are willing to use it as evidence, what conclusion should a reasonable person draw from that?"
A reasonable person would understand that they might not know enough about court procedures, and then would find out that one doesn't present evidence about something that's not being heard. If any of these cases ever made it to trial, THEN there would be a point where the facts of birth would be presented. None have gotten that far.
83
posted on
09/25/2009 4:27:14 PM PDT
by
mlo
To: Conservative4Ever
Apparently the same people who decided it was a “myth” without bothering to investigate any of the facts.
84
posted on
09/25/2009 4:30:35 PM PDT
by
AmericanVictory
(Should we be more like them or they more like we used to be?)
To: doesnt suffer fools gladly
"What cannot be explained away is the fact that an announcement of his birth was placed." Bwahahahaha ... keep pushing that one, fool. You have no idea whether someone altered the microfiche at a mere five or six archives or not. You believe the newspaper announcements, if dated to actually being in 1961 cannot be in error, for any reason, yet you and your obamanoid ilk cannot explain away why Nordyke TWINS born just a few hours after Barry was supposedly born in the same hospital happen to not be in the paper at all, the same edition or for several weeks following ... and they were the TWIN daughters of a Hawaiian physician! Oh, and their birth registry numbers are slightly lower than Obarryo's, yet they were born after the time he was supposedly born in the same hospital. Yeah, you fools really have a high level of credibility citing the riddled with errors supposed newspaper imagery from microfiche. [ Wipe the stinky brown off your face, doofus. ]
85
posted on
09/25/2009 4:31:27 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
To: doesnt suffer fools gladly
We can just agree to disagree but I learned the hard way that a news paper birth announcement is not prof of anything.
I’ll stick to my wait and see attitude. Like my ex mother in law used to say, “It all comes out in the wash”
86
posted on
09/25/2009 4:35:00 PM PDT
by
GloriaJane
(http://www.last.fm/user/GloriaJane)
To: ml/nj
because it can not be substantiated with other proof.
If anyone CARES to even bother to look at a article on the ( Western Journalism ) web sight, in a article called ( Clearing the Smoke on Obama's eligibility ).
This article exposes the possibility that Obama could have been born over seas, and with the Hawaiian lax laws at that time, there was room for shenanigans and loopholes where a mother could have given birth to a child, come to Hawaii and file for a original Hawaii birth certificate......
If that is a legitimate news paper announcement of Obama's birth, need to find a way to check and see just who sent the information to the news papers.
87
posted on
09/25/2009 4:35:54 PM PDT
by
American Constitutionalist
(There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
To: MHGinTN
You birthers are a vicious group, with the name calling and such. So vicious that you’d all be perfect for the other side. That’s how you’re all viewed anyway, as fools. Utter and complete fools. That, I don’t care about. What I care about is that it taints the party. We all get lumped together as crackpots. Obama’s having the last laugh when he releases his birth certificate, his last day in office. He’s just enough of a ball buster to place it in a full-page Slimes page. You’re making us ALL look like fools.
To: Non-Sequitur
" That none of the cases have gone to trial would be one conclusion. None of the cases have gotten even close enough to trial to allow for discovery would be another conclusion. But that's just me. "
It's called a deliberate obstruction of Justice.
89
posted on
09/25/2009 4:41:18 PM PDT
by
American Constitutionalist
(There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
To: stockpirate
Ask them if they want to buy some swampland in Florida ?
90
posted on
09/25/2009 4:43:26 PM PDT
by
American Constitutionalist
(There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
To: Two Kids' Dad
So, let me make sure Im getting this straight: 0bamas lawyers have gone to court and gotten all kinds of cases dismissed for whatever spurious reasons, and not even once have they presented any birth-related documents? If 0bama was born in Hawaii and his (Daily Kos) COLB was legit, a reasonable person would think that would be one of the first pieces of evidence submitted to the court. Since none of his lawyers are willing to use it as evidence, what conclusion should a reasonable person draw from that?Speaking lawyer: Obama's lawyers have made motions to dismiss the cases for lack of jurisdiction. (So far, every such motion that has been ruled on has been granted.) When a lawyer moves to dismiss a case for lack of jurisdiction, he cannot submit any evidence, because that would be conceding that the Court has jurisdiction to consider evidence.
To: Lurking Libertarian
Hypothetically, is it better to get the case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, or produce a document that will put the matter to rest?
To: doesnt suffer fools gladly
You don’t need any help, fool, you’re making yourself look like an utter fool all by yourself. BTW, skippy, you and your obamanoid ilk are the only ones claiming the birther movement is making the Republican party look foolish. Why is that, littleman?
93
posted on
09/25/2009 4:48:11 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
To: American Constitutionalist
“Ask them if they want to buy some swampland in Florida?”
To what are you refering?
94
posted on
09/25/2009 4:55:53 PM PDT
by
stockpirate
("I came NOT to bring peace but a sword." - Jesus Christ)
To: American Constitutionalist
How can you bring honor and state that perpetrating a lie be considered " Success " ? Well it's got to be shown a lie first.
To: nickcarraway
Hypothetically, is it better to get the case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, or produce a document that will put the matter to rest?Would one document put the matter to rest? The plaintiffs would demand that forensic document analysts verify the authenticity of the document. They would also demand discovery into Obama's passport files, his college records, his parents' divorce case, and all sorts of things. (Read some of Orly Taitz's court pleadings.) Finally, they would say that even if he was born in Hawaii, Obama still isn't a Natural Born Citizen because both his parents weren't citizens. (This has been alleged in many of the court cases.) The result would be that the court cases would drag on for 4 years or more, all through which Obama's opponents would claim that nothing he did was legitimate because the court hadn't ruled yet.
If I were Obama's lawyer (and I'm not!), I would be doing exactly what he is doing.
To: ml/nj
To spend over a million dollars for something that even an expensive lawyer wouldn't charge more than $5000 for? (And why would he even need an expensive lawyer. Any kid just out of law school could do this, right?) Yet every single one of the suits questioning him to date has been thrown out of court. Maybe a law school student could have done as well; what does that say about Obama's competition?
To: American Constitutionalist
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697 And?
To: American Constitutionalist
It's called a deliberate obstruction of Justice. How so?
To: Lurking Libertarian
Sounds rational. Would any court potentially have jurisdiction?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 281-294 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson