Posted on 02/16/2010 8:48:41 AM PST by bvw
Are you sure that is not Obama’s resume?
My question, also. If Haywood had said that, he would be undermining the case against Obama. He would have to tell us whose identity Obama "stole." Making up an identity from whole cloth, which he did, isn't "identity theft."
bump
LOL!
You want to make your claim of belief in 0bama’s mythological life without a shred of evidence, and because I am not your secretary to run and fetch, you claim some kind of victory.
I see other things have been posted but being the 0-sucker that you are, of course that won’t be “enough” to disprove that your hero was indeed born in Honolulu at (one) of the hospitals he claimed to be born at.
I read, and assimlate, and try to understand. I am not an encyclopdiea.
You could do the same, but prefer not to.
Your choice, live with it. And of course in the meantime come to FR to support your hero.
Hey nightmare - please, after reading Red Steel’s post, explain how I am wrong. Please.
Anybody who seeks to get a birther to back up their claims must have a “hero” named 0bama.
Anybody who points out that there was no “travel ban” on Pakistan must be an “0-bot”.
Anybody who points out that there is no great mystery behind who the Dr. was, that there IS a story out there; must believe the story 100%.
Calling for actual facts in conflict when a birther says the story was ‘soundly disproven’? HERITIC! OUT WITH YOU! DO NOT QUESTION THE UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS OF BIRTHERS!!!!!
Chill out dude. Not everyone who wants you to back up your claims is a paid agent of our common foe.
Making sure your own side has its facts straight is not treason against your side.
At this point, is where they just make stuff up.
Glenn Beck's mocking of "birthers" has been a tremendous disappointment to me. I am a big fan of his otherwise, but by slapping the "birther" label on anyone who reasonably questions Obama's refusal to release a host of documentation, he is committing the same sin he loudly complains about when those on the left label him a "racist" simply because he has reasonable questions about Obama.
It just amazes me that he doesn't see his hypocrisy on this. I think I understand why he does it - whatever he actually believes about Obama's eligibility, I think he feels that it's a strategic mistake to focus on the birth certificate issue and thereby to give the left an excuse to paint everyone who disagrees with Obama as a crazy. I understand this argument and somewhat sympathize with it. However, Beck has built his arguments largely upon the foundation of the sanctity of the Constitution, and the Constitution is quite clear about the natural-born requirement. He can't just cavalierly cast that requirement aside because it proves uncomfortable in the current political environment, while at the same time demanding that the Constitution be followed. He is being completely inconsistent, and I think it hurts his (and our) cause.
3. Suspicious Personal Identifying Information.[c] other personal information that’s been used on an account you know to be fraudulent [i.e. the name of the birth doctor]
I just still cannot understand the multiple identity thing. Why would a respectable person go abut under different names?
This has never been explained to me at all.
Is this the kind of dream your tagline refers to? Just wondering.
From http://www.commondreams.org/
Why it matters
This is our moment.
If ever we needed forward thinking and urgent action, it’s now.
For the first time in decades, progressives have a mandate.
We have the power - and a moral obligation - to challenge the political ideas and governing structures that long ago stopped serving the common good.
It’s power only if we exercise it.
As good citizens we did our part to elect an administration that, though perhaps not as progessive as we’d like, is more progressive than any we’ve seen in decades.
It’s a first step toward pushing the country a giant leap forward in the direction of social progress.
True, the controversy over O’s constitutional qualifications for POTUS or lack thereof might invoke the possibility of identity theft (especially the possibility of the use of multiple SS #s), but fraud, perjury, and obstruction (cover-up) are the more likely crimes committed. So Hayworth is somewhat off base to compare Obama’s situation with the usual variety of “identity theft”; it seems to be far more complex.
The Obot blew up...LoL!
I’m bothered by it, as in LEGAL name changes there is a public legal notice published and a court order. I know because I have a nephew-in-law who changed his last name in adulthood to that of his step-father.
Have we ever seen anything like that for Obama? What exactly is Steve Dunham’s REAL name? Where’s the paperwork, and why isn’t that considered a legitimate question to ask and expect to have answered by those in official positions?
You didn’t address the fact that the supposed birth doctor quit practicing medicine/delivering babies in 1956.
You just slide on past that little bit of info and back to personal attack.
An Alinsky rule of course.
And hey, I’m not a dude.
I know! One of my favorite TV movies off all times was "Yale-New Haven Hospital!", where Tom Selleck played the plucky OB-GYN who goes to college, works really hard, attends medical school, takes a job at a big university hospital and later leaves his golf game early to drive across town and bring young George Bush in the world in a routine delivery. And who can forget "Peanut," the story of the plucky OB-GYN who goes to college, works really hard, attends medical school, gets a job at a small clinic in Georgia, and later brings young Jimmy Carter into the world in a routine delivery?
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.