Posted on 01/26/2012 12:23:24 AM PST by CIBvet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY&feature=youtu.be
Ticker guy, from the Market Ticker, did a very convincing series of videos essentially proving the same thing. His critique of the image goes a lot farther than anyone else has, and in a far superior manner. I recommend people check it out, though I’m too lazy to provide the links.
I knew immediately when I downloaded it from the “official” Whitehouse website. This is not rocket science, and every person familiar with Illustrator who has looked at Obama’s BC knows that it is a fraud, and a bad one at that. Whomever created it should be in prison.
The Big Dope has fake pedigree papers ... after all the assurances we have received from Hawaii's Governor Abercrombie, and the White House, and others ... you can't possibly be serious ... say it ain't so Joe, say it ain't so!
It really doesnt matter: during the allotted break at work there were no less than 4 people nodding at each other how unequivocally Obama should be re-elected. Not only that, but he’s better than Clinton.
What difference does Obama’s eligiblity matter if his performance itself has no bearing?
When I pointed out how anti-business Obama’s policies are, the ONLY response I received were: BUSH!
I pointed out that BUSH is no longer president, and that Reagan inherited FAR worse economic situation from Carter than Obama and turned it around so WELL that he was re-elected in a landslide.
The response was how badly BUSH increased the deficit and that’s WHY Obama is struggling.
I told them that I paid my rent for nearly a year entirely on the interest of money I’d accumulated while going through basic training and tech school.
My fellow worker-Obots don’t like me much; frankly I believe it to be a lost cause. Case in point: most “conservatives” believe Romney to be a decent option.
What difference does Obamas eligiblity matter if his performance itself has no bearing?
For people such as this, there should be no actual voting rights. BO could be an actor on a reality TV show pretending to be the president, and these people could "vote" for him and watch his show -- because that's all it is, a show, entertainment. It's not real voting for responsible, thinking people who love their country and are concerned about its future.
For everyone else, there can be real voting rights for real presidential candidates in real elections, for real governance of the country. Not entertainment, just the "politics is for old people" group*. :)
*(I heard this sentiment expressed by a young twentysomething man at a forum that concerned, as I recall, the placement of BO on the ballot in NH.)
Just because it was posted ten days late doesn’t mean it’s not an April Fool. Birfers are Fools.
For someone who is willing to patiently work their way through the proof, it is there. But this only clouds the question of where exactly BHO was born.
As far as I am concerned this is moot and relatively unproductive because he has stated his father was Kenyan, and thus he fails the ‘natural born’ test required in the Constitution.
There is plenty of explanation of this topic at the blog http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
What difference does Obamas eligiblity matter if his performance itself has no bearing?
^^^
You are so right. Lordy, how I wish you were wrong.
Is not the Georgia hearing in court scheduled for today, Thursday, January 26, 2012? As I understand from previous posts on FR, the Bamster has been denied the motion to quash in the Georgia case. As such, let’s see whether or not either him or his attorney show today. My bet is that neither will show — also watch and see the Lame-Stream, state-run media totally ignore the story.
"Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril."Game on @9amEST Georgia Watch Obama ballot challenge hearing live on streaming video The three cases being heard will begin with atttorney Van Irion, representing plaintiff David Welden; then Attorney J. Mark Hatfield, representing plaintiffs Carl Swensson and Kevin Powell; and finally Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq., representing plaintiffs David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas McClaren and Lauri Roth.
Does an OWSer poop on the sidewalk?
Yes, most of the best breakdowns of the LF COLB have been reviewed and discussed on FR.
My bet is that neither will show also watch and see the Lame-Stream, state-run media totally ignore the story.
&&&
Agree and agree.
Well, actually it is prima facie evidence of fraud. It could even be that it is intended to continue a false story about his father. And even if his father actually was BHO-I, the NBC thing is sufficiently ambiguous (See e.g. Rawle, for a view inconsistent with your certainty: "Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.") that I would suggest that: Fraud's the thing wherein we destroy the confidence in the king.
ML/NJ
“Well, actually it is prima facie evidence of fraud”
Yes, exactly. However for practical political purposes, too many of the public are going to brush off the fraud if it turns out that BHO was still born in the US.
Why fight that battle when he clearly fails the ‘natural born’ test?
Because fraud is much more understandable to 98% of the population. There is no legal ambiguity about fraud. There is about NBC. (I'll admit that I do believe the Framers meant child of parent citizens, but I'm aware enough to know that the issue isn't quite so clear cut as some would see it. I even think that besides just meaning born here, it could also be interpreted as child of A citizen parent, especially in Obama's case where his now supposed father had nothing to do with his upbringing.)
ML/NJ
No difference at all -- if you don't consider the US to be a Constitutional Republic
No difference at all -- if you don't consider the US to be a Constitutional Republic
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.