Yeah, I made a poster of him doing this. :)
Posted on 02/16/2012 3:38:55 AM PST by RobinMasters
In a Southern California campaign appearance, presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich encouraged California attorney Orly Taitz to continue her campaign to question Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to hold office.
Taitz, who has filed several lawsuits aimed at securing Obama’s certified birth certificate and introducing evidence of his ineligibility for office, rose to her feet to address Gingrich in Pasadena. She suggested his lagging campaign could only be lifted by raising the issue publicly.
“It could help your campaign like it did Donald Trump,” Taitz said.
Gingrich responded by saying Taitz was better equipped for the role.
“That’s a project you should pursue,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
It is the people not on the train who are crazy. Anyone supporting the Bat sh*t lunatic currently destroying the country should not be questioning the sanity of others who want to see his credentials, and who otherwise question his legitimacy.
Wow. That really takes the cake! That is having your delusional cake and eating it too!
How is the candidacy of Donald Trump doing nowadays?
Does anybody remember the upshot of his Quixotic tilt at the birth certificate windmill?
You must have been talking to a different group of people than myself. The Salient points of the birther issue have never been addressed.
1. Is Barack Obama even a 14th amendment citizen of this nation?
No good evidence exists to demonstrate that he is.
2. Is Barack Obama a "natural born citizen?" All evidence indicates that under the CORRECT understanding of the term, he is not.
As for any talk of "conspiracy", I have always held that creating a replacement birth certificate for an adopted child is NOT a CONSPIRACY because it is done in accordance with legal procedures designed to protect the child.
There are some less informed people that think the oddities coming out of Hawaii represent some sort of "conspiracy", but these people are unacquainted with the normal practice of State Agencies when dealing with the records of Adopted Children such as Barry Dunham and myself.
Or course, people like you are very quick to label those you disagree with as Nuts and Kooks, just because they are uniformed.
I, on the other hand, cannot comprehend why anyone would bother supporting the legitimacy of Barack. Calling his legitimacy into question cannot be as bad for the nation as arguing that he is rightfully our leader. This, more than any thing else, would seem to be the behavior of a kook.
Does anybody remember the upshot of his Quixotic tilt at the birth certificate windmill?
Yes, it resulted in Barack Obama desperately pleading with Hawaii to hurry up and send him a copy of his newly created replacement birth certificate to cover up his 1971 adoption. Unfortunately for him, the silly bastards at Hawaii DOH didn't know that the file would contain the information used to create it, and the idiot staff at the White House was likewise too stupid to realize they were posting the proof that it was created recently in the same file.
I read all the time about people sending digital pictures without realizing the metafile contains a lot more information than they wanted people to know. Likewise, I recall when Dan Rather tried to make an issue out of this Fake document concerning George W. Bush, but didn't realize the fonts used in the document weren't created until the 1980s.
These people are NOT computer literate, and like ignorant fools, the inadvertently screw themselves over when they try to use digital technology.
So yeah, I would say Donald Trump asking to see his birth certificate was a great success because it caused the idiots at the White House to inadvertently release evidence of the bungling that went into their document.
Perhaps the lunacy is the assumption that anyone who doesn’t ride the Birther crazy train must therefore support Obama?
How did it “help” the candidacy of Donald Trump again?
How is that candidacy thing going for old Donald Trump?
What was the event that precipitated his massive decline in the polls again?
Until rather recently, the “salient points of the Birther issue” were largely focused on BHO’s place of birth. Back then I was called an Obot for not buying the conspiracy theories that BHO was born in either: Indonesia, Kenya or Canada. The argument over his parentage was around back then, but only barely and at the earliest it arose in October of 2008. It didn’t really gather speed until enough Birthers were unable to look past how bankrupt the ‘born somewhere other than Hawaii’ arguments were.
You may not think the points you mention have been addressed, or addressed to your satisfaction. But, that doesn’t matter. BHO is accepted as an NBC by anyone who’s opinion matters. Birthers don’t accept it, but their opinion is of no consequence to the reality of the situation.
If you want to invent an argument that BHO was adopted by someone at sometime in the past, fine. But don’t expect anyone to buy it who doesn’t already buy into Birther claptrap.
The folks I call nuts and kooks are those who persist in repeating things that are clearly incorrect and they should know better (Pakistan travel ban, Grandma said he was born in Kenya, BC’s are all forged, etc.) or insist that their personal interpretation of law and history must be binding and everyone who disagrees with them is a traitor, Obot, or other such animal.
BHO is the President of these United States. He’s an NBC as the term is understood by the Legislative and Judicial branches. He won the election squarely if not fairly. That makes him the legitimate President. You don’t like that? Well, I can’t say I blame you one bit. I don’t either.
But that is still how it is.
I am going to be way late to the party, but I do have to weigh in here, on the subject of illegitimate bastards. Upon thought, I’m sure you will agree that the misnomer, illegitimate bastard was designed to exonerate the real illegitimate bastards that produced what might be call an illegitimate bastard but in reality, the so called illegitimate bastard had no say in the matter, and is as innocent as the day is long.
The real illegitimate bastards were the parents of the so called illegitimate bastard. I know what you mean and am on your side of this issue, I just believe there has to be a more legitimate description of the first half black occupier of the White House who is just enjoying the hell out of his illegitimate presidency at the expense of millions of “the people” to his delight.
Until proven otherwise, beyond any reasonable doubt,
“He is not a legitimate president”.
On this we are in 100% complete agreement!
I fondly recall the illegitimate president shooting me and my properly elected representatives the surreptitious bird, expressing by the look on his face, the disdain, disgust, dislike, disapproval, and general displeasure, with all things related to the United States of America as constituted prior to his illegitimate occupation of the White house.
I would disagree with your characterization of what happened. The Issue with the birth certificate sucked up all the oxygen from any other discussion, not that other points were not legitimate, but it was the scrutiny of the birth certificate issue which was holding people's attention.
There was plenty of reason to believe Barack Obama was born somewhere other than the United States. Prior to the release of his COLB, *I* thought he was born in Kenya. Chris Matthews thought he was born in Indonesia, and he is at the center of Democrat Politics and a Media Universe! If CHRIS Matthews could get it wrong, you can't blame ANYONE ELSE for getting it wrong.
Chris Matthews, Hardball, December 18, 2007:
But didn‘t Hillary dump on Obama a few days ago for playing up his Indonesian roots? So, what is she up to here? Is she pushing how great he is for having been born in Indonesia, or what, or simply reminding everybody about his background, his Islamic background?
You may not think the points you mention have been addressed, or addressed to your satisfaction. But, that doesn’t matter.
It matters to me and others, and that is why we persist.
BHO is accepted as an NBC by anyone who’s opinion matters. Birthers don’t accept it, but their opinion is of no consequence to the reality of the situation.
You mean because the majority says so, that, can decide the truth of something? I disagree. This is a fallacy of "argumentum ad populum."
If you want to invent an argument that BHO was adopted by someone at sometime in the past, fine. But don’t expect anyone to buy it who doesn’t already buy into Birther claptrap.
It is a reasonable enough presumption. Obviously Barry could not have had a legal guardian which lived thousands of miles away in Indonesia. From 1971 till 1979, he was underage, and must necessarily have had legal guardians. Those guardians were obviously his grandparents. It is completely reasonable that they should have adopted him, and that is why he has been dodging and twisting to keep his birth documents out of the public eye. What is unreasonable is to believe that there WAS no legal guardianship of him between the ages of 10 and 18.
The folks I call nuts and kooks are those who persist in repeating things that are clearly incorrect and they should know better (Pakistan travel ban, Grandma said he was born in Kenya, BC’s are all forged, etc.) or insist that their personal interpretation of law and history must be binding and everyone who disagrees with them is a traitor, Obot, or other such animal.
I never put any stock in the travel ban, nor whatever some foreign speaking grandmother replies to leading questions, nor to forged birth certificates, (Government create replacement documents doesn't count in this regard in my opinion.) But as for the "personal interpretation of the law and History", That is objective, and can be argued on the facts. I have seen every argument against the citizen parent theory, and they all come back to one point. Some court 120 years after the fact says that being born on the soil makes you a citizen, and therefore (by a transformation never fully explained) you are a "natural born citizen". The entire argument is a non sequitur.
BHO is the President of these United States. He’s an NBC as the term is understood by the Legislative and Judicial branches.
Who in my opinion don't really care whether or not they are accurate.
He won the election squarely if not fairly. That makes him the legitimate President. You don’t like that? Well, I can’t say I blame you one bit. I don’t either.
But that is still how it is.
To sum up what you just said, Because the MEDIA (completely run by Liberal Democrat Union Members) gave Obama the equivalent of a billion dollars worth of free advertising and interference running against his Republican Opponent, The rigged system managed to con the dullest and most superficial of the 52% of the voting population into picking their ordained candidate.
I don't consider it fair, and I don't consider it square. Not a one of these media people gave a sh*t whether he was a "natural citizen" or not, they only cared that he could win and advance the Liberal agenda. Again, I direct your attention to the Chris Matthews quote above. He gave not the slightest inkling of disapproval or questioning of the propriety of someone whom HE BELIEVED to be born in Indonesia (therefore not even meeting YOUR rule for being a "natural citizen") running for the office of the U.S. Presidency.
The media doesn't care if he's foreign born or not. If they found out he was, they would cover that up too lest the neanderthals among us make an issue of it!
Of course the media didn’t, and doesn’t care. That’s a given.
But when the Conservative legal foundations, think-tanks, commentators (Thomas Sowell, Ann Coulter, etc.) and judges (Alito, Thomas, etc.) don’t seem to agree with Birthers, perhaps Birthers are simply wrong.
I only use the term because it is a description of him which cannot be seriously contested and because his supporters hate it. :)
“He is not a legitimate president”.
On this we are in 100% complete agreement!
Amen. The burden of proof is on him, not on anyone else. Since he failed to establish his Legitimacy, he must be regarded as an illegitimate President until it is demonstrated otherwise. (Despite what the crowd of Know-Nothings think.)
Yeah, I made a poster of him doing this. :)
But when the Conservative legal foundations, think-tanks, commentators (Thomas Sowell, Ann Coulter, etc.) and judges (Alito, Thomas, etc.) don’t seem to agree with Birthers, perhaps Birthers are simply wrong.
I have to admit, that argument had me befuddled for awhile. Why would people, whose opinion I otherwise had always respected, be so disdainful of something that seemed to me so obvious? It was a conundrum. I eventually did come up with some explanations that make sense to me, and it is my current working theory to explain their behavior.
It all starts with John McCain, whom I voted for in the Primary, mainly because all the other candidates sucked worse. (I have personally met, and shook the hand of John McCain, by the way.)
When I voted for John McCain, I did not know that he was born in Panama. (On a military base, yes, but still outside the United States Proper.) I did not discover that he was not born in the United States until late 2008. Now this makes no difference to me at all, because His father was assigned to that base as a defender of our Nation, and it has always been my opinion that where stands our Military, there is America also!
The problem is, among the General Public, this is a no-no. So many people have grown up with a FALSE 14th Amendment based understanding of the meaning of "natural born citizen" that it is a no-brainer. To them, a "natural born citizen" MUST be born here.
What I and Others didn't know at the time, was this issue had had far more serious consequences for John McCain than any of us could have guessed. As a result of John McCain's having been born outside the Country, He dared not raise the issue of what is a "natural born citizen" because the bulk of the public would side against him.
It goes beyond that. John McCain was the Republican Nominee, and it was the Duty of Party Leaders and leading Republicans to help get him elected, so rightly or wrongly, they could not, would not, discuss the issue of "natural born citizen" because to do so would politically KILL their guy.
It is my opinion that anyone in the Party who knew how the issue would affect their candidate's ability to get elected, would not want to discuss it, and as a result, the issue could not be brought up as a weapon against Barack. The Media (the other side) also did not want to bring it up because of Barack.
After a while, everyone's positions became set in stone, and as this article so cleverly explains, the rest was cascade and herd theory.
To summarize, you have a vast amount of ignorance regarding the correct meaning of "natural born citizen" (even by the lawyers and the Judiciary, because anyone that has not studied this specifically, does not know the truth about it.) You have political circumstances which compelled people in both parties to change the subject and ridicule anyone who was bringing it up, and you have the cascade effect of many people making up their minds suddenly as a result of the perception that others had made up their minds, and then you have the Herd mentality which requires the herd to attack anyone who refuses to be a part of the herd.
And that is the SHORT explanation. :)
The funny thing is, Both Ann Coulter AND George Will have both written on the issue, without even realizing it! Publicly they disdain the "birther" argument, but both of them have written on the issue of "Anchor Babies" and if you read their articles, every single point they make also applies to Obama.
They BOTH point out that "anchor babies" are an incorrect understanding of the 14th amendment, and that these children should NOT be regarded as American citizens. THAT IS EXACTLY THE "BIRTHER" ARGUMENT! :)
They agree with us in Principle, they just refuse to see it.
The very picture I had in mind.
Keep fighting the good fight. The truth will come out.
I don't know any other way to behave. :)
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.