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

To: Fantasywriter
The point about the house is that if he had been born in HI somebody would know about it.

Oh, I think some most certainly did know about it: Stanley Ann, Grandpa Stanley and Grandma Toots, Dr. Sinclair (who signed the birth certificate). You're relying on an account (Maraniss) which lacks the input on those with the most critical first-hand knowledge of events in those days. Like I said, you're trying to draw an inference and conclusion from an incomplete account. Though you seem blind to that reality.

But, do tell: if it's impossible to carry pregnancy to full term and give birth without those around the person knowing about it, then where is the evidence of her pregnancy from that place where Stanley Ann was, if not Hawaii? Who are the person(s) who saw her pregnant in that other place? Who are the persons who noted the home to which Stanley Ann brought the newborn in that (non-Hawaiian) location?

If the absence of that evidence in Hawaii means Stanley Ann didn't give birth there, then the absence of that evidence in any other place means she didn't give birth in any other place. So either you're implying a) that Stanley Ann wasn't BHO II's mother (which is what I construed you to be saying at one point) or b) Obama is some sort of cabbage patch kid or extraterrestrial who just magically sprang up out of nowhere. You can't special-plead this and claim the absence of such pregnancy evidence is significant as to Hawaii, but not significant anywhere else. It's your standard -- you have to apply it consistently or not at all.

The obot version that she spent her pregnancy in HI, went to the hospital, gave birth and brought the baby home without ANYBODY noticing is psychotic.

No, that version accepts the very real possibility that their 17 year old daughter being impregnated by this philandering African guy was something of a social scandal, and so the Dunhams kept Stanley Ann out of view. (A common practice in 60's America).

The point is this: according to Maraniss, SAD was not living with her parents prior to giving birth, nor did she bring her baby home to her parents’ house.

Again, Maraniss is drawing that conclusion without the input of Stanley Ann or her parents -- the persons in the best position to know. I accept it's possible Stanley Ann didn't reside with her parents; that the Dunhams found a person to look after S.A. from the point her pregnancy became more difficult or more obvious. I don't consider that point proven either way. The historical record is too incomplete.

In any event, the point is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT to the question of proof of birth and eligibility. As noted above, I was able to procure passports for my children based on birth certificates that listed NOTHING about residence (parents or newborn) at the time of birth. And I didn't have to track down and get sworn statements from persons attesting they saw my wife pregnant at the time and in that locale. I'm sure that's quite a revelation to you. These after-birth-residence and who-saw-her-pregnant things you keep harping on are NOT the "keys" you wish to make them out to be.

116 posted on 07/23/2015 8:07:30 AM PDT by CpnHook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]


To: CpnHook

“Oh, I think some most certainly did know about it: Stanley Ann, Grandpa Stanley and Grandma Toots, Dr. Sinclair (who signed the birth certificate).”

This is the very essence of stupidity, and it’s not the first time you’ve done it. What you are saying, in so many words, is that because you assume you’re right, you’re right. The question is, was SAD in HI. Your response is, ‘Since I assume she was there, then in fact she was there, and all these people would have known about it.’

You have an illogical and disordered mind. You have no comprehension of what constitutes evidence or witness testimony. You claim all these dead people, if they were alive, would say SAD was in HI. That assumes she was there. Yet you seem INCAPABLE of comprehending the fallacy of arguing, ‘it’s true because I assume it’s true.’

Please stop wasting my time. All this has been explained to you before, but you are evidently too thick to grasp it. You need to find someone with unlimited time and patience to explain such basics to you...over and over and over.

No freaking wonder you are an obot, if this is the best you can do.


118 posted on 07/23/2015 8:31:00 AM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: CpnHook
Oh God. Another wall of crap text which isn't worth reading.

Crap Crap Crap ad nauseum.

148 posted on 07/23/2015 1:09:40 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

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