Posted on 08/13/2015 9:59:41 PM PDT by MarvinStinson
4 Simple Questions .....
1. Back in 1961 people of color were called 'Negroes. So how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time ?
2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 and Lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, Right? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in "Kenya, East Africa".
This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet Exist ?
Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_%28http:/en.wikipedia..org/wiki/Kenya%29
3. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital".
This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called "KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home", respectively.
The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978?
( kapiolani.org )
Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media?
4. Perhaps a clue comes from Obama's book on his father. He states how proud he is of his father fighting in WW II. I'm not a math genius, so I may need some help from you. Barack Obama's "birth certificate" says his father was 25 years old in 1961 when Obama was born. That should have put his father's date of birth approximately 1936 - Now we need a non-revised history book-one that hasn't been altered to satisfy the author's goals-to verify that WW II was basically between 1939 and
1945. Just how many 3 year olds fight in Wars? Even in the latest stages of WW II his father wouldn't have been more than 9 years old. Does that mean that Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes ?
Very truly yours,
RICHARD R. SILVERLIEB Attorney at Law
354 Eisenhower Parkway Livingston, NJ 07039
"A pen in the hand of this president is far more dangerous than a gun in the hands of 200 million law-abiding citizens.
Let’s review, shall we?
There were 139 posts on this thread before my first post. If you go back and read the first fifty or so posts, many of them are attacks on birthers or ridicule of birthers.
For example, post #1 says simply: “Birther please;” a modern-day colloquialism for “please stop this nonsense.”
My first post is in response to the following post (#54) from “CA Guy:”
“But somehow all court challenges felt the president was there legally.
So someone presented something in favor of the president’s position that may be the case against the opposition or the opposition couldn’t make a case, right? Who won a case against the president regarding status, did I miss something?”
I responded to CA Guy’s post by factually listing the lawsuits against Secretaries of State for putting Obama on the ballot and the eligibility challenges that were heard by state Election boards.
I concluded my post by answering his question concerning whether anybody had won a case by saying: “Obama being eligible prevailed in every legal action mentioned above.”
At that point, you got your birtherbot panties all in a twist. And all I had posted was facts.
No doubt you had an excellent excuse for at least half of the hundreds—more likely thousands—of times you’ve harped on this issue. The only difference yesterday is that you were more honest about why you obsessive-compulsively post those stats.
I have no need for an excuse.
I have stated over and over again, unequivocally that I don’t support the Obama is ineligible position; that I believe Barack Obama is a natural born citizen and that I believe this issue is a political loser for conservatives.
I would like to see the debate over eligibility put to bed permanently via a grand jury investigation and a congressional investigation.
Your obsessive-compulsive posting involves the exact number of cases in which judges have ruled in Obama’s favor. You admitted you post this figure with never-ending repetition so as to demoralize conservatives.
Of course since that is a sleazy, scummy activity, you are now dishonestly misstating the case.
If there was ever to be a case where a judge didn’t rule in Obama’s favor, I’d be among the first to post it. But there aren’t any.
How can direct quotes of courts’ rulings “misstate the case?”
I was referring to the fact/case that you have admitted that you post here in order to demoralize conservatives. Of course you can’t grasp language usage on that level. I forgot how simple I have to keep it, if there’s to be even a slim hope of your comprehending the words
I do not post here to try to demoralize conservatives. That is a misperception.
Anyone who equates conservatism with birtherism isn’t capable of being demoralized because they are a true believer in the “sacred cause.” Trying to impact true believers is a waste of time.
Conservatism consists of a myriad of issues. Birtherism is a single issue. There are many conservatives who aren’t birthers and have no more interest in the “Obama ineligibility movement” than to just poke a finger in Obama’s eye, metaphorically speaking.
I figure that if you’re going to be a birther, at least get your facts right. For example, the person who started this thread quoted a letter saying that Kapiolani Hospital had a different name in 1961. Every other 1961 birth certificate from that hospital (ie the Nordyke Twins) that has been seen publicly also says “Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.”
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/8e/fe/8efefe4937cb4ec3dd2c5061c1a7fb9e.jpg?itok=YKvkIjpQ
“What is more demoralizing to conservatives, constantly seeing Obama win frivolous lawsuits and then being subjected to him laughing in our faces”
Haha. Your dishonesty knows no bounds. You made no mention of demoralizing those who question Obama’s integrity. [Which is all so-called birthers are—people who ask if Obama was telling the truth when he claimed to be born in Kenya, when he claimed HI...or whether he was lying both times?]
No, you were quite specific about demoralizing “conservatives.”
And of course you are the one who’s doing it. No one else harps hundreds—probably, if every instance were counted, thousands—of times about Obama winning all those lawsuits, and American citizens losing. You post that info day in and day out, YEAR in and YEAR out.
You are also the one who gloats about Obama supposedly laughing over his ‘great’ victories. From the way you speak of it, it’s obvious that you take a sick and perverse pleasure in Obama’s ‘legal successes.’
There is no wiggle room this time, Nero. You let the mask slip. Your sole purpose here, by your own aadmission, is to demoralize conservatives. You are engaged in a scummy, sleazy effort. It is beneath contempt.
I am not Barack Obama winning frivolous lawsuits. Don’t try to kill the messenger.
Certainly you are not Obama. You are worse. Obama is a radical leftist who makes no attempt to hide it. You are a liberal posing as a conservative. That puts you in a class of your own. Not even your two fellow FR obots pretend to be conservatives. Incredible as it seems, you make them look almost honest by comparison.
Take the matter of Palin. You have one quote of hers with which you agree. But to ALL of her major political and philosophical positions you are diametrically opposed. This has been pointed out countless times to you since you made the patently false claim that you are a Palin supporter. Yet you simply continue, in true troll fashion, to promote everything Palin opposes.
So what does that make you? It makes you a person who has lied to JR himself. You did it to save your skin, but you shouldn’t be proud of it. If you have to lie to maintain your posting privileges, you shouldn’t be posting.
As to your being a liberal, rest assured I am not the only one who has noticed. I’ve lost track of how many posters have asked me why you haven’t already been banned. Believe me, freepers are onto you.
You see, you make the classical liberal mistake. You assume liberals are smart and conservatives are stupid. Therefore if you once in a blue moon claim to be a conservative, we’ll all be stupid enough to believe you.
Once again you are wrong...as is pretty much always the case.
Agreed. He’s a probably a liberal troll - fishing for something to take back to his other liberal troll friends.
For the record, there is no position of Sarah Palin’s that I am opposed to. Governor Palin was my first choice for the Republican nomination with Ted Cruz as my preferred Palin running mate.
I expected Hillary Clinton to be the Democrat nominee and countering Clinton with Palin put the Republicans in the strongest position to win, in my humble opinion.
The rest of your tripe isn’t worth commenting on.
I like discussing the eligibility issue, you don’t seem able to discuss that intelligently so you try to shift the topic to whatever individual is disagreeing with you at the moment.
I’ve indulged you for a couple of posts but your alloted time is now up.
“For the record, there is no position of Sarah Palin’s that I am opposed to.”
This is a lie. Palin, probably more than any other conservative, has condemned the corruption and systemic dishonesty of the Permanent Political Class.
You cannot point to a single post where you have been anything but SUPPORTIVE of the PPC. You have never even acknowledged the catastrophic level of corruption that pervades the Ruling Class, much less condemned it.
In fact, not long ago you and a fellow obot mocked the very idea that the PPC lies, and could conceivably lie for Obama. The two of you found this idea—which is foundational to Palin’s political philosophy—just too funny/amusing.
If you agreed At ALL with Palin, it would be YOU who was pointing out the role of corrupt politicians in protecting and sustaining Obama and his lies. Instead countless conservatives must explain this basic Palin belief to you—over and over and over—while you, in true troll fashion, ignore it all and continue on with your idiotic liberal mindset.
I think our dear FRiend Fantasywriter may have forgotten that there is no one in the Republican Party who is more representative of the Permanent Political Class than 32 years in Washington D.C., John Sidney McCain and Governor Palin, being the pragmatist that she is, agreed to be his running mate.
Is it your position that Palin supports the Permanent Political Class?
Also, your cheap anti-Trump shots were noted. Palin supports Trump, which you don’t.
Yet another LIE noted [i.e.: that you agree with all Palin’s positions—you agree with exactly one of them, and its not one of her big ones ].
It is my position that Sarah Palin was John McCain’s running mate. It is my position that Governor Palin said that she found concerns about Barack Obama’s birth certificate to be a distraction and annoying.
Governor Palin was well aware that no state in the union and no federal law requires a candidate or an elected official to use a birth certificate to establish their eligibility for office.
Under federal law, a U.S. Passport is considered to be the primary and preferred documentary evidence of citizenship and identity.
Do you believe Palin supports the Permant Political Class?
The Permanent Political Class as a whole, no I don’t believe Sarah Palin supports it; but I also believe that she is a political pragmatist. That is why she ran with John McCain who is the poster senior citizen for the Permanent Political Class and I know she has strongly supported some senior politicians like Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama and James Inhofe of Oklahoma, another member of the Permanent Political Class. Sarah Palin obviously supports or rejects members of the Permanent Political Class on a case-by-case basis.
Permanancy in electoral politics is dependent on getting votes from your constituents. Seniority, experience and longevity in and of themselves are not necessarily inherently bad things.
Interesting. You managed to bring yourself to say you don’t believe Palin supports the Permanent Political Class. You can’t bring yourself to say she is the fiercest critic alive of the PPC. But you [claim to] support her, and you don’t believe she supports the PPC as a whole.
Tepid at best.
Still you *must* share Palin’s passionate opposition to the PPC. You did, after all, say you agreed with “all” her positions. So it is nice to know that going forward you will not be citing members of the PPC as reliable sources. You are in too much agreement with Palin as regards the corruption of the PPC.
And now how about an apology for your weasely attempts to undermine Trump’s support. Palin says Trump is the best thing that’s ever happened to the PPC. So, since you agree with all her positions, you must be a great admirer of Trump as well.
Oh, and btw, guess what a quick online search revealed? That the fact of Palin having run with McCain is a classic liberal talking point used to discredit her opposition to the Permanent Political Class. So you can add this to the rest of your unsavory resume: that you are importing leftist attacks against Palin’s integrity onto FR. [Whereas if you were a conservative, you might view Palin’s veep campaign experience as the catalyst that launched her anti PPC crusade.]
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.
