Vetting the President - A Challenge to Naysayers

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
All I want this thread to accomplish is to show what other president's in the past have released.

Unfortunately, like I said, you won't get it.

All you will get is what we have seen already. Blind hatred for Obama, and blind support (even though they'd never admit it) for Obama.

Trying to find that middle ground of intelligent discussion on this issue is like trying to find a needle in a hay stack.

reply to post by nyk537


That's exactly what I want to happen. That way, every time one of them makes a new post or starts a new thread, I can link them back to here and let them know that I am still waiting.

It won't accomplish much, but it will give me peace of mind.

Any reasonable, thoughtful and informed person who carefully considers the case made against Obama's natural born citizenship realizes there are serious questions to be answered. You and I honestly have no idea where Obama was born. Anyone who states otherwise is either lying or delusional - except, possibly, his Kenyan grandmother, and she claims (on tape) that she was present at his birth in Kenya. So Obama's grandmother is either a liar or Obama was born in Kenya. As it stands now, there is more "evidence" that Obama was born in Kenya than in Hawaii.

In any event, it is now out of our hands and will be decided by the highest court in the land, and that is a good thing. At this point, we must unite as Americans and respect the Supreme Court's authority and eventual decision. If and when the Supreme Court conclusively decides that Obama is a natural born citizen, and does in fact take the oath of office, then we unite behind our rightful president.

However, knowing that this is the case, those who continue to deny the simple truth that there is in fact a court challenge to Obama's eligibility to hold office, and that he may indeed be prohibited from holding office, are not helping the problem. Exactly the opposite. Not only does it add to the chaos and confusion, it perpetuates ignorance and criminality.

If Obama is not a natural born citizen, and if Obama had legal documents forged and/or falsified in order to hide that fact, then Obama cannot be president, and it is now the Supreme Court's responsibility to ensure that he does not become president. It does not matter how many people voted for him. To suggest that he should be allowed to be president in order to avoid civil unrest is ignorant at best. I have faith that most Americans have enough respect for the rule of law that they would completely agree.

Only those who have no respect for the rule of law would: 1 - Want a criminal to be president, and 2 - Resort to violence and criminal actions should that criminal be prohibited from being president.

I also suspect that if all this is true, Obama will not be the only one to go down... we can expect Biden, Pelosi, Reid, and Dean to suffer the same fate, as they all aided and abetted the fraud.

If only the mainstream media could also be criminally charged for their blackout...

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Many idiots on this board

has not been vetted,

He's been vetted. People decided to ignore the negative facts about him.
That's their right. The only thing that is still questionable is his citizenship. There are too many questions and Obama could clear them up instantly by releasing his Birth Certificate - but he decided not to. Being a conspiracy board - questions will be raised here.

that he's a Muslim,

He claims christian.

Anti-War,

He is anti-war ... well, today he is. At one point he said he was in full agreement with George Bush (43) about the war in Iraq. He flip flops.
the weekly standard

In 2004 Obama said in reference to the war - "There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who’s in a position to execute."

Christian,

He claims christian, but black liberation theology isn't christian.
James Cone wrote that if God didn't do what the angry black
man wants - then they should kill God. That isn't Christian.
Saying that the muslim all to prayer is the most beautiful sound
on earth isn't something that a christian who understands his/her
faith would say either.

baby-killing,

Culture of death = pre-born baby killing.
You disagree - but that's just the way it is.
real clear politics/chicago tribune

gun-banning extremist.

He's definately anti second amendment rights.
cnn - with video link.

Of course - you may interpret things differently.
Whatever

reply to post by FlyersFan


Missed the point. Not here to argue about that. Plenty of threads for that. All I want is proof that every president released the documents people are claiming Obama has held back.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Missed the point.

naaaaaaah man .. I was laughing WITH you and pulling your leg a bit.
SEE? Guess that intent got lost in the posting ...

Anyways -

As for your list - the only thing that potential POTUS folks have released in the past, that I know of, have been their grades from college and their medical records to some extent. They have a checkup and the doctor says 'all fine'. That kind of thing.

No president in the past has had to show their Birth Certificate publically before because there wasn't a question before. However, just the fact that there are serious questions about his place of birth, he should release the document. That way most of the noise about it can go away.

There is an immediate Obama family member AND an ambassador from Kenya both saying that they know for sure Obama was born in Kenya. The fact that people now wonder about his place of birth is no surprise given the information we know.

The fact that he hasn't released it just raises more questions.

THERE .. Is that a post more to your liking Irish-fella??
I suppose I shouldn't attempt to jest with ya' ... it didn't come across.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
This is not an "Obama thread". I don't even want any facts about Obama on here.

Maybe you should have gone for a different title, then. There's probably still time to change it. Perhaps "The Presidential Document Challenge" or something.

Sorry for my off-topic posts.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by FlyersFan


Gotcha.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Meh. Wasn't really talking to you. You were just defending against the lies people continued to post on here.

You and I are on the same page.


[edit on 1-12-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply to post by Irish M1ck


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by The Nighthawk

Originally posted by jd140
You want to compare the way Obama is being treated to the way Bush is being treated.......ARE YOU KIDDING? Right now(emphasis added) President Bush wouldn't be able to win a HS class President election. He is being bad mouthed by I think the new number is 80% of the American public.

That IS the case--Right Now. BUT, where were you when Bush ran in 2000? When his questionable military record first came up? His coke conviction? His string of failed businesses? Nobody wanted to talk about that. In fact the right-wingers who control the MSM shut down ANY conversation that headed in that direction.

In 2004 Dan Rather was set up to be the patsy when documents with accurate info verified by Bush's former CO, but with a questionable chain of custody, surfaced and Rather made them public. The info in those documents was real, but because of how they came to Rather's hands they, and he, were discredited.

Nobody wanted to hear it.

That info could have swayed the election for Kerry. But once Dan Rather took the fall, investigation stopped.

The whole thing was a deliberate set-up to silence legitimate debate.

Bush's records are sealed.

It doesn't matter what his status is now. There was legitimate concern that he wasn't the right man for the job based on records of his actual actions. To this day we don't know the evils that could have been prevented had Bush's records been public, and his campaign failed on its own merits-or lack thereof.

The way I see it Obama is being treated a hell of alot better then President Bush is. Get off your high horse.

This is just false. During the campaign Obama recieved worse press than McCain, up until Palin started playing her character to the hilt and the MSM couldn't ignore it anymore. Besides, the only reason they're playing "neutral" (if not nice) now is because Obama might reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and re-regulate the media, and then they'd actually have to work for a living again instead of getting fat on money from all their subsidiaries.

Fine you are right. I will admit the truth.

I am white, I voted for McCain, I do not agree with alot of what Obama says. Thanks to Nighthawk I have realised the reason I do not like Obama is because I am racist.

And so is everyone else who did not vote for Obama. Admit it people, I did and I tell you I feel alot better getting it out.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by jd140
Who could have predicted four years ago that he would run for the Presidency, let alone win?

I could! And I DID!

Exactly four years ago, I said, "I hope he runs in 2008. I'd vote for him..." Now, just because you had your head in a hole somewhere and didn't know who he was doesn't mean he "just came out of nowhere".

Removed Off-topic portion of post.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

I will also admit you are right and admit the truth to you also.

He did not come out of nowhere, everyone in the US knew who he was except for me. I apologize to you as I did not get cable or internet in the cave I was living in. Everyone, except for me, knew he would beat out Hillary in the primaries. Again, the cave I lived in did not get cable or internet.

Continue on belittling people with your keyboard kung fu. I have been defeated and will watch on the sides.

"Here's to four years of being labeled racist for questioning the future president" Nice One! He sure is untouchable from this angle.

Obama sucks and that's how I feel about it. What ever happened to disdain and contempt for your leaders? I wonder how many generation Xers or whatever who listened to Rage against the machine voted for Obama? I'd guess alot.

This thread is as dumb if not moreso than anti-Obama threads- I thought mine to be a rather humorous jab-
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You people are slow.

Mods, can we get some off topic posts removed?

I will repeat the topic of the thread one more time:

If Obama is guilty by not revealing documents that are necessary to be properly vetted by the American public, then certainly past presidents have done it also.

Where are those documents?

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply to post by Moonsouljah


I'm going to use one of your hope stamps. I'm hoping that one day you'll make a post that is useful.

Unfortunately, hoping is just that: hope. My guess is, you'll continue with the same rhetoric you've started with.

But here's to hoping you won't!

In the meantime, you can make my wish come true by staying on topic.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply to post by Irish M1ck


You might have gotten more posts that relate to what you want to talk about if you hadn't made the entire first post about Obama.

As for past presidents, as far as I am aware none of them were ever questioned about where they were born or went to school because it was all out there in the open and none of them had lawsuits filed against them seeking to prove where they were born. So these documents you are calling for now are not just floating around on the internet. Hard as it is to believe, the internet actually doesn't know everything.

Edit to add: It is possible that none of our presidents have been properly vetted, but that would be an issue with the Secretaries of State not the past presidents.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Jenna]

reply to post by Jenna


It's an introduction. It states the reason why I am doing what I am doing. It's not my fault people are so A.D.D. that they can't make it past the first paragraph.

It doesn't take more than 30 seconds to skim the OP and get the point. People would rather just continue the hateful rhetoric.

You read it and understood it. Don't defend those who don't deserve it.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply to post by Irish M1ck


True. But you had to know that putting Obama's name in the title and then quoting a huge block of text that lists documents people want released about him was going to steer this thread into being just about him.

Besides, it's not A.D.D. it's.... Oh, look at the butterfly!! (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Have to get dinner on the table, but I'll have a look in a bit and see if I can find anything about any past president's having their natural born status questioned or even just their citizenship if I can't find anything about the former. As far as I know, none have been questioned until now though so I most likely won't come up with anything. It seems to me that if they had been, someone would have found a case or law or something that would have cleared this whole Obama thing up before it got to the point it has.


Edit to respond to your edit: That's what I do though. It's part of my charm and why everyone loves me so much.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Jenna]

The only thing I have found about any other presidents, or vice presidents for that matter, that were rumored to not have been natural born citizens was Chester A. Arthur. (Yes it's from wikipedia, but I have found them to be as accurate as any printed encyclopedia.)

Chester Alan Arthur was the son of Irish born preacher William Arthur and Vermont born Malvina Stone Arthur. Most official references list him as having been born in Fairfield in Franklin County, Vermont on October 5, 1829. However, Arthur sometimes claimed to have been born in 1830 (the date is on his grave inscription and occurs in some reference works). His father had initially migrated to Dunham, Quebec, Canada, where he and his wife at one point owned a farm about 80 miles (129 km) north of the U.S. border. There has long been speculation that the future president was actually born in Canada and that the family moved to Fairfield later. Given a lack of official documentation and the seeming confusion about the year of Arthur's birth, historians have been unable to rule this possibility out. If Arthur had been born in Canada, he would not have been a "natural-born citizen" and would therefore have been constitutionally ineligible to serve as vice president or president. Some of his opponents circulated the Canada rumor during the 1880 election, but they could not prove it, and no proof has emerged since.

So it was rumored that he was born in Canada, but no one has ever been able to prove it either way. Can't find anything about any other presidents where this was an issue.

Buried in this New York Times article about McCain was the following though about past candidates for the presidency:

Mr. McCain is not the first person to find himself in these circumstances. The last Arizona Republican to be a presidential nominee, Barry Goldwater, faced the issue. He was born in the Arizona territory in 1909, three years before it became a state. But Goldwater did not win, and the view at the time was that since he was born in a continental territory that later became a state, he probably met the standard.

It also surfaced in the 1968 candidacy of George Romney, who was born in Mexico, but again was not tested. The former Connecticut politician Lowell P. Weicker Jr., born in Paris, sought a legal analysis when considering the presidency, an aide said, and was assured he was eligible. Franklin D. Roosevelt Jr. was once viewed as a potential successor to his father, but was seen by some as ineligible since he had been born on Campobello Island in Canada. The 21st president, Chester A. Arthur, whose birthplace is Vermont, was rumored to have actually been born in Canada, prompting some to question his eligibility.

So candidates have been questioned, but only one president has had questions surrounding their natural born status and he wasn't voted into the presidency he got the job when Garfield died because he, Arthur, was the vice president.

The situation surrounding Obama is rather unique, so the documents of other presidents you asked for in your first post simply were never asked for because there was absolutely no question where they were born. With Arthur, there were a few rumors but no one filed a lawsuit and none of the documents have been found to prove it one way or the other.

reply to post by Jenna


Well that holds true for the first two or so documents. I'll agree to that. However, there are a multitude of other documents being asked for or questioned that would not be unique only to Obama.

One reason why I really care now, this has spread beyond internet rumor sites. I heard it being discussed on talk radio today. Obviously, this stuff is affecting people.

These things here are not having to do with his birth and are being talked about on forums and talk radio:

Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released

Punahou School records -- Not released

Selective Service Registration -- Released – Proven Counterfeit

Occidental College records -- Not released

Passport (Pakistan) -- Not released

Columbia College records -- Not released

Columbia thesis -- Not released

Harvard College records -- Not released

Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)

Baptism certificate -- None

Medical records -- Not released

Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public view)

Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state senators' records are intact)

Law practice client list -- Not released

University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None

If he has to provide them, others should have also. The BC issue is important, and I am willing to argue with people about that. However, the whole thing is really getting blown out of proportion, and when it starts to spread on "more reputable" sources (yes, I am calling conservative talk radio more reputable), I start to get concerned.

Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote

but for a lot of people its in conflict with

Amendment 12 - Choosing the President

why is that?