Vetting the President - A Challenge to Naysayers

reply to post by Irish M1ck

---

A lot of these relate to his BC though. The only issues that concern me in any way are the ones mentioned in the various lawsuits since, for obvious reasons, questions thought up here or elsewhere are not going to be answered by Obama if they aren't in a lawsuit that makes it through the discovery process.



I wasn't aware that these were being asked for in any of the lawsuits, and can't imagine why they would be.



These are asked for because they should list citizenship.



This is a separate issue from the lawsuits, and if he really didn't register and if the document that was released really is a forgery then he committed a crime and should be sentenced appropriately regardless if he's the president-elect or not.



These have been asked for the same reason as his other school records.



Pertains to ctizenship. (Entering a country that Americans were not permitted to enter.)



Same as for Occidental.



Not to sure about this one, but I would imagine there is curiosity about it due to his wife's thesis. Birds of a feather and all that.



Same as for the other two college records.



Seems kind of odd to not have any of these anywhere since he was the president of the HLR.. Not too sure why these would be asked for though.



Perhaps to disprove his claims of being Christian? I don't think everyone gets one though, so I'm not sure what good it would do.



Bush's medical history
Clinton's medical history

There are medical records for every president we have had on that site. Of course I can't vouch for the accuracy, I'm not a doctor and am not over 200 years old so I haven't personally given physicals to any of the presidents.



Well now that's just silly, took me two seconds to find them here.



I think they are asking because he may have represented people who then supported his candidacy with large donations which leads to a conflict of interest. I don't know that this has been requested in any of the lawsuits though.



I'm not sure why these are being asked for either. Perhaps for the same reason as his thesis?

..............

Overall, I think that the main reason there are so many questions about him, aside from the BC issue, is that very few outside of Illinois had heard of him before and so he seemingly came from nowhere and is now the president elect. He spent a very short period of time in the US senate and hasn't really proven himself.

The lawsuits should be in the MSM, these are serious allegations and should not be left in the dark corners of conspiracy sites. The issues brought forth in the lawsuits need to be settled once and for all, not swept under the rug. A lot of people have a hard enough time trusting the government as it is, something like this needs to be taken care of not left to fester.

reply to post by Jenna

---

a lot of you sources are blanked


It took only a few chaps at BLACK VAULT
to get the release of sensitive material regarding UFO's



can i suggest the BV team to try to help you

reply to post by dalek

---

Those are quotes from Mick's post on the previous page and from the OP. I just left them in the external tags. I was responding to what he(?) had listed so I left it as is and just added my response between them.

Here is an excerpt from politico.com, they found one of Obama's article for the HL Review:



And before everyone carries on about it being 'unsigned', it is apparently standard practice for it to be unsigned as noted further along in the aritcle:




[edit on 1-12-2008 by TheWayISeeIt]

reply to post by TheWayISeeIt

---

Good find!

Glad to see our friendly neighborhood blogs still suck at research! Perhaps I should email that idiot and send him/her the link so one more can be checked off as a false statement.

Your link leads to the records pertaining to his being a Illinois senator at the federal level. They are referring to the records from his time in the Illinois state senate. I believe these actually are locked.

TERRORIST ALLEGATIONS THATS MESSED UP ANYWAY YOU LOOK AT IT! Come on If the man deals with some known terrorist types not saying all the way, sorry i said it up top a bit) you have to be suspicious

I'm not exactly head-over-heels about Obama. But I will take up one issue on his behalf: his religious background.
Article VI of the United States Constitution states that :
"no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Therefore, it doesn't make any difference as to whether he is a Muslim, Christian or whatever. I may have problems with some of the other issues raised, but as a supporter of our Nation's supreme law I can't see how anyone could raise an argument about his religion or lack thereof.

It has NO bearing on his legitimacy as President. That's the Law.

I'm to the point I think this is a planned game by both sides. Just post the same crap every day, have the same argument and earn some points. I hear they are taking them in lieu of cash at K-Marts.

I changed the title in hopes that it will help people stay on topic (since apparently reading a paragraph or two is difficult).

reply to post by The Nighthawk

---

A zebra named Barack asked God if he was a white zebra with black stripes or a black zebra with white stripes??? God pondered the question and answered, "you are what you are!"...To which Barack the Zebra doesn't know what to make out of it...Does anyone know which Zebra Barack is?

reply to post by BlueTriangle

---

Oops my mistake. I went and looked for the correct ones and found a New York Timespartial chart of bills Obama sponsored and a CBS article. But other than those two articles, and a few where he is asked about the lack of records, I'm coming up with nothing.

I agree with BH here. When Obama gave his speach at the Democratic Convention 4 years ago, I said to myself "That man is going to be president in 4 years"

To learn about someone, you have to go and do just that, learn about them. Not wait to be spoon fed.

Your "joke" is bordering on racism you know. Calling someone of mixed race a zebra is so not politically correct. Give your head a shake.

Obama hasn't had a chance to even do anything, right or wrong (or have you not noticed that the inauguration hasn't even taken place yet?), and people are all over him like a duck on a junebug.

However, I'm pretty sure that the majority of the US gave Bush more than enough chances, eight years of them, in fact, and if we feel he screwed up massively, we all have more than enough reason to feel that way.

[edit on 12/2/2008 by chickenshoes]

What a load of CRAP!!! But I'm not at all suprised. This is what the liberals do - carry two set of rules - one for "them" and a different one for "us." For 8 stinkin' years the liberals cried about Bush's military records - since that was the only thing off limits. No one questioned his birth place - we all knew where he came from. His records as Governor were public, save a few files. Adn since he was one of "those" Republicans, the liberal media interviewed bathroom attendants that handed him towels!

The Obama isentirely a different issue... His own grandmother states he was born in Kenya for Christ's sake! Produce the damned Birth Certificate!

And WTF does that have to do with questions relating to Obama's birth place. You see, you people are so filled with hatred for Bush that you can't even see through the haze at the REAL issue - WHERE HE WAS BORN!!! He got elected President - good for him and I could care less! BUT, the thingy called the CONSTITUTION - you know, the one you guys claimed Bush was destroying - specifically states the qualifications to be President. There are very legitimate claims as to whether or not he meets these qualifications.

Oh my.... wait a minute here... I think I got it... If a Republican violates the Constitution it is heresy and the onset of Armegeddon, but if a Democrat violates the Constitution, then it must be for a good reason.

Anyone smell that??? Smelss a little like HYPOCRISY!

reply to post by The Nighthawk

---

Obama is an admitted drug user. Noone is calling him out on it.

We all know Bush is a doodiehead, the evidence is written all across the news.

Can you honestly blame anyone for being "once bitten, twice shy"?

I would rather have some guy come from the common populous, to handle things in a common sense way, than any of these elites ( and don't try to tell me this man isn't part of the liberal elite).

If Hillary had been the nom and had won, we would have pretty much had the same situation except we naysayers would all be "sexist".

If McCrap would have won we would be having to endure the liberal whiners crying like little girls with skinned knees about another "stolen election".

Feel free not to read the threads if they bother you so, and just sit back for four years and see how it turns out.

Let me just address something inherently flawed in your thread topic. It sucks. Why didn't you just make it a comment on the original post of that list (which I might add sucks)? It looks to me as if you are trying to generate a discussion from a narrow premise shrouded in suckiness. There are some who might "stay on topic" and look for this information on Clinton, Bush, etc. Shoot, I bet Carter would tell you all of this if you asked him - he seems lonely these days.
But still there are others who might find issue in the whole original argument as it doesn't seem to take into account the problematic nature of the modern system. Bush was 4 and 8 years ago right? If Americans gave a damn they would be aware of his family's obvious ties to Nazi Germany or the fulfillment of the Bush PNAC dream. They don't care though. And I'm not sure if someone brought up the point but we're living in an age when information gathering is at its most capable and efficient state. We should simply expect more background info on our leaders now, its the otties!
As a society, we've come to generally accept the whiteout background of our leaders. But this indifference is only in the mainstream, there are some who find it detrimental to our alleged representative democracy.
Some things on that list is information that I personally wouldn't care about any president. But other things allow for people to make uneducated inferences about his past.
Also, Teddy Roosevelt was the first US president to leave American soil. That was only a century ago. Since then Obama hands down takes the cake for most-globalized or worldly or whatever prior to taking office. No other president received part of their elementary education from a school outside the US- much less a madrasah. Could this Obama's globalized past indicate a possible conflict of interest running our sovereign nation? Shouldn't we learn from the last 8 years(I know how much that DUMB phrase resonates with Obaaaaama people) to make sure we know our pres will represent US and not private interests?
Does Obama's secretive and worldly past deserve more scrutiny than usual? I'd say yes. Sucky post. Now how about you address this more serious thread of mine related to who his Sec of Trans will be:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I'd like to hear some PRObama response to a serious and overlooked issue-

Does anyone not think that if there was any question regarding Obamas eligibility to be president, someone in the Republican party would have made an issue of it during the campaign instead of dragging up non issues like Bill Ayers, etc?