Major General says president's eligibility needs proof

First off, to all you folks who keep saying "REPUBLIC NOT DEMOCRACY HURFF DURRF HURRF DURFF" you might want to come out of your little fantasy worlds and get with this little program we call REALITY. The USA IS a Democracy. EVERY ASPECT of our political system is based on Majority Rule. EVERY SINGLE DAMNED ONE. Local (city) Government? Representatives chosen, decisions made, policies enacted by Majority Rule. Democracy. State? Elections for State Reps and Senators--Majority Rule. State legislative bodies write their respective laws by Majority Rule. Should the Governor of that state choose to, he can use his check and balance of the veto power--but that can be overridden by-sure enough-Majority Rule. Federal? Same thing. Even the interpretation of our precious Constitution splits along party lines on almost every single issue because the Supreme Court votes on every issue, and the makeup of the Supreme Court is determined by whichever party's candidate won the office of the Presidency in that Democratic Process we call the Vote.

EVERYTHING in our entire system of government is based on voting and majority rule. EVERYTHING. Technicalities over terminology are effectively moot, because functionally, WE ARE A DEMOCRACY.

Get used to that fact. Really reflect on it, and you'll know it to be true.

Second, really? I mean, we're still on this crap? Even as our nation thrashes around, near-mortally-wounded by almost thirty years of the Right-Wing War on the Middle Class, with tens of millions unemployed or underemployed, lacking health care, facing foreclosure, just a hair's breadth from complete and utter bankruptcy and living in a tent somewhere, even with two wars still on, municipalities and states bleeding cash and police forces all across the country full of violent thugs looking for an excuse to cause harm to innocents, this is your rallying point?

REALLY??

I mean, seriously, did you stick your tinfoil hats to your heads with some kind of poisonous glue that's now eating your brains?

In the last six months I've truly learned just why it is nobody outside the conspiracy/paranormal "community" takes anything we ever have to say seriously, regardless of how legitimate it may be--because, quite frankly, for every legitimate topic of discussion and study, there's a thousand whacked-out crackpot "theories" and outright fabrications thrust into the data-stream to bring one's suspension of disbelief crashing down in flames like the Hindenburg.

It's pathetic. Nobody even needs to try and discredit you anymore--you do it to yourselves. Come on. Alan Keyes? The carpet-bagging right-wing nutjob Obama rightly trounced in his bid for Senate in Illinois? Really? You don't think his opinion has anything to do with that big axe he's waiting in line to grind, do you? Naaaaahhh. No way the "honorable" Alan Keyes would ever lie about his hated political opponent out of spite, is there?

And as for your buddy the retired two-star General, I'll see him and raise you a whole host of current and retired Generals and Admirals, among other ranking officers. Maybe you saw some of them show their support for Obama during the Democratic Convention? Or does their collective opinion mean nothing because it doesn't support your thesis? How do you know your "boy" isn't in the pockets of the MIC, his opinion bought and paid for by military contractors feeling the sudden and uncomfortable heat of Obama's plan to audit the entire Federal Government, including serious cutbacks in military spending for projects we haven't needed since the end of the Cold War, but have kept paying for as a form of Corporate Welfare? Naah.

I'm not even angry with you fools anymore. I'm angry at myself for giving enough of a turd about your worthless claims to respond to them. Just another damn hoax designed to distract people from the real problems and prevent those problems from being solved, because the real threat--the Mega-Rich Elite--want to keep the idiots squabbling amongst themselves so they can keep robbing us blind, and surround us with a police state to keep their wage-slaves in line. I know this truth falls on deaf ears, but if you want to solve the real problem and fight the real enemy you'll have to give up your childish libertarian/frontiersman fantasies and get involved in the process you hate so much.

It's the 21st Century, people. Big Government is here to stay. Taxes are here to stay. This nation, and its Government For, Of and By the People, this Democracy, will move forward, and you're coming along for the ride no matter how much you kick and scream.

Welcome to real life.

"But more than 50% of America voted for this charlatan and he now has the helm of the ship of state. Even so, he is not MY President. I will not refer to him as such. I will call him Resident Obama, and an illegal resident of the white house at that. I resent him for what he is not"

"Other than this, my key short-term complaint is that he has not had a heart attack in office."

Quote from external source: www.freerepublic.com...

Interesting to see the original post omitted some of the above. This retired General is having a rant, nothing more. He doesn't like "His" new president and thinks that the US should kick him out because of this.

To me, it bears all the hallmarks of simple racism and carries no credibility despite the fact this man used to be a high ranking military officer. Military officers are good at waging war, not politics.

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
reply to post by Harlequin

 

harlequim asking the president to show that he is duly qualified to be president has nothing to do with racism....

The "racism" charge is a smokescreen from folks with an unsupportable position. They think if thry yell "racist" loud enough in this crowded theater, they can cow and shut up their opponents without actually having to answer the charges. sometimes it works, with the timid. With others, well, not so much.

nenothtu out

Originally posted by dankai


How's this for a worthy candidate in this matter? I've read comments in another thread that called the soldiers stepping forward "cowards" and "scared." This man is a Major General! And for all of you who yell at the top of any pinnacle that you served x amount of years, and did this tour or that tour...This man "served 38 years in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, Operation Desert Storm and other locations." AND HE'S A MAJOR GENERAL! I wonder how much disrespect I'll read from military persons on here now.

wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90125]wnd.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Even a Field Marshall or Fleet Admiral can be a traitor.

Originally posted by nenothtu
You mean that insistence on adherence to the Constitution now equates to "twisting and subverting" the Constitution? Orwell himself couldn't have provided a clearer example of doublespeak.

They are not insisting on an adherence to the Constitution. They are demanding things that are not called for in the Constitution and then claiming they are doing it for the Constitution. In fact these people doing so care very little for the Constitution and are just using the name of the Constitution as a cover for their activities. They wish to overturn a lawful election because they were on the losing side, a very anti-democratic, anti-republican and anti-Constitutional attitude. They wish to impose their own brand of tyranny.

If you want to claim they are "protecting the Constitution," show me in the Constitution where it says one can only use the the long-form birth-certificate to prove their citizenship. Show me in the Constitution where it say anyone who was born of immigrant or resident alien parents are not a natural-born-citizen.

Originally posted by nenothtu
And as far as your attempts to shout down the opposition, who, after all, are only insisting on concrete proof - well, as the Bard said, "Methinks thou doth protest too much!"

What complete and total idiocy. Debate and counter-points are neither shouting down the opposition, nor somehow proof we have something to hide. Such an accusation could easily be flipped back on the likes of you.

I think those who are driving it are racist. If you say you are not racist, well you are protesting too much, proving you are racist.

I think those who are driving this are bigots. If you say you are not a bigot, well, you are protesting too much, proving you are a racist.

I think those who are driving this care little for the Constitution. If you say you do care, well, you are protesting too much, proving you do not care about the Constitution.

I think those who are driving this wish to subvert our democracy and republic. If you say you are, well, you are protesting too much, proving that you do wish to subvert our democracy and republic.

Shall I go on? Your "protest too much" argument is nothing, filler and empty words when you have nothing of substance to say.

Originally posted by geemony
Actually retired Generals and staff officers retain their rank as a title in retirement. When a president is no longer president is he not still referred to as president? Nice try but respect is respect, he absolutely is qualified to pass judgment.

There is a serious lack of reading comprehension on this board.

I am going to spell it out one more time for those who have trouble reading.

Whatever his rank is or was in the military is of no consequence to a court case establishing whether Barack Obama is a natural born citizen. Unless the general in question is also a Constitutional-scholar as well as an expert in some field relating to the case, his rank does not matter outside of publicity.

And no, his rank does not make him any more qualified to pass judgement any more than any other person on this board. Simply because he is a Major General does not mean he is infallible nor does his rank confer expert-knowledge in every field known to man.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
He's a citizen and he does have standing on that criterion alone.

The Court has already ruled that is not the case, on repeated occasions.

In the case of Taitz's lawsuit (correct me if I am wrong), they are using active duty soldiers to circumvent this. As the Major General is not an activity duty soldier (even though he could be called up) that in itself could hurt.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
And he is hardly alone in the matter. I saw Alan Keyes asking the same questions the other day.

So what? If you want to talk sheer numbers, 69 million people found the proof of his status as a natural born citizen to be in their satisfaction. The number of people believing something has no bearing on whether it is true or not.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Certainly, Obama can do the same and put an end to the speculation.

That is an flat-out lie.

Those who believe this nonsense need to admit that there is nothing that will put an end to this. Every rational thinking person know that each and every one of you to a man is nothing but a liar. Presented with the evidence you claim you want, you will find an excuse to declare it unsatisfactory, and we all know it. This is a case built on nothing but lies.

Admit it.

[edit on 28-2-2009 by SaviorComplex]

Originally posted by nenothtu
The "racism" charge is a smokescreen from folks with an unsupportable position.

To quote you...

Originally posted by nenothtu
And as far as your attempts to shout down the opposition, who, after all, are only insisting on concrete proof - well, as the Bard said, "Methinks thou doth protest too much!"

So, why are you protesting so much, nenothtu? Are you trying to hide something?

I think the people have an absolute right to question who is at the helm of their country. We live in such a corrupt world now and anything is possible.
The history of Obama's rise is certainly questionable and the lack of documents to back him up are noteworthy.

Occidental College records - not released.
Columbia Thesis paper - not available, locked down by faculty.
Harvard College records - not released, locked down by faculty.
Selective Service Registration - not released.
Medical records - not released (only a one-page report).
Illinois State Senate schedule - 'not available.'
Law practice client list - not released.
Certified Copy of original Birth certificate - not released.
Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth - not released.
Harvard Law Review articles published - None.
University of Chicago scholarly articles - None.
Record of Baptism-- Not released or 'not available.'
Illinois State Senate records--'not available.

People keep saying he has provided a birth certificate according to factcheck.org which just happens to be owned by The Annenberg Foundation.pajamasmedia.com...

I also find the following article a good read. I have checked up on most of the connections and indeed they are true.
www.redcounty.com...

John McCain probably has the original birth certificate he could pull out at any time clearly proving he was born in Panama, on an active U.S. military base. I believe if someone wanted to see it, he would oblige.

Obama on the other hand has made no effort to quell these accusations. The issue will never be settled until we see the "vault copy" of his BC in Hawaii (which he WILL NOT release), then have it examined by experts, and unbiased sources.

Until then we are all going by hearsay, or by images we are assuming are real, and not altered. There is no "hard evidence" for either side of the argument as of now. I'd like to see the whole thing be put to rest, though. If he has nothing to hide, ask the State of Hawaii to release his original records, then everyone will shut up about how he is not Constitutionally eligible.

For the record, I don't care either way, I did not vote in this presidential election.

[edit on 28-2-2009 by KnoxMSP]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by KnoxMSP]

I'm not even angry with you fools anymore. I'm angry at myself for giving enough of a turd about your worthless claims to respond to them. Just another damn hoax designed to distract people from the real problems and prevent those problems from being solved, because the real threat--the Mega-Rich Elite--want to keep the idiots squabbling amongst themselves so they can keep robbing us blind, and surround us with a police state to keep their wage-slaves in line. I know this truth falls on deaf ears, but if you want to solve the real problem and fight the real enemy you'll have to give up your childish libertarian/frontiersman fantasies and get involved in the process you hate so much.

reply to post by The Nighthawk


Well said my friend. Our enemy has never been Bush or Obama.

They are puppets...Obama less of....the mega rich.

The mega rich do not care about borders, laws, goverments in the way that even the wealthy view borders, laws goverments as the mega rich decide and create borders, laws and goverments in ways that makes Senators and Congresspersons wet thier panties.







[edit on 28-2-2009 by whiteraven]

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by nenothtu
You mean that insistence on adherence to the Constitution now equates to "twisting and subverting" the Constitution? Orwell himself couldn't have provided a clearer example of doublespeak.

They are not insisting on an adherence to the Constitution. They are demanding things that are not called for in the Constitution and then claiming they are doing it for the Constitution. In fact these people doing so care very little for the Constitution and are just using the name of the Constitution as a cover for their activities. They wish to overturn a lawful election because they were on the losing side, a very anti-democratic, anti-republican and anti-Constitutional attitude. They wish to impose their own brand of tyranny.

If you want to claim they are "protecting the Constitution," show me in the Constitution where it says one can only use the the long-form birth-certificate to prove their citizenship. Show me in the Constitution where it say anyone who was born of immigrant or resident alien parents are not a natural-born-citizen.

Originally posted by nenothtu
And as far as your attempts to shout down the opposition, who, after all, are only insisting on concrete proof - well, as the Bard said, "Methinks thou doth protest too much!"

What complete and total idiocy. Debate and counter-points are neither shouting down the opposition, nor somehow proof we have something to hide. Such an accusation could easily be flipped back on the likes of you.

I think those who are driving it are racist. If you say you are not racist, well you are protesting too much, proving you are racist.

I think those who are driving this are bigots. If you say you are not a bigot, well, you are protesting too much, proving you are a racist.

I think those who are driving this care little for the Constitution. If you say you do care, well, you are protesting too much, proving you do not care about the Constitution.

I think those who are driving this wish to subvert our democracy and republic. If you say you are, well, you are protesting too much, proving that you do wish to subvert our democracy and republic.

Shall I go on? Your "protest too much" argument is nothing, filler and empty words when you have nothing of substance to say.

Boy, that was a LOT of protest! I must have hit a nerve.

They are doing this precisely because they don't believe this WAS a lawful election. Mr. Obama has not helped matters by first releasing an obviously falsified document, and then stonewalling when called on the carpet about it, and failing to provide the proper documentation . That's not even bringing up the plethora of other documents that have been stashed, as mentioned by a poster above.

You're absolutely right, I'm not at all sure that he COULD provide adequate documentation at this point, after having stonewalled for so long. Could be that the stonewalling itself is evidence enough.

The "Anti-democratic, anti-republican., anti-constitution" rant brought a smile to my face. Thanks for that! That's the same "anti-american" argument the bushies used in their attempts to silence their opponents. The irony was not lost on me.

If you want to claim YOU are defending the Constitution, then show me where the Constitution specifies that a COLB, falsified or otherwise, is sufficient proof that Constitutional requirements are satisfied. If you cannot, then I'm afraid you've nullified your own argument there.

You are quite correct in your assessment that "debate and counterpoints are not shouting down the opposition". HOWEVER, mud-flinging and spurious accusations of "racism"and "idiocy" ARE, especially when directed at those you know nothing about. They also fall under the headings of of "knee-jerk reactions" and "desperate attempts to defend an untenable position by clouding the issue".

For the record, the next 3 levels up in my chain of command are all black men, and a finer bunch of men I couldn't hope for. I have no problems at all taking my orders from a black man, but then again, none of them have had any problems proving their credentials for issuing orders. Matter of fact, my immediate boss will probably laugh his behind off when he reads this. We don't see eye-to-eye politically, but he knows me far better than you do. You see, when human respect is involved, political differences don't degenerate into mud-slinging fests.

By all means, continue with name calling and mud slinging when you have no tangibles to fall back on. It illustrates my point beautifully, not to mention that the entertainment value is inestimable. I really don't mind being called names. I've been called much worse, by some of the best name-callers on the planet, with whom you could not even begin to compete.

nenothtu out

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
So what? If you want to talk sheer numbers, 69 million people found the proof of his status as a natural born citizen to be in their satisfaction. The number of people believing something has no bearing on whether it is true or not.

I do believe you have effectively proved the case for those who want him to submit his COLB or BC for verification by an unbiased third party. You said it yourself, 69 million people believing something has no bearing on whether it is true or not.

Out of over 300 million Americans, it is quite understandable for people to think this way - it is human nature to doubt things.

Obama posted a pic of his certification of live birth, on his website, not his certificate of live birth, that is the reason why people believe he posted a fake certificate on his website. He posted the certification to squash claims of ineligibility; but it only added fuel to the fire.

Factcheck.org has seen and authenticated his birth certificate
www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Factcheck website also provides you with the source of the 'ineligible' for president claims.

I think this major general should do some research, it wasn't hard for me, all the way in AUS.

reply to post by The Nighthawk


i couldn't have said it better myself!!! nice post, nighthawk...for a while i thought i was the only one that thought this way.

Originally posted by KnoxMSP
Until then we are all going by hearsay, or by images we are assuming are real, and not altered. There is no "hard evidence" for either side of the argument as of now.

AH! The delusion on your side of the argument is incredible.

One side has presented a certified, signed and stamped certificate and State officials who have vouched for it. Obama went through 2 years of a scrutinized campaign and neither political adversaries, including republicans, found anything on his alleged birth out of the country.

Nevermind the fact that he went through all the scrutiny necessary to get his security clearances.

And don't forget the investigator trying to dig up dirt on Obama that found his birth announcement in a Honolulu paper of August 1961. The same investigator claimed that:

Hi, I’ve talked to the Department of Vital Records and the Honolulu Advertiser.In 1961, the hospitals would take their new birth certificates to Vital Records. At the end of the week, Vital Records would post a sheet that for the news paper to pick up that contained births, deaths, marriages and divorces. The Advertiser routinely printed this information in their Sunday edition. This is not a paid announcement that his grandmother could arrange. This is information that comes from Vital Records - we know this because this particular section reflects those records. ...

This information was received by Vital Records the first week of his birth = that suggests the hospital. source

On the other hand, what is the hard evidence the other side of the argument has? I'm yet to see it.


If Obama was born out of the country he had to be flown immediately to Hawaii after his birth (the date on his birth registration is August 8) and then his parents lied about his birth place.

Nevermind that for this to be done, since no Hawaiian Hospital had any information of his birth, his parents had to come up with some forged documentation to be able to register Obama has being born in Hawaii.

So despite Obama automatically receiving US citizenship because of his mother, regardless of the country where he was born, his parents decided - 48 years ago mind you - that perhaps their son might want to have a shot at being President, fabricated the whole thing and state officials at the time didn't even check the Hospital records to see if the information checked out.

48 years later, state and federal officials and agencies, both political parties and the intelligence community are going along with it because (insert theory here).

Is it possible? Yes, I guess everything is possible.

But for people to think that both sides of the argument have the same amount of evidence and probability, one has to stand back and admire in awe the complete lack of common sense and reasonability.

You guys are pathetic... Obama is a citizen... he duely won the election by a decent majority...

... and as you guys told us Democrats and liberals after the surpreme court gave the 2000 election to the idiot...

GET OVER IT!!!

reply to post by grover

I have to laugh at these "Get over it" quotes. Try getting over the fact that Obama did not win by a decent majority ..it was 52.9 v 45.6 ..not a landslide in my opinion.



[edit on 28-2-2009 by sueloujo]

Originally posted by converge

Originally posted by amari

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
AMENDMENT XXVIII
TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A. While all men have been created equal under one true divine creator not all sources of verifiable factual information are equal.

This is the funniest post yet but believe me many will feel this way and want the Constitution Of The United States OF America to be admended and open to liberal interprtation instead of what The Constitution actually states.

Yes, that's quite a fantasy you have going there.

But since you pick up on this post, I'd like to ask you amari, and the author of the original post, ProtoplasmicTraveler, if you think factcheck.org is an unreliable source and apparently even a threat to our Nation, what is the reliable source you are basing your opinions that Obama isn't a natural born citizen?

I await your reply, thank you.

My contention is this, the necessary paperwork was not filed on a timely basis in Hawaii to register Obama's birth in Kenya for citizenship in the U.S. The further question of Obama's U.S. citizen parent being his mother living 10 years in the U.S. to qualify Obama as a U.S. citizen.

www.israelnationalnews.com...

[edit on 28-2-2009 by amari]