Sitting president's eligibility questioned by member of congress

page: 4
54
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 



oops

Misread your post. Yes the Occidental thing was, IIRC, chalked up to an April Fools joke in the end.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Libertygal]

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Libertygal]




posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


indeed you do have a point. we don't really have any control over news sources, and factcheck could be wrong, my sources posted earlier could be wrong, as could everyone else.


If I see good, HARD, evidence that he's ineligible, I'll change teams so quick, you'd think I went gay. Until then, I call Bravo Sierra on this.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
In California you do not need to show proof of citizenship or even an ID to vote! That means non-citizens can vote. Foreign nations or enemy nations can influence elections, that casts doubt on the validity of all elections in my mind. It also explains the hard socialist left of California politicians and it's laws and regulations. All are cast in doubt.

Ever wonder why Obama campaigned in other countries? It's so those countries can have their citizens cast votes in elections like ours where no ID is needed to vote.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by Dbriefed]



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


So what is exactly IS the "race card' anyway? Please define what seems to be meaningless term from the mid 90's.
And read this!

Now there you go again! Funny how the question of racism against a black President is always mysteriously transposed to the completly fake "all criticism is racist" BS.
This tactic is ridiculous, by your "reasoning" then, either ALL criticism is racist, or NO criticism is racist. thats just stupid. To pretend that their is NO racism towards the President is just plain, ....well, I already said it.

Are you going to be one of those guys that says their is no racism toward blacks in America?



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SIEGE

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by maybereal11
 


I promise to go away when Barry produces his Occidental records. His whole adult life is a contrived mess. You can blame his mom and dad for that. His mother passed him around like a bad head cold.


And you ? Did you have a wonderful life . . did you now ? You
sound like you're so close to perfection. Are you ?

I don't blame anyone for his mess of an adult life . . mine would
make your hair curl. But we're stuck with our lives aren't we ?
We make do with what life has handed us. . . as best we can.

"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight
in the dog."


I'm only 38. So I will let you know when I release my memoirs at the ripe old age of 78. For what its worth, my dad walked out on us when I was in the 4th grade. I was raised by my mom who sacrificed everything for me and my brother.

Obama sure paints a vivid story in his memoir. Not bad for a man who hadn't accomplished anything yet. At this point, I don't even care about his BC. I want to see his college records and his writings. Afterall, he bragged about hanging out with Marxist professors during his college days.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by genius/idoit
reply to post by dashen
 


Why bother belonging to a website that discusses political discourse if you have already chosen to "just sit back"?And why join in?Why not "just sit back" and watch orpah?You know the fact that you can have that opinion and voice it speaks to the greatness of this country,pardon me for wanting to keep it that way.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by genius/idoit]


that's a good point.

I go take a nap and all hell breaks lose,



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 







Obama sure paints a vivid story in his memoir.


That was odd wasn't it?



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   
what happened to all that stuff about obama's 100 ssi #'s and addresses and whatnot?

anyone remember that



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moodle
what happened to all that stuff about obama's 100 ssi #'s and addresses and whatnot?

anyone remember that


Yes I remember, was that a hoax, I don't know , I asked a while back,
www.scribd.com...


“The evidence contained in exhibit B shows that Barrak Hussein Obama might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 Social Security Numbers prior to assuming office as president. The Social Security number most commonly used by Barrak Hussein Obama is one issued by the state of Connecticut, the state where Barrak Hussein Obama never resided and shows him to be 119 years old.

This coupled with the fact that Mr Obama’s grandmother, Madeline Dunham was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court Probate department and had access to the Social Security Numbers of the deceased, constitutes circumstantial evidence casting serious doubt on the legitimacy of Mr Obama and his claims of being born on U.S. territory.”




[edit on 123131p://bThursday2010 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Of course it was a Republican who questioned it.

What's the news here?



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   
[edit on 123131p://bThursday2010 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Of course it was a Republican who questioned it.

What's the news here?




Well if a democrat had the balls I might just vote for him.

I didn't vote for any of these people republican or democrat.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by maybereal11
 


I promise to go away when Barry produces his Occidental records. His whole adult life is a contrived mess. You can blame his mom and dad for that. His mother passed him around like a bad head cold.


LOL...apparently you live in a world wher ebing elected President of the United States represents some sort of failure in life?

And your hatred of him extends to his deceased parents?

Nope....No altered reality obsession here....wow.


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
I'm surprised there are still those on ATS who think Obama won this presidency on his own merit.

In 2004 Obama clearly said he would NOT be running for president because he believes when someone accepts a job, he should know something about how to do that job.

In the senate, Obama works like gangbusters to lobby money for Big Pharma and gets them billions in $$ for WHAT? Avian flu research and medicine stockpiling!

"Shockingly" he changes his mind and runs for president although he admittedly didn't feel he had enough experience. He is everything opposite of Bush, good orator, promises "hope" and "change", and he can give us the one thing that will distract us for a while . . . he could be our first black president.

Next, under strange circumstances, Colin Powell leaves the Bush Administration and quickly begins going public in support of Obama--the nobody who had done nothing really significant except to garner billions for Big Pharma! Shortly thereafter, other elites, such as Warren Buffet, proclaim support for him in the media.

Meanwhile, dizzy McCain throws a curveball and selects a totally ridiculous running mate like Palin with no explanation, leaving some (like me) to think it was done to purposely done to repel supporters from his own campaign and sway them to Obama's side because people now thought he was a loon.

Obama wins because he's everything Bush wasn't and then some. Except he's just as bad as Bush. He hasn't done anything different. He's supported the Patriot Act, committed more soldiers to war, and used every dirty trick in the book to try to covertly sneak in laws that will diminish our freedoms, and I haven't even mentioned his spending yet. Oh, and astonishingly, we have a pandemic outbreak that should have been Avian flu but Baxter screwed that up, so we had to settle for the swine. What vision the man has.

Henry Kissinger says Obama is in a great position with his current staff to start a New World Order.

Obama lied and said he didn't see any evidence of a North American Union despite the fact several states had already introduced bills to oppose it and the SPP. He admitted he was a member of the CFR, but claims they just sit around and talk about how to make things better.

This man is a fraud whether he has a birth certificate or not.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by piddles
 



After what I saw on FactCheck.org about the H1N1 conspiracy theories, I came to the conclusion that FactCheck is a big fat fraud. When you only use the very government agencies that are in question as your sources for "fact checking," it becomes clear which side of the fence you're on.

That's just my own opinion, though.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by piddles
again, I think the birther argument is dumb


I respect your right to think as you wish. I even respect most of your posts that I've read. Sometimes we actually agree, however what I admire is that you don't usually stoop to insulting other members in making your points.



it's seriously a non-issue created and exploited by angry racists who can't believe there's a black guy in office, with many others following based on their political beliefs.


You're dangerously close to characterizing anyone who has an interest in this issue as a racist. Consider for a moment that the motivation for questioning the President's eligibility are simply that there is ever-mounting evidence of something being hidden. Intentionally hidden. And why?

I don't follow this issue as a function of my political beliefs. I follow it because it smells, and I want the air cleared. I don't think I'm alone in that ideal. I had strong objections to the previous administration as well. I certainly didn't dislike former president Bush for his skin tone.



for crying outloud, must I reference the fake kenyan birth certificates (the second one was just embarrassing) to further discredit this movement?


Yes, you must, and I will as well. The fake BCs were truly an embarassment. They made those who rallied around them look very foolish and desperate.

People are pursuing and/or watching this issue because it matters. It cuts to the very core of the Constitution, and the longer it goes on without the President putting the issue to rest -- as he easily could do, apparently -- the more important it becomes.

Why is President Obama's information being withheld?
What is in there that he doesn't want illuminated?
Why is it characterized as "wingnut" to desire an answer?



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by argentus
People are pursuing and/or watching this issue because it matters. It cuts to the very core of the Constitution


I believe I'm not mistaken in saying that in the past 10+ years there were multiple grave issues, all cutting to the very core of the Constitution and what not, which didn't receive 10% of the publicity and debate this one did. From murky details of wiretapping under Bush, to legality and manner of prosecution of a few recent wars, to legality of the new Obama tax on employer health plan etc. The fact that this one somehow keeps surfacing when others didn't I find totally specious.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
The partisanship of the site is questionable due to a number of factors but the advertising puts it right on the front page...

It's not in the mainstream because it's not news.

I could post anything I wanted on MY blog and then tout it as news as well, but that pesky fact checking will probably deflate it to an opinion piece at the very most and libel at the worst.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



I believe I'm not mistaken in saying that in the past 10+ years there were multiple grave issues, all cutting to the very core of the Constitution and what not, which didn't receive 10% of the publicity and debate this one did. From murky details of wiretapping under Bush, to legality and manner of prosecution of a few recent wars, to legality of the new Obama tax on employer health plan etc. The fact that this one somehow keeps surfacing when others didn't I find totally specious.


Yes, I agree.....there were many issues which infringed upon the Constitution. Many of them have been continued under this one. I don't know if the debate was as small as you inferred -- Mostly there was ridicule of the Bush administration. He was admittedly an easier target. I think most of us were initially more fearful of the U.S. government under Bush than under Obama. I'm not certain that's still the case.

It IS specious. That doesn't negate the possible validity of the issue, but I think you made your point well.



posted on Jan, 7 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Good to see you around BH.

Yes. Everything I can find concerning Nathan Deal leans toward this being part of a strategy to compete in the race for Govenor of GA.

Releasing the letter which would have had to of included his "case" would make him vulnerable in the election since I suspect that it is a prettied up version of something Orly Taitz would propose and would quickly fail on close examination.

So..the best strategy for Nathan Deal is to announce he sent the letter, but don't give any details...don't release the letter...that way he reels in the far right while not being put in the unwinnable position of backing up his BS.

I have no doubt that Nathan Deals democratic opponent is asking the Obama administration for a copy of the email as we speak in hopes of using it to his advantage in the upcomming race for Govenor.

The POTUS in keeping with his policy of not engaging the vitriolic fringe will likely will not pony up the letter for political use either Dem or Rep.

The letter should be released by the man who wrote it and he should own those words...absent that he is just appealing to ignorance in his own state, which should be offensive to everyone, but most of all Georgians.

In the end I suspect what might have seemed a good strategy by Deal in the moment will thoroughly backfire. Even the fringe right doesn't like to be played with.





top topics
 
54
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join