It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Janky Red
Well I am interested to find that this is in the "Paul Bunion???" forum
I think the OP should have filed this incredibly frightening information in a
P O L I T I C A L forum, a place where we talk about politics, not lumberjacks.
Anyhow OP awesome, between people like you and FOX news, well I AM VERY WELL
informed.
I wonder what libtards will say to this one?
the savior isn't so saviorish now is he is?
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
If someone uses their title to know their self-worth...and are offended by someone else using that title...then that is a self-confidence issue they need to work out themselves.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
He didn't go around calling himself a Doctor when he is a Lawyer.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
He called himself a "professor" when he was a "senior lecturer"...do you know the difference??? One is going to be a lifetime teacher on a tenure track at a college...the other does not have plans to make teaching their career. They do the exact same job, they have the exact same credentials. Having an official title of "professor" does not grant someone magical abilities that Obama was trying to claim he had.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Your hate of the man blinds you...and it clearly shows it affects your logical thinking skills.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Obama thus far kept 105 of his promises, compromised on 35 promises and broke 16:
www.politifact.com...
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
So thats the first piece of disinformation out of your mouth right there.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
As for him breaking promises? The one thing Iv learned over the years is that no president ever keeps all of his promises.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Anybody who holds a president to that much scrutiny is naive at best.
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
The examiner which is known to be a conservative biased website has sourced this information from a blog of all places:
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Originally posted by debunky
... and here you can read the anonymous bar complaint.
factsfirstok.blogspot.com...
The short of it:
In his book he admits to have taken some illegal substances. (Dont know if true, haven't read it)
So Mr complainant, having read the bar application form, notices that it asks if you have ever been convicted for use or possession of drugs, and if said convictions exceed 200$.
Mr Complainant of course knows, that thats not what the illinois bar meant with that question, they really wanted to ask if he ever did drugs. "HE LIED!"
Can you explain that, please. If they specifically ask about a conviction and not use, then how did he lie? He was not convicted of possession yet he admitted to use. What was the lie?
Originally posted by debunky
Exactly. Thats the argument the person who filed the complaint made:
He admitted to using drugs, yet answered the question if he was convicted with No.
He answered the question if he there are any open fines other than from traffic violations with no,
...
wait for it
...
*despite* having open tickets from traffic violations, that exceed the 200 dollar they set for drug use.
Oh, and he answered the question if he had a lawyer help him fill the application out with no, even though he *knew* a lawyer!
I can't say I am suprised the guy who wrote it didn't want to put his name under it, yet is totally okay with using someone else
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Sorry but that website is wrong...
Obama told Americans that his first action, or one of the first would be to bring all our troops home.
He also claimed that under his administration there would be transparency in government.
He also claimed that healthcare would be for the good of the people right?
Well, his administration was caught making deals with Big Pharma that does not help the people.
Not to mention how many times he claimed the economy was fixed,
Oh, he also claimed there would be X amount of jobs saved,
In fact I say what you claimed above is the first piece of disinformation coming out of YOUR mouth
Yeah well Obama is King in breaking promises
Anybody who would imply a President should not be accountable
"professor, and or person with a degree in CONSTITUTIONAL Law
.....Lots of good information have come from similar sources, and who are we to believe Obama's MSNBC?
Obamatron
Michelle Obama stating that Kenia/Africa is Obama's home country..... hummmm
Originally posted by skunknuts
((big ass snip))
I anxiously await this simple evidence that can either give credence to your claim, or put your mind at ease and allow you to stop sounding so traitorous.
Best,
Skunknuts
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
I must say that we need to hold our elected leaders to what they promise.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
He also claimed that under his administration there would be transparency in government.
Really? Not even I believed that claim from Obama and I generally support his policies. That is unrealistic to all politicians in general, dont be naive. If you can put any confidence in any politician you think will allow the cameras everywhere he or she goes, by all means do so, but it is unrealistic.
If you suspected that he was lying when he promised transparency in government and you are okay with that, fine. You really shouldn't expect that to be an excuse for his lying though.
We held George HW Bush to his promise "Read my lips, No new taxes.".
There is nothing wrong with expecting honesty from someone who is entrusted with executing the law of this great land.
If you voted for Obama, then you are telling us that you voted for a man that you suspected was lying on the campaign trail. That was your decision.
I would tend not to vote for a candidate, POTUS down to Dogcatcher, if I suspected that they were lying to me in order to get elected.
Originally posted by GovtFlu
Dude, sorry but that's not a birth certificate.
To verify we did indeed have the correct document, we contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records.
"It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo said June 13, 2008.
"They're just words," said spokeswoman Janice Okubo. "That (what was posted on the Internet) is considered a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii."
"There's only one form of birth certificate," she said, and it's been the same since the 1980s. Birth certificates evolve over the decades, she said, and there are no doubt differences between the way birth certificates looked when Obama was born and now.
"When you request a birth certificate, the one you get looks exactly like the one posted on his site," she said. "That's the birth certificate."
Just like a kid born in kenya could be registered hawaiian born by a grandmother living in hawaii that wants US citizenship for her grandson.
1. In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were three different birth certificates that were obtainable:
a. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
b. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or mid wife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, an adult could, upon testimony, file a “Delayed Certificate”, which required endorsement on the Delayed Certificate of a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing, which evidence must be kept in a special permanent file. The statute provided that the probative value of the Delayed Certificate must be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. (See Section 57-18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
c. If a child born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult including the subject person) if the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
2. In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fourth kind of birth certificate for children born outside of the Territory or State of Hawaii. HRS Chapter 338 was amended to add a new section authorizing the Director of the Department of Health to issue a birth certificate for a person NOT born in Hawaii either as a Territory or State, upon sufficient proof that the legal parents of such individual had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth of such child.
It doesn't have to be a CIA scheme,
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Originally posted by debunky
Exactly. Thats the argument the person who filed the complaint made:
He admitted to using drugs, yet answered the question if he was convicted with No.
You are still losing me here. Convicted of and admitting to use of are two different things. What are you talking about?
He answered the question if he there are any open fines other than from traffic violations with no,
...
wait for it
...
*despite* having open tickets from traffic violations, that exceed the 200 dollar they set for drug use.
What???
Oh, and he answered the question if he had a lawyer help him fill the application out with no, even though he *knew* a lawyer!
I can't say I am suprised the guy who wrote it didn't want to put his name under it, yet is totally okay with using someone else
Buy a coherent thought and get back.
Originally posted by nycfrog27
BHO. Was he born in America or not? Personally, I believe that if someone accused me of not being a "natural born" citizen, I would come on National TV and show everyone my ORIGNAL, SIGNED AND SEALED-RAISED Birth Certificate. That would end it all right there.
Originally posted by kozmo
Hoax!? Really??? Pfffffffft! Whatever... This is completely factual! The only "hoaxy" thing about it are the semantic games Obama supporters choose to play.
Admin edit
This thread is based on false information from DUBIOUS sources. In other words, it's a HOAX. Not a very good one at that.......Accordingly this thread has been move to the ATS [HOAX] Forum.......Springer...