Obama not eligible for President, Nancy Pelosi guilty of ....

"Obama doesn't have a black butt."

Boy you birthers are really cracking the lid off this thing for sure.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
So anybody who doesn't blindly follow the claims of birthers is an "Obama champion"?

But conversely, to many obama supporters anyone who doesn't blindly support obama's policies is called a racist.

How does that deny ignorance?

Can you please show us 1 instance where someone was called racist for disagreeing with an Obama policy?
Racism is directed at the birther movement for obvious reasons, but not at those who are discussing actual politics.

Originally posted by SG-17
I don't think that Pelosi had a trail, so how could she be guilty of fraud? You can accuse her of committing fraud, but she isn't guilty until a jury of her peers finds her so.



Though there won't be a trail because there wasn't any fraud to commit since Obama was born in Hawaii.

Its been a couple years so memory is a lttle hazy, but the document Pelosi signed was not the same one that ended up going out to the states, and the one that went out had some missing verbiage. I think you can search it right on here and see both of them.

People should vote for the man not the place of his birth.

reply to post by canadiansenior70


Ah whatever...we've had some Nazi sympathizers and their heathen offspring sneak into that office so what's the big deal about a guy who may or may not be a foreigner?

What is more foreign to the USA than Hitler, Nazi Germany and the Holocaust for cryin' out loud?

By comparison, this is like a damn snot nosed boy scout.

I believe our Barry is there for one reason only, and that reason is so there is a visual link to the 'Deep Impact' movie. In these times we are travelling through, its the only thing that makes sense.

st.

In my short tenure here, this is the funniest line I have ever seen on ATS:

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
Now the one thing is, that on the Internet, is where we are most likely to find something leading to the truth.

And this the most racist:

Originally posted by canadiansenior70

Obama has more than his birhplace to hide. He might be older than he claims, certainly not younger. He has a large scar on his head. He has Dumbo ears that most black people don't have. He does not have a 'black butt"..his is skinny (and one I woud never be able to get a grip on).....

I suspect the thread starter is either very young or very old, either would explain the above feeble comments.

Regarding topic.

I joined ATS and come here to be enlightened hopefully by minds sharper than my own. If I wanted to read unfounded conjecture from some maniacal blogger I'd skip the log in route. Honestly a birther blog is the basis for making a newsworthy thread??? Journalism 101: Always consider the source.

reply to post by the owlbear


I can't understand this why should we forget about this issue to pay attention to something ... what more important? If what you say is true that it does not matter because he was put here by TPTB than what good would it do to "pay attention to something else" duh according to your thinking no matter what the issue is they will just "fix" it anyway. So, in a nutshell you just want to let them just do what ever they want!!!! That is courage for you and you sure are a patriot.

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
"

Hopefully you know what "epithet" means already.

"
DUH?
I'm Canadyan an don't no nuthin'. Ain't that sumthin' 'bout a gravestone? 'er is it sumthin' 'bout crocheting? Mebbee it's a kinda fish? Effen it is, is it live or dead?

You did not know the thing I was taling about, though did you? You allowed your ignorance of it to allow you to follow a blog full of innacuracies and lies. I assumed that being Canadian, you may not have that kind of intimate knowledge of terminology used in US political speak. I do not know all the little hateful nicknames Canadians toss from party to party, I am not Canadian. Apparently you took that to mean you were stupid. So your response is that being Canadian does not matter, you would know it anyway and yet you did not know it. Good one.

The blog is a lie and obviously written by a right wing hack. That was what I was pointing out to you. Go ahead and take it the wrong way though.

Yet another ultra unreliable website being cited again.

My, my when will y'all learn and produce an original thought.

Originally posted by Shadowalker
Its been a couple years so memory is a lttle hazy, but the document Pelosi signed was not the same one that ended up going out to the states, and the one that went out had some missing verbiage. I think you can search it right on here and see both of them.

Or you could just read the post and link one page back by Benevolent Heretic and get the right answer from real sources. I have a feeling that some choose to have a fuzzy recolection of some thing they heard somewhere once though.

Originally posted by whatwasthat

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I have a question:

Is it required to have "party certification" under constitutional law, or is this more of a ceremonial certification?

In other words, is he eligible to run anyway without approval? I'm still looking but I haven't seen anything saying it's required. Can somebody point me in the right direction before I make a judgement?

To suggest it is ceremonial sounds like you are asking why does it matter if a person is certified by the national party ?

Each state has an election commission with the responsibility to decide who gets their name on an election ballot.

The rules vary among states and without certification by a recognized party the task of being included on the ballots in

all election districts is close to impossible. Each election commision must be satisfied that candidates are eligible to

hold the office they seek. The election commissions can rely of the national party certification of candidates, so yes the

certification by the national party is very important.

Very important, but not required by law?

That is the key to this argument, and whether this can play any role in ousting Obama. Sounds to me like it's more of a necessary evil one must go through so that you're not railroaded by the two major parties. But not in anyway constitutionally required.

Originally posted by Antiquated1

Originally posted by canadiansenior70
He has Dumbo ears that most black people don't have. He does not have a 'black butt"..his is skinny (and one I woud never be able to get a grip on).

What is going on here? People are flagging this stuff? This is what I am supposed to be looking to for answers? Are you kidding me?

...oh,! Thanks for reminding me. Flagging now.

Originally posted by wcitizen
I read somewhere, I think it was on the 'White House Insider' updates, that it was suspected that Nancy Pelosi was holding something over Obama, and that was why she remained Speaker after the disastrous mid term election results.

The President does not appoint the Speaker of the House. The Speaker is voted on by the members of the majority party in the House. The only thing the President can do is suggest to House members who he would like to see as Speaker.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


No, this is actually old news from late 2008 when I first heard of it. Do a search on ATS for it, there were a few threads for it.

Here is a good source.

www.canadafreepress.com...

Originally posted by spinalremain
"Obama doesn't have a black butt."

Boy you birthers are really cracking the lid off this thing for sure.

Yea! And Snoop Dog isn't black either.

Originally posted by wasco2

Originally posted by wcitizen
I read somewhere, I think it was on the 'White House Insider' updates, that it was suspected that Nancy Pelosi was holding something over Obama, and that was why she remained Speaker after the disastrous mid term election results.

The President does not appoint the Speaker of the House. The Speaker is voted on by the members of the majority party in the House. The only thing the President can do is suggest to House members who he would like to see as Speaker.

this is correct.

AND, The Speaker is in line to be POTUS after the V.P.

it IS the most powerful non-elected position in the world.

example:

Nancy Pelosi (when She was the Speaker) could have been President after only being elected by a very small block of voters in Her district !!!!

She did not represent a majority of U.S. voters !!!!

Originally posted by wasco2

Originally posted by wcitizen
I read somewhere, I think it was on the 'White House Insider' updates, that it was suspected that Nancy Pelosi was holding something over Obama, and that was why she remained Speaker after the disastrous mid term election results.

The President does not appoint the Speaker of the House. The Speaker is voted on by the members of the majority party in the House. The only thing the President can do is suggest to House members who he would like to see as Speaker.

OK, then the article I read must have been inaccurate. - although perhaps the Dictator can twist a few arms, as it were, to get what he wants.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by wasco2

Originally posted by wcitizen
I read somewhere, I think it was on the 'White House Insider' updates, that it was suspected that Nancy Pelosi was holding something over Obama, and that was why she remained Speaker after the disastrous mid term election results.

The President does not appoint the Speaker of the House. The Speaker is voted on by the members of the majority party in the House. The only thing the President can do is suggest to House members who he would like to see as Speaker.

OK, then the article I read must have been inaccurate. - although perhaps the Dictator can twist a few arms, as it were, to get what he wants.

the POTUS certainly does have the power of persuasion.

BUT only IF His/Her party is the House majority !!!!

Pelosi was named Speaker when Bush was still the POTUS !!!!!!!!