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.

 

Judge rules Obama will stay on Georgia ballot

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
ATS has a better grade of debate on this than Freedom4um, where the Birthers get really vile at anyone who doesn't share their fantasy.

A few things I'd like to point out:

For those agitating for a default judgment or contempt citation (or arrest warrant) for Obama for not coming to the hearing: Besides the issue of special accommodation for a sitting President, there was a very serious doubt that the subpoena of a Georgia administrative court had any clout on persons and things outside the State of Georgia. As a matter of fact, Taitz was aware of this doubt by the day of the hearing because she had tried to subpoena another birther -- Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Phoenix, Ariz -- to make him provide her with his alleged evidence and he had the county counsel write her a starchy letter about how her subpoena lacked authority (rather than reveal that he really had no evidence). Apart from this, a default judgment on such an issue (that would have deprived millions of Georgians of the chance to vote for Obama) would have been the easiest thing to overturn.

The birther geek-speak about the Hawaii birth certificate is really about the internet image of the Hawaii birth certificate. Not one of those people actually examined the paper document itself. The Hawaii Dept of Health issued it on that strange green security paper because it was required to by FEDERAL law, namely the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevent Act of 2004, PL 108-458, enacted Dec. 17, 2004, § 7211(b)(3)(A), 118 Stat. 3826 reprinted in the Official Note to 5 USC §301. This requires birth certificates to be issued on "safety paper" designed to prevent falsification. This safety paper is so effective that it confuses Photoshop and a lot of other computer programs for duplicating images.

The Georgia decision makes clear that Taitz was very unpersuasive about evidence. There are hundreds of professional document examiners in this country, many of them available freelance for forensic purposes, and they have the professional background, the credentials, etc., and have already been recognized as experts in other court cases. Taitz avoided all of them and opted for self-styled dabblers. Why hasn't an authentic expert come forward on the birthers' side?

The Georgia decision was with the weight of legal authority. A good many "amateur lawyers" seemed to misunderstand - almost deliberately - the meaning of "precedent". "Natural Born Citizen" (NBC, with or without a hyphen) occurs in American law ONLY in the provision about Presidential eligibility. NO court case ever dealt with the issue of a person born here but somehow not an NBC. The cases that do exist treat non-candidates for the Presidency but used NBC as synonymous and interchangeable with "native born citizen" or "birthright citizen" - often using the phrase NBC itself to describe the person - for someone born here even when both parents are non-citizens.

About another country's claim on a child born here: This was already an issue in many of the precedents. But the American courts have said that, as far as American law is concerned, those children are US citizens from birth even if the law of a foreign country (which they might or might not ever visit) says something else. We fought the War of 1812 to prove this point. In Obama's case it is even more cumbersome because (and this is sort of awkward to say about the Prez) his parents' marriage may not have been valid, since his father already had a wife back in Africa. That fact alone may be enough to cancel the notion of dual citizenship, but even if it didn't, that does not affect his NBC status. And we have the example of the 21st President, Chester A. Arthur (1881-1885) born in Vermont to an American mother and a British father.




posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SG-17
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


We said Birthers are racist, not conservatives. Unless you are insulating that all conservatives are birthers.


No. I'm saying that "birther" doesn't equal "racist".

I'm not a birther, but I can understand how someone who is attracted to conspiracy theories WOULD be a birther. When I first heard about the idea, I researched for myself, and have decided that there isn't enough evidence to convince me either way. However, my interest was never racially motivated. I'm also interested in lots of controversial or conspiracy-type things.

But even if I WAS convinced by the evidence, it still wouldn't make me a racist. That is my point.

I will say, though, that I am absolutely certain there is SOMETHING that Obama is hiding about his past. It could be as simple as grades he isn't proud of. I have a gut feeling that he actually DID register as a foreign student at some point, and that is what he is hiding, as he should not have been eligible for that status.

But you know---I should be able to question Obama without being called a racist. Apparently one can't.

And I will continue to have a problem with that.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


I can understand your view completely. The guy does seem shady. There's something odd about him, and incredibly phony. I would say the same about 99% of politicians though.

Statistically I suppose it would be impossible for all all birthers to be racist of course. You do have a valid point. The thing is, all signs point to racism on the issue when the goalpost is moved time and time again. There has never been a presidential witch hunt of such mundane magnitude. It really is something how the lies just continually flow from the same sources. That coupled with the fact that he's the first president with black skin directly supports why ppl claim it's racism. Keep up ypur research and don't let ppl piss you off with what they think. How could they even know anyway? This is the intenet.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
But you know---I should be able to question Obama without being called a racist. Apparently one can't.

And I will continue to have a problem with that.

You know, that really is it right there. I'm not even sure which side you're on for this debate because I don't argue people, I argue ideas and concepts.......99% of the time. It's that 1% that seems to be growing here lately that is enough to ruin the atmosphere entirely.

It used to just be abortion which polarized people to the point where a civil discussion couldn't be had between reasonable people. Lately it's covering a lot more than just one topic. Unfortunately, with Obama, you're entirely right. It's not even a topic we need to feel banned from with him. It's anything related to the man at all, period, no exceptions for a growing percentage.



It's no better..and looks no more mature coming from those on the far left than it did when it was coming from those on the far right.


Thanks for making the point about the accusation of being a racist. I'm not one, I never have been..and Obama STILL sucks as a President.



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I think this post, and any post asking for a rational discussion about birther stuff, is beyond silly.

Rational, calm, mature discussion is brilliant when you're discussing real things, but birther stuff is pretty much people just regurgitating lies generated as political propaganda.

If I wanted to have a mature discussion on the genetic basis for "Jews being so cheap" people would rightly treat me like I was an idiot. Well, except the ignorant and the racist. I would absolutely deserve this treatment. 100%. There's no justification for maturely discussing things that have repeatedly been established as not only wrong, but as lies. Intentional lies.

Besides almost every birther thread has a clear rational explanation of the actual facts, just like this thread. All of those posts are ignored by birthers. So, birthers ignore rational posts, birthers spread political propaganda and lies. Birthers, when derided for spreading lies, get offended at the level of discourse. Lol.

If birthers want to not be treated like ignorant, self-delusional liars they need to engage in an honest discussion. Something most of them refuse to do.
edit on 7-2-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)


I just can't take it. I want to stay out of this, but I can't. I just can't.

You're twisting the issue by comparing it to you discussing "Jews being so cheap". No one has said "Obama can't be president because he's half-black". YOU'RE the one who keeps inferring that the birther issue is a racist issue. If someone DID say that, they would be racist idiots. Believe it or not, some people have actually read all of what you consider to be PROOF of Obama's eligibility and STILL have questions.

Questioning is a sign of intelligence. If people didn't question, we would all believe the world was flat and the sun and stars orbit the earth. Even when something seems ridiculous to YOU, people have the right to question.

People have the right to question our president's eligibility. Peoply have the right to question if we've been to the moon. People have the right to question 911. People have the right to think cryptids exist. People even have the right to think that a lens flare is Nibru or that "the moon is upside down". This is ATS!

What I DON'T think people have the right to do is constantly ridicule people who do question--on any issue, even this one. To me, that's mean spirited.



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


I've never said birthers are all racists.

Show me where I did. In fact the one time I used the word racist, in a different thread, I actually said I thought they weren't.

So... barking up the wrong tree.

By the way, you're the one inferring something. What you're falsely accusing me of is implying, not inferring.

As for the whole, "questioning is good"... it is in theory, but in practice, there's no point in questioning things like "Why Obama has a CT SSN number" because he doesn't. There's no point in questioning, "why Obama's forged BC has layers" because, as has been pointed out by numerous REAL experts, there's legit explanations for that. It's duplicate-able.

If it CAN be explained then the basis for the questioning is GONE. I don't suppose the same people go around all day questioning things like, "are eagles birds? I bet it's all a conspiracy to make me think they're birds, they could be fish".

Some questions/questioning is BS. Pretending every thought, question, idea, conspiracy is AS valid as every other, or that every one has even some value, misunderstands the basic point of questioning. It's not arbitrary. You follow evidence, legitimate evidence. Regurgitating lies are political propaganda, and saying those lies are "evidence" and therefore based on that evidence you're being clever by "questioning" isn't actually all that clever at all.

Thus the whole "Jews are cheap" thing. People can present "evidence" that that is true, but it has as much probative value as the birther "evidence i.e. none.

Show me REAL birther evidence and we'll talk, but to this point I have seen exactly NONE.

Finally, the whole concept of "mean spirited" is just a joke.

Spreading lies and political propaganda is MUCH MUCH MUCH worse than pointing out, in ANY fashion, that someone is spreading lies.

People who get easily offended, especially people that refuse to engage with reality, are putting themselves in a situation where others will under value their feelings.
edit on 7-2-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


I've never said birthers are all racists.

Show me where I did. In fact the one time I used the word racist, in a different thread, I actually said I thought they weren't.

So... barking up the wrong tree.

By the way, you're the one inferring something. What you're falsely accusing me of is implying, not inferring.

As for the whole, "questioning is good"... it is in theory, but in practice, there's no point in questioning things like "Why Obama has a CT SSN number" because he doesn't. There's no point in questioning, "why Obama's forged BC has layers" because, as has been pointed out by numerous REAL experts, there's legit explanations for that. It's duplicate-able.

If it CAN be explained then the basis for the questioning is GONE. I don't suppose the same people go around all day questioning things like, "are eagles birds? I bet it's all a conspiracy to make me think they're birds, they could be fish".

Some questions/questioning is BS. Pretending every thought, question, idea, conspiracy is AS valid as every other, or that every one has even some value, misunderstands the basic point of questioning. It's not arbitrary. You follow evidence, legitimate evidence. Regurgitating lies are political propaganda, and saying those lies are "evidence" and therefore based on that evidence you're being clever by "questioning" isn't actually all that clever at all.

Thus the whole "Jews are cheap" thing. People can present "evidence" that that is true, but it has as much probative value as the birther "evidence i.e. none.

Show me REAL birther evidence and we'll talk, but to this point I have seen exactly NONE.

Finally, the whole concept of "mean spirited" is just a joke.

Spreading lies and political propaganda is MUCH MUCH MUCH worse than pointing out, in ANY fashion, that someone is spreading lies.

People who get easily offended, especially people that refuse to engage with reality, are putting themselves in a situation where others will under value their feelings.
edit on 7-2-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)


I did just look through this thread again, and you are right--the birthers being racists wasn't coming from you specifically. I'm just so sick of that as a first line of defense that I DO get offended by it, and I'm not sorry about that at all.

No, when I said "inferring" I meant inferring. I was saying you take what birthers say and infer from their position that they must be racist (maybe it should be the collective "you" and not YOU specifically). In your post, it was the part about the Jews that pointed me in that direction. I guess I DID do some inferring of my own there, because when you brought up a racist argument as one that shows the fallacy of the "birthers'" ways, it seems like you were implying that the birther position is also racist in nature. Inferring and implying, all in one...

I think there is some evidence that Obama is hiding SOMETHING. Do you not? Questioning what he might be hiding is perfectly valid.

And yes, I DO think some questions are ridiculous. The "moon is upside down" thread was as ridiculous to me as the "birther" idea is to you. I went into that thread briefly to see what was being said, and first tried some logic, and then made a joke, and then when I realized no one wanted to listen (and they also didn't want my jokes!) I left the thread. The moon itself could step down and say "I am not upside down" and they wouldn't believe it.

So I do understand where you are coming from about being frustrated by what is perceived to be a silly fascination with what you feel are all lies about Obama. But I also felt that calling them "ignorant, self-delusional liars" was a bit mean spirited.


edit on 7-2-2012 by GeorgiaGirl because: spelling



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


I do not think there's ANY evidence that Obama is HIDING anything at all.

I think there's public information which shows he has chosen to keep some aspects of his personal life private, like everyone else does. None of us puts all our private info out there and neither does he.

Look at it like this, birthers broke laws to access his SSN. When you're dealing with sociopaths like that you'd be wise to protect your privacy.

There's a LOT of lies floating around, a LOT about Obama, most generated from a small group of people:

- Koch Brothers,
- Orly Taitz, et. al,
- The Examiner (owned by the guy that owns the hard right Weekly Standard)
- WorldNetDaily (Joseph Farah et al)

90% of the lies about Obama, passed around as evidence on ATS, are from this group of well funded right-wing propagandists. There is NO legitimate issue I have ever seen raised. Not one. By pretending their propaganda is in anyway legit you are doing their work for them.

Re: Ignorant seal-delusional liars

Ignorant - Ignorant of the facts behind the evidence they're presenting
Self-delusional - As in they're deluding themselves if they think the entire state and federal governmental system is in cahoots to put a non-eligible person in the white House
Liars - As in they are spreading lies, and often they know it

Again, nothing mean about speaking the truth, even an unpleasant truth is preferable to a lie... unless you're talking, about white lies, etc.


edit on 7-2-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5


...am breathing just fine now , thanks
for that reminder.

"Impeach"
edit on 7-2-2012 by SeekerLou because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerLou


"Impeach"
edit on 7-2-2012 by SeekerLou because: (no reason given)


For what exactly?
How will it fit into this birther conspiracy?



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Questioning is a sign of intelligence.


No it is not.
Questioning why the sky is blue would fit.
Asking repeatedly why the sky is red, would not.
Questioning authority is one thing.
Making up things and then raising questions about made up things, and asking questions that are answered, then asking them again just because people do not like the answer is not a sign of intelligence.

Asking how to accomplish something is.
Asking how to accomplish it every time you try for eternity is not.

Not all questions are created equal and the birthers have no valid questions to ask so any "questioning" they do is less than a sign of intelligence.

Tell me, honestly, what would you call this? All these "questions" have been answered. All these lies have been exposed. All of this has been settled beyond settled. The only questioning going on is a rehash of what has been debunked, explained, and proven. Intelligent?



posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
I think there is some evidence that Obama is hiding SOMETHING. Do you not? Questioning what he might be hiding is perfectly valid.


That is extremely un-American sounding. That is guilty until proven innocent. Do you want to live in a world where anyone who decides you might be hiding something can then demand you prove you are not? That just sounds entirely antithetical to what every Democrat, Republican, and Libertarian I know thinks America should be like.



posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by LIGHTvsDARK
Just read through the decision. WOW!

The decision has just changed the definition of NBC. He maintained that ANYONE born in the US is a NBC. So that means all the anchor babies are eligible to be President.


Yes, anybody who is born as US citizen is a natural-born citizen, because they didn't have to naturalize to become one.

Both logic, common law, precedent, and the 14th Amendment make it simple. There are two mutually exclusive kinds of citizen: natural-born and naturalized. natural-born = automatic citizen from birth. naturalized = take active measures to become a citizen in accordance with law.

Realistically, for somebody to dispute that Barack Obama Jr is not a natural-born citizenship is to present positive evidence that he was born outside the USA and was later naturalized as a US citizen. At a minimum, clear, validated documentation of both.

(The first is not enough on its own because John McCain was also born outside the USA and is still a natural born citizen because the laws of the USA at the time declared him to be a US citizen from birth).

One needs, at minimum, a preponderance of evidence that Obama was born somewhere else which is stronger than the well-known evidence that he is born in the USA.

No such evidence exists.

Unsupported claims of forgery (despite oaths by state officials) don't count, and would be irrelevant.



Pretty soon, NBC will be changed to mean anyone that becomes naturalized citizens.


Not at all. Nothing was changed. It's well recognized that naturalized citizens are not eligible to be President.



Welcome to another step in One World Government folks and the elimination of the sovereign country of the US of A.


GMAFB. What does one have to do with the other?

A pattern I see frequently:

*) liberals howl at what conservatives do
*) conservatives howl at paranoid exaggerations, what they imagine liberals hypothetically might do
edit on 8-2-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join