Judge: Obama eligible to be Georgia candidate

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Who cares outkast searcher. Obama wouldn't win Georgia anyway, but you keep waving your Obama flag as the country's debt continues to soar.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Have you read the actual transcript of trial or seen the video.
www.orlytaitzesq.com...
There are many issues and Obama refused to show. I have read the bantering in circles about SS number. It was NEVER issued to Obama, see transcript. It was initially issued to someone born in 1890 in Connecticut, no they are never recycled.
Obama cannot pass the Government's E Verify, in other words he couldn't work at McDonald's with that SS number.
2 of the 3 trials were not about his birth but to define the term Natural Born Citizen.
There are also issues with his Selective Service card.
Also that he has multiple names and left Indonesia as a Indonesian citizen with one name and wound up in Hawaii with another. Please read and learn before posting. He is a fraud, usurper, and should be hung for High Treason.

Originally posted by CaptChaos
Um, the GOVT website says this:

Then it goes on to say more but all of this has been posted already.

I'm the same age as the POS. I was born in Connecticut. My SSN starts with 042 as well. Just a coincidence, right?

Do you or do you not understand the difference between "normally" and "always?" How about "system" and "PERFECT system?"
There are differences.

The ONLY way he could have that as a SSN is if he was either born in CT or, possibly, his parents mailed in the application from CT somehow, even though they supposedly lived in Hawaii, and have never been even near CT.

Then explain why my SSN reflects a state I was not born in and my SSN was applied for when I was born. Are you suggesting your example of you means that everyone across the board is perfectly the same way, especially when discussing an issue full of opportunity for human error?

Or, like some are proposing here, they mixed up the zip code between Hawaii and Hartford. Kind of a stretch, I'd say, since their whole objective at the time was to get that right.

No, if you read the government website their goal at the time was to prevent duplicate numbers. It was never to keep geographical track of births. Please birthers stop quoting parts of that page if you cannot read it.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Also, for someone who wants this topic to die why do you keep bringing it up?

Originally posted by tkwasny

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
reply to post by rnaa

 

How come birthers didn't raise this big of astink about McCain being born in Panama? Please dont say race has nothing to do with this as your credibility drops to automatic hypocrisy.

Disclaimer: I do not support Obama, republicrats or any controlled opposition candidate in this fake choice people call "elections".

Both parents were US citizens at the time of his birth AND he was born in American territory (military base)

You are ok with just repeating that? No need for proof? No need to see the hospital records? Birth Certificate? So if Jonny says so, that is good enough but Barry, well Barry better get lawyering up?

How do you even know John McCain's dad is really his dad? He sure looks a lot like Malcom X to me.

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by TopherWayne

 

No, really? He's half black? OMG!! It's the end of the world as we know it...

Can I ask an honest question? Why do many of you keep saying he is half black? Why do you make it a point to point out? It sounds as if it is something you can perceive on your own when I know for a fact it is not.
You can only call him half black because you KNOW he has a white mother, not because you looked at him.
If Obama were breaking into your home at night, would you immediately notice he was half white? How so?
I only mention this because any adult in reality in America today understands that you only have to look black to get shafted like a black person. No racist ever asks a black person how much white blood they have before deciding whether or not to hate them based on race. The whole crying "it cannot be race because we know he has a white mom" sounds really insincere.

reply to post by Still


You have accused me of lying. I will try again to explain it to you simply as I would any layman.

If the judge offered a summary judgment in chambers, and I said I didn't know except what I read, it means that he read the pleadings and found enough evidence to enter a Summary Judgment based upon the pleadings rather than a Default Judgment. If he did not believe there was sufficient evidence in the pleadings he would not have offered a Summary Judgment but rather a Default Judgment. Obama did not file any objections to the pleadings, i.e., no defense. That would have called for a "Default Judgment". From what I have read, he did not offer a default judgment. So, if what I read had any veracity, the judge changed his mind between what he read and what was presented in the Courtroom.

Now because you have challenged my veracity and honesty, I have nothing further to say to you.

.

Originally posted by ALF88

Originally posted by PaxVeritas
All the above makes me a racist and a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist?
Our society is in the toilet.

Everything that doesn't follow mainstream is either racist or you are a conspiracy nut.

And the worst thing is that exactly those people b*tch about being called racist or a conspiracy theorist, when they disagree on another topic that is not mainstream. They are hypocrites. Don't worry about them.

Fact is, the official accounts stink!

edit on 4-2-2012 by ALF88 because: (no reason given)

Questioning things "scientists" and "experts" tell us in 2012 is perfectly sane and rational.
Questioning whether or not the Earth is flat or round in 2012 is crazy, tinfoil hat, conspiracy NUT stuff.

There are levels of questioning. Not all questions are valid.

reply to post by LaElvis


People are still claiming that Obama stole the SSN of a an born in 1890. If you look up the man that Obama reportedly stole his SSN from you will find that his SSN is completely different from Obama's. Furthermore, the man didn't die until 1981, whereas Obama's SSN was issued sometime between 1977 and 1979 so it would have been completely impossible to steal his SSN.

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by Still

 

You have accused me of lying. I will try again to explain it to you simply as I would any layman.

It was simple enough as it was. I would actually prefer legal jargon.

If the judge offered a summary judgment in chambers, and I said I didn't know except what I read, it means that he read the pleadings and found enough evidence to enter a Summary Judgment based upon the pleadings rather than a Default Judgment.

Which was demanded by the plaintiffs.

If he did not believe there was sufficient evidence in the pleadings he would not have offered a Summary Judgment but rather a Default Judgment.

No, he would opine in favor of the evidence or lack thereof which is what he actually did. You are a stranger online claiming to be a lawyer. He is an actual judge. Who should I believe?

Obama did not file any objections to the pleadings, i.e., no defense. That would have called for a "Default Judgment". From what I have read, he did not offer a default judgment.

Yes, he did and the plaintiffs requested a summary judgement and the judge agreed.

So, if what I read had any veracity, the judge changed his mind between what he read and what was presented in the Courtroom.

That sentence makes no sense, especially for anyone with any knowledge of court proceedings on any level. Sorry but I can only point out what I see. Maybe you read to many right wing blog versions of what happened. Check what really happened as is posted all over the 10 threads on this.
What exactly did you read? What happened was the judge offered a default judgement and the plaintiffs said they wanted their evidence heard and so it was and it turned up lacking and thus the ruling you got.
Did I use simple enough terms?

Now because you have challenged my veracity and honesty, I have nothing further to say to you.

.

edit on 4-2-2012 by Nite_wing because: Simplifying things for a child.

Cute personal attack. I bet that always impresses federal judges.

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

I read everything I can. There was more than once source on the original information. Rumors can lead to facts. Facts can lead to evidence. Unfortunately the evidence may have been hidden in this case. That is the issue. We still do not know. This was basically a ruling on insufficient evidence. It is not proof or dis-proof of Obama's natural birth citizenship or his Certificate of Live Birth.

What evidence was hidden?
What did you not understand about the judgement of the "evidence" entered?

Originally posted by ClydeFrog42
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Whats with the pissing match, man? You contribute nothing, yet you address anyone with their own opinion on the matter in a sarcastic tone.

Definition of "useless".

We get it, you think birthers are morons, and anyone who even considers the issue interesting an idiot. You want a prize? Give it a rest...

The birther movement is the definition of useless. Look how many birthers regularly declare victory while Obama remains in office. I could be wrong though.

Present an intelligent and factual birther argument. Prove us all wrong.

To the OP,

You say birthers just create new lies to spread after others have been dispelled. Its ironic you say that because probably 85% of the content on ATS is not fully true and could be called "crazy"; like the birther movement. I have read plenty of threads of people adjusting their theories on aliens, paranormal, weather, etc to new situations in order to bring up the same point; this is no different with eligibility. I just thought this was an ironic/hypocritical point. Everything is different when your on the other side of the aisle.

On a second note, I dont think all birthers are racist and trying to comment on Obama's race or ethnicity. I think they are holding onto that note because they think it has a thread of truth too it and if it was true ( I dont know), it would be a guarantee to get rid of Obama. This is the ultimate goal.

Obama's citizenship WAS in question and asking for verification is not only valid but
should have been on the lips of EVERY US citizen. I personally still have questions
pertaining the definition of 'natural born citizen' vs 'citizen', so, for me, the issue is still
in question.

For the record, I voted for Obama. I look Caucasian, but am actually American Native.
All 'birthers' are not racist...some of us simply seek the truth. Personally, if Obama
had kept his campaign promises I would be in your camp, actively defending him,
and doing my best to make a case for valid citizenship. Sadly, he lied about bringing
home our troops (among other lies) and to me, character has no skin color...
But a liar, is a liar. And liars cannot be trusted. So hence, nothing he claims should go
unchallenged. This is simple prudence...

Originally posted by Still

Originally posted by ClydeFrog42
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Whats with the pissing match, man? You contribute nothing, yet you address anyone with their own opinion on the matter in a sarcastic tone.

Definition of "useless".

We get it, you think birthers are morons, and anyone who even considers the issue interesting an idiot. You want a prize? Give it a rest...

The birther movement is the definition of useless. Look how many birthers regularly declare victory while Obama remains in office. I could be wrong though.

Present an intelligent and factual birther argument. Prove us all wrong.

Excuse me? did i say I was a "birther" in fact, I believe I said, no more then two pages back, that its about time this birther thing die...

but, thats not my point, at all. I dont intend to "prove you wrong"

The man is president. Anyone still dwelling on this issue is wasting valuable time. That is beside the point, a non issue.

The point is that the OP started this thread for the sole reason of slandering people who identify with the birther crowd. It was apparent in his opening post, and its even more apparent now, as he rolls his eyes and pours pages of writing for the sake of a "your stupid and I'm not" argument.

The birth certificate thing is certainly a lost cause, but people who see it as an issue are more then entitled to their opinion. No amount of personal attacks is going to change that...

If you disagree, fine. But, thats no excuse to talk down to anyone with an alternate opinion. You want to convince people? how bout you drop the self-agrandized tone.

Originally posted by rival
Obama's citizenship WAS in question

no it was not - it was in question exactly the same as every previous presidents citizenships was in question.

and asking for verification is not only valid but should have been on the lips of EVERY US citizen

why? He showed his birth certificate, certified by the state of Hawaii - something no previous POTUS bothered to show...

I personally still have questions pertaining the definition of 'natural born citizen' vs 'citizen', so, for me, the issue is stillin question.

and as you refuse to accept the facts, it will always be in question - the same as some people refuse to accept the world is no tflat, or man never went to the moon etc.

But a liar, is a liar. And liars cannot be trusted. So hence, nothing he claims should go
unchallenged....

But all previous presidents have lied the same way - yet you never challenged them the way you are demanding records from Obama.... now why would that be.... what is different about Obama..... oh, I see!

browsed through a few posts to try to get answers but its the same old same old garbage here on ats

so all i want to say is this


as far as ive heard, the judge has yet to rule

so until i find another source stating the judge ruled, ill just take this as another nonsense ats thread where people bicker with each other over nonsense

Quick, this is a test: Other than the first 7 US Presidents (George Washington--Andrew Jackson) and Chester A. Arthur who became President after James A. Garfield was assassinated, name the only person to be elected President that was not a natural-born Citizen? . . . . Give up? Why it was our current putative occupant of the White House, Barack H. Obama. Shazaam!

Here is a bonus question: How many times did the Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) try to alter the Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 natural-born requirement for President between 2003--2008? . . . . . . . . . let me answer this question before the buzzer sounds. It was 8 times that this alteration was attempted. Only Senate Resolution 511 (4/10/2008), technically the ninth attempt, was successful except that it was applied to John McCain and not to one of the co-sponsors, Barack H. Obama who eventually was the Democratic nominee. This resolution stated that two citizen parents were essential. Why wasn't this litmus test applied to Obama? By the way, one of the other co-sponsors was Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. She could have passed this requirement. Why didn't she insist that this same standard be applied to her and the other co-sponsor Obama. I believe she made a strategic mistake when she failed to take advantage of this situation. Perhaps she missed a golden opportunity or maybe she realized that Resolutions are often not worth the paper they are printed on.

This whole sorry situation was pre-meditated and our complicit media, judiciary and Congressional leaders are in on this con job. I never would have imagined until 3 years ago that not a single person in either the House or the Senate would not have come forward to blow up this conspiracy. I am truly ashamed that the USA has reached this state of moral collapse. It appears the so-called Republicans stand ready to nominate Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal who are not natural-born Citizens just like the joke that is in the White House. If they can't get this right, what makes us think that they can or will solve any of the other hard questions that face our once great nation?

Originally posted by LaElvis
name the only person to be elected President that was not a natural-born Citizen? . . . . Give up? Why it was our current occupant of the White House, Barack H. Obama.

BZZZZ - wrong answer, as Obama is naturally born, which is why he is the legal POTUS!

This resolution stated that two citizen parents were essential.

BZZZZ again wrong answer, it did not!

This whole sorry situation was pre-meditated and our complicit media, judiciary and Congressional leaders are in on this con job.

The con job is being pushed by birthers, but they have failed at every turn, their con job is just not working.

I never would have imagined until 3 years ago that not a single person in either the House or the Senate would not have come forward to blow up this conspiracy.

because the conspiracy is only in the minds of the birthers.

I am truly ashamed that the USA has reached this state of moral collapse.

Yes, it is very sad that in 2012 some birthers still cannot accept that a black man is the legal POTUS, and they make up silly conspiracy stories to explain how he cheated his way there.

I think saying the driving force behind anyone questioning Obamas eligibility is 100% racism is pretty ignorant to believe.

First, its a question of accountability. He took so long to present the BC, and first tried to pass of a COLB (Certificate of Live Birth) that was less than impressive. The BC finally released showed evidence of Kerning technology (google it), something that hadn't been around the time the BC would've been printed.

If i told you I had a jar of cookies, and you said you wanted to see it and I said no. Then finally just showed you a picture of it. Would you believe I actually have it? Would you make that judgement based off my race?

ALSO, lets not forget the questions surrounding John McCain's eligibility. Maybe you forgot, but plenty of news outlets broke the story that McCain could not be eligible for POTUS due to his birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal!

Are they racist? No. Why? Because John McCain is white of course!

heres that article: www.nytimes.com...