Posted on 09/19/2014 3:27:56 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
‘liberal, conservative, libertarian,’
Olay, forget all those associations/labels for a moment. Just think like a human being. I don’t know how smart you are on the overall scale, and I don’t know your cognitive/analytical abilities. So I can’t assume you’re particularly smart or certifiably stupid. I just don’t know.
Nevertheless, I am going to ask you, as one thinking, reasoning human being to what I hope is a similar entity, to reexamine Ms. Goderich’s statement. Do you, wearing your very best analytical thinking cap, see anything wrong with it at all? It’s not a trap. I really want to know. Ponder her words in the larger context, and let me know what you come up with.
My theory, incidentally, is that there is no one alive with an average, or even somewhat below average, IQ that cannot see the problems with what she said. Yes, I believe even Obots can see it. They pretend they don’t because the alternative is unthinkable. But on a strictly rational basis, they know Goderich’s statement was beyond credulity. But maybe I’m giving Obots too much credit. I wonder....
I don’t believe he is African-American. Dark skin does not prove African by personal trait. If anything he is Indonesian-American. His sperm doner to free wheeling Stanley Ann was an Indonesian-SE Asian Muslim cult guru named Muhammed Subuh.Look the guy up and compare with Obama’s portrait photos for POTUSA. Obama was born in Kenya because cult members were not inclined to accept a white woman’s child and as such Mama and family found a communist Kenyan to make the claim for father. Since the surrogate father already had a wife in Kenya Mama could not get married in Hawaii but could get married in Kenya. This guy Obama has a lot of intrigue associated with his life.
‘Not really. That’s why they almost all sound exactly the same. They come from marketing departments.’
They sound alike because they follow the same standard formula. But there’s no magic to writing one. They’re really quite simple and easy to compose. On top of which, that is what a writer does: write. A writer that is too incompetent, stupid or klutzy to write their own sell sheet isn’t sufficiently talented to warrant an agent.
Perhaps, however, someone like Obama is the exception: a person who can’t write their way out of a wet paper bag, but who had a resume such that the agent believed he had at least one good story in him. In such a case the agent might help with the sell sheet, but he or she would work only with the facts supplied by the author. No ‘facts’ would be made up/ad-libbed, and all would be vetted by the interested party.
They may be edited by the agent. But the original author of the bio is ALWAYS the author of the book being promoted. I’ve heard that from multiple published writers.
One thing is for certain: A copy editor does NOT pull a birthplace of Kenya out of thin air!
Obama claimed many, many times over the years that he was born in Kenya. The evidence exists in print all over the place, right up to the beginning of his presidential campaign, when it dawned on somebody in his camp that it was problematic.
Exactly. Well said.
& here’s another point. People say, ‘But Obama also claimed to be born in HI.’
As indeed he did. He had two sets of documentation, one real, one created by his relatives in HI. He could claim birth in either location as it suited his purpose, and if challenged, could ‘prove’ the location in question. The idea that because a con-man/snake oil salesman/pathological liar at one time tells the truth—if, and ONLY if, it suits him—and at other times tells a lie proves anything is silly. All it proves is that liars lie.
My point was simply how would anyone go about proving or disproving her statement 23 years later?
Whether I believe her or you think she’s lying is irrelevant.
How do you juxtapose the argument that we should respect the pronouncements of courts, with their rulings which make "gay marriage" legal?
Does this ruling engender in you more respect for the existing legal system or less? Or is their no change in your opinion of it?
On the same day that the Supreme Court refused to review homosexual marriage appeals they also refused to review two more Obama eligibility appeals, Mc Innish v Bennett, the Alabama ballot challenge and Rudy v Lee, the attempt to be granted standing by demonstrating direct financial injury due to an ineligible president signing patent legislation into law.
As for the homosexual marriage non-ruling, I don’t judge the entire American judicial system on the basis of one denial of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.
Over the course of decades and after reviewing rulings in hundreds of appeals, I find that I am in agreement with the high court about half the time and I am in disagreement with the court the other half. That’s a marginally better agreement percentage from me than the bills passed and policies implemented by the other two branches of the federal government.
Your question is akin to judging the presidency of Ronald Reagan solely on the basis of his decision to sell missiles to Iran in exchange for release of American hostages or his signing of the bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens. Those are two “rulings” that I completely disagreed with but I loved the presidency of Ronald Reagan overall and I have the utmost respect for his legacy.
As for your “juris uber alles” comment, as I have repeatedly said, if Congress should ever take up the Obama/natural born citizen issue, I would be just as “congresssus uber alles” in reviewing any actions they might take on this issue. The problem is that there has never been a single congressional hearing on whether Obama is a legal president or not. Its difficult to report about inaction.
No surprise there, but this is interesting.
Your question is akin to judging the presidency of Ronald Reagan solely on the basis of his decision to sell missiles to Iran in exchange for release of American hostages or his signing of the bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens.
Both of these examples are presented from the perspective of a liberal. Conservatives see neither of them in this light. Conservatives have long regarded the allegation that Reagan traded missiles to Iran in exchange for the release of American Hostages as being an utter and unequivocal lie. Reagan had no power during the time the Hostages were being held, he was just a candidate. Conservatives believe it was his statement that we would go to war with Iran if they were still being held when he took office that convinced the Iranians that Reagan was a man with whom they had better not f**k. The nation was in the mood to smash Iran, and Reagan actually gave it voice at that time.
The missile trading came later, and was spearheaded by Oliver North without Reagan's direct knowledge, and it is not considered a bad thing either. Conservatives love the fact that Oliver North did this, because it DELIBERATELY DEFIED DEMOCRAT TRAITORS in Congress who had cut off Military aid to the Contras in Nicaragua. (Just as they did Aid to South Vietnam)
The Amnesty thing was an agreement reached with Democrats to do something about illegal immigration, and it was not something Reagan wanted to do. (And of course the Democrats never kept up their end of the bargain.)
But Yaaaah! Our Wonderful courts have given us "Gay Marriage"!
I think I’ve already stipulated that you prefer the branches of government headed by Barack Obama, Harry Reid and John Boehner to the branch headed by John Roberts.
And no further commentary regarding Reagan and Missiles or Reagan and Amnesty?
Again, I am at a loss as to how to comprehend your espousing such liberal talking points. Those statements are dramatic outliers in conservative circles.
Yes, I understand that you are at a loss.
Perhaps this will help, can you name the nationally recognized (and therefore influential) conservatives in elected office who have espoused the “Obama is ineligible” position?
I thought that's what Arpiao's Cold Case Posse was doing. They should be indicting soon...really soon...any month now...pretty soon...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.