Levin, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, others to leave a Legacy of COWARDICE

VANITY

[Chance Hart]

First off, I am a conservative and have spent countless hours listening to and reading the books of all these men. Reading Levin's Liberty and Tyranny was compelling, as were many of the publications of these Patriots. With the VAST amount of Constitutional research accumulated in order to write these best sellers, there is and has always has been one important fact known to ALL these men to be a Constitutional FACT missing. That non negotiable FACT is that according to the Constitution, Barack Hussein Obama is NOT eligible to be placed on the ballot, let alone occupy his present position as President of the United States of America! Obama himself touts the fact that his father was a British Subject at the time of his “BHO 2’s” birth, making him at the very least a duel citizen and not eligible to hold the office as president. Furthermore, Daddy was NEVER a citizen of the United States, again making Jr. ineligible with that fact alone. None of these men (as far as I know) served in the military for whatever reason and I think there may be some suppressed guilt because of that when I hear their accolades regarding current and former Men of Honor. As they refer to many of their callers and guests as “Brother”, they at the same time have never felt compelled to commit the heroic act of jumping on a Firecracker, let alone a Grenade to help save their “Brothers” and in the end help save this Nation. Levin is the one that has disappointed me the most when I heard him disenfranchise many of his loyal listeners on Jan 19th, 2010 (may have been the 20th) by referring to those that even questioned the eligibility issue as (paraphrasing) ignorant and foolish. He followed that comment by saying that Obama was of course eligible to be President. He, in my opinion is an expert on the Constitution and knows full well that his statement was an out and out lie. When the truth finally reveals itself, I can almost hear the excuses from these Less than Honorable radio and TV Patriots now – 1. I was given strict orders from station bosses not to bring up or allow discussion on the eligibility issue and to refer to those that do bring it up as ignorant Birthers. 2. Yes, I of course knew the simple truth, but decided it was the wrong approach to be honest when the proper way to handle this was at the Ballot Box. 3. Book sales were BOOMING and I was too GUTLESS to show the Courage that I ask my listeners to display on a daily basis. 4. There are a few in the business that are standing their ground on this issue and Liberals are calling them names. Sticks and Stones will break my Bones and even Words would really hurt me because I AM A COWARD! By the way, there are thousands of these Cowards walking the halls of Congress and other places that have at least to this point failed to MAN UP. All this makes me admire all the more the few that in their heart really do trust God Almighty and FEAR NO EVIL.

[philman_36]

I was just doing a little research on the @Koran burning at Bagram and came back to see the usual and expected inanity that had been left for me.

[DiogenesLamp]

I was going right along with you until I got to the above statement. What about Obama’s several years of upbringing in Indonesia, where he became known as “Barry Soetoro?” Do you deny that this happened? If so, why?

Not at all. I believe Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. Definitely under Indonesian law, and possibly under Hawaiian law as well. (States will not tell you anything about adopted children.)

I think the 1971 adoption by his grandparents (When Barack Obama Sr. *AND* Stanley Ann just happened to fly into Hawaii during the same time period) was an effort to undo the mess created by Stanley Ann running off to Indonesia where their grandson was picked on.

The evidence appears to indicate Obama was adopted TWICE! First by Lolo Soetoro, and secondly by his Grandparents.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Barry Soetoro, Stanley Soetoro, and Barack Obama Sr. (On "Family business") at the Airport in 1971. Thereafter Barry stayed with his grandparents. (You tell me what likely happened.)

[DiogenesLamp]

BTW - didn’t every state let Obama on their ballot?

I guess you missed the part where Roger Calero was on the Ballot in New Jersey and New York for the Presidency despite the fact that he was born in Nicaragua to Nicaraguan parents?

http://www.ourcampaigns.com/CandidateDetail.html?CandidateID=50998

They let an actual FOREIGNER on the ballot, and you think they are CHECKING anyone's credentials?

Again, you are using the fallacy of "argumentum ad populum". What you don't get, is just because everyone thinks a certain way, does not mean they are CORRECT.

[Harlan1196]

I want to err on the side of the law.

You are wrong on the NBC = two citizen parents. The courts will reject your argument.

[Harlan1196]

There are many respected conservative legal scholars and judges that think Roe v Wade is bad law. Some of them sit on the Supreme Court. There is a mountain of published legal thought on the controversy.

There are absolutely no respected conservative legal scholars and judges that accept the NBC = two citizen parents. We know what the Supreme Court feels about the issue - the Chief Justice swore in Obama. There is no published legal thought on the matter (beyond birther websites).

Criticism of Rove v Wade is well within the mainstream of American legal thought. WKA is the only operative law on NBC within the mainstream of American legal thought - there is no controversy.

In the legal system, some opinions count more than others. When it comes to NBC the opinions that count are not on your side. They would be on your side for Roe v Wade but not WKA.

[Harlan1196]

Everyone knew he was ineligible - the SWP has a long history of running entire tickets that were ineligible. And not just New York.

“Since they weren’t going to be elected anyways, the Socialist Workers Party didn’t care that they nominated a ticket entirely ineligible to be elected. Why? Because Róger Calero is both foreign born and also not a US citizen; and Arrin Hawkins is too young. To avoid ballot access problems for the SWP, as the constitutional ineligibility may also render them unable to be listed on the ballot in some states, the 2000 SWP ticket of James Harris for President and Margaret Trowe for Vice President are being used in states that will not permit the Calero-Hawkins slate to be listed. It is not the first time the SWP pulled this stunt. In 1972, the SWP nominated a Presidential candidate — Linda Jenness — who was also too young to qualify for the office (so the party used a replacement nominee in some states to achieve ballot status). They regularly do likewise in US Senate and Congressional races by nominating candidates too young to be eligible to serve. “

http://web.archive.org/web/20070730141140/http://www.politics1.com/swp04.htm

Some states don’t appear to have eligibility requirements to get on a ballot, some do. They still would not be able to actually take office if they won.

[DiogenesLamp]

If you two want to push out I can go on the clock at 1..../s

Thanks, but I should be good. :)

[DiogenesLamp]

I want to err on the side of the law.

No you don't. You want all the hodgepodge of law that has occurred subsequent to 1787 to alter and/or obfuscate the correct meaning of a constitutional term.

You are wrong on the NBC = two citizen parents. The courts will reject your argument.

And now I am beginning to think you are stupid. Again! With that non sequitur!

Let me make this very clear for you. I do not give a D@MN what a Court says about this issue, ESPECIALLY one that has not looked at the evidence. *YOU* may need a minder to tell you what to think, but the rest of us are intelligent enough to research this ourselves and find out what the founders meant.

They most certainly did not mean to allow anchor babies.

[philman_36]

The courts will reject your argument.
What you're doing is called psychological reinforcement. It's also used in psychological warfare. You present something as factual when it isn't.
@The Battle for Your Mind - Propaganda, PR and PsyOps"If you think about how you think, you will find your mind is made of memories, facts, and that sort of thing; you picked these up through continual reinforcement... Using a computer metaphor, your mind is hardware (the grey matter, providing you with senses, nerve endings, neurons) and software (combined from that odd core of your being that is doing the reflecting, and the material it is reflecting upon, kind of like a computer program and its data). That isn't the whole story, of course; there is an unidentified extra component, the 'wetware,' that gives you free will, volition, self-awareness. We know next to nothing about how this piece works; it appears to be an odd combination of chaotic and stochastic processes, transcending both. About the only thing we know for certain about the human mind is that we haven't even begun to utilize it to its full potential." Michael Wilson, from: "Memetic Engineering PsyOps and Viruses for the Wetware"
You keep saying this while there is nothing whatsoever to indicate what any court will do in the future.
You're expressing an opinion, not a fact, and it will never be anything but an opinion until a court actually takes up the case instead of throwing it out on technicalities.

[Harlan1196]

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of our justice system that I can’t help you with. That “hodgepodge of law” is the American Common Law. Whether you give a damn what a court believes is irrelevant - that is our system of justice and it is not going to change because of your pet peeve.

The present definition of NBC is the same as it was in 1787. NBS=NBC=born on US soil.

You disagree - I got it.

[philman_36]

And now I am beginning to think you are stupid.
Read #409. He isn't stupid, he's a snake!

[Harlan1196]

History is always a good predictor of the future when the facts being argued don’t change.

Every birther case in every court has failed. Every one, every time. All the way from a Georgia administrative hearing to the Supreme Court.

Now what’s different now? Nothing’s changed. Same argument by the birthers - same grounds for rejection by the courts.

Of course it is an opinion. But an informed one.

[philman_36]

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of our justice system that I can’t help you with.

Just like you've seen this, or something similar, many, many times.
He goes the extra mile and throws in a little degradation to your intellect for good effect.

[philman_36]

I notice that you don't deny that your statements are psychological reinforcement.

You think people aren't smart enough, or knowledgeable enough, to recognize what you're actually doing.

[philman_36]

History is always a good predictor of the future
when the facts being argued don’t change.


How right you are.

Think "they're subhuman" as "the facts" being argued.

[Harlan1196]

Shall we go back through both of your posts and pick out the straight out insults thrown at me? “Stupid”, “snake” and “liar” for starters?

If you don’t like the tone of the discussion then clean up your own act.

You are so unhinged you can’t even recognize your own hypocrisy.

[Harlan1196]

I also didn’t deny that I was still beating my wife.

[philman_36]

“Stupid”, “snake” and “liar” for starters?
I didn't call you stupid. You're very smart and subtle at what you do.

You are so unhinged you can’t even recognize your own hypocrisy.
You've got it so ingrained in you that you can't even stop what you do even when you're called on it.

[Harlan1196]

Think “idiotic” as “the analogy” being made.

That’s one of your more incoherent posts - a jump from the workings of the American justice system to genocide. Wow.

[philman_36]

You’ve got it so ingrained in you that you can’t even stop what you do even when you’re called on it.