Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congressional Bombshell
nobarack08 ^ | Feb 14, 2010 | syc1959

Posted on 02/14/2010 7:39:01 PM PST by syc1959

The following is a clear definition of a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ as one born to two parents (plural) in the House of Representitives

Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, 1838-1839 MONDAY, January 28, 1839. Mr. Heman Allen submitted the following resolution; which was read, and debate arising, it was laid over, under the rule, viz: Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of so amending the law on the subject of naturalization, as to exclude those from the privileges of natural-born citizens who are or shall be born of parents

Read the rest.

(Excerpt) Read more at wp.me ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: barack; birthcertificate; certifigate; eligibility; illegal; ineligible; naturalborn; nbc; obama; undocumented; usurper; whatisobamahiding; whoisbarackobama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last

1 posted on 02/14/2010 7:39:01 PM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: syc1959

“FREE THE LONG FORM!”


2 posted on 02/14/2010 7:48:22 PM PST by Dryman ("FREE THE LONG FORM!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
game...set...and match.

I guess this fits as 0bambi seems to be always watching tennis while speaking....something about the hypnotic bounce and return of the ball that calms the nerves.

3 posted on 02/14/2010 7:48:45 PM PST by spokeshave (Blaming a gun for a crime is like blaming a carpenter's hammer for a shoddy construction job!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Pretty much in recent history and with GOP collusion, all definitions are changed to whatever best suits the Liberal agenda. Good luck with this.


4 posted on 02/14/2010 7:52:39 PM PST by Ingtar (I closed my eyes, only for a moment, and the moment's gone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
I have been saying this for months. The birth certificate is a distraction from what is hiding in plain sight. Obama is not a natural born citizen, because he has never had a father who was an American citizen. Both parents must be citizens of the USA, at his birth, in order to meet the requirement.
5 posted on 02/14/2010 8:13:10 PM PST by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greeneyes

I’m not an expert, but I think you may be wrong a bit. I think if the mother is a natural born citizen who has lived her forever, any children born to her are natural born citizens. The same is true of the father, I believe.

If I’m wrong—well it won’t be the first time—but I have a situation like this in my family. The father became a naturalized citizen after the birth of his first child.


6 posted on 02/14/2010 8:23:25 PM PST by basil (It's time to rid the country of "Gun Free Zones" aka "Killing Fields")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

The link in the blog is dead


7 posted on 02/14/2010 8:26:28 PM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Here’s a permalink to the congressional record

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llhj&fileName=033/llhj033.db&recNum=397&itemLink=D?hlaw:1:./temp/~ammem_dJlZ::%230330398&linkText=1


8 posted on 02/14/2010 8:30:43 PM PST by patlin (1st SCOTUS of USA: "Human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

The children will be citizens but not natural born citizens of two citizen parents. Obama has admitted dual citizenship. That means he is not a natural born citizen.


9 posted on 02/14/2010 8:33:51 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

And fast forward to 1952. Hope you don’t mind if I add this.

In 1952, President Truman vetoed the McCarran-Walter Act, which PASSED, despite Truman’s veto.

Here’s a copy of Truman’s commentary on the veto:
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~splatsresearch/images/Truman%20Veto%201952.jpg

Under the heading “Alien Births Mentioned” Trumans says:

“Native-born American citizens who are dual nationals would be subjected to loss of citizenship on grounds not applicable to other native-born American citizens. This distinction is a slap at millions of Americans whose fathers were of alien birth.”


10 posted on 02/14/2010 8:38:15 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
Thank you. It's about time that Free Republic's scholars help to structure the discussion so intentionally redirected by Obama acolytes. Excellent find, and exactly to the point.

Most have already found the John Bingham statement to the joint session of congress in 1866, when Bingham was paving the path to the 14th Amendment. http://www.scribd.com/doc/20621020/John-Bingham-Quote-About-Natural-Born-Citizen-Not-About-14th-Amendment

The Constitution is meaningless if citizens don't understand what it says, or means.

This Constitutional issue grows in significance as Obama makes appointments to the supreme court. Two more are reputed to be near retirement. When Obama is held to account for his ineligibility his appointees must recuse themselves because they will lose their jobs when he does. Some might think it better to await a republican president, since Obama’s successor may not make better choices, and all his appointments will clearly be as “progressive” as can clear the senate.

I believe the scandal surrounding the cover-up of Obama’s eligibility will take down many in the legislature and even some in the judical branch and should move forward before he does more damage. I think the Democrats should wish for the same because there may still be a small majority in the senate when he is removed.

Of course there are other scenarios, such as a different father than the one he told us all about. But we must proceed based upon what Obama II told us, and what he told us makes him illegitimate. He knew it of course, but he also told us he considers the Constitution an interesting historical artifact”, which “...doesn't let me accomplish what I believe our society needs”. He apparently counted on acquiring the means to nullify the Article II requirement, certainly counting on the ignorance of citizens about history, and knowing the mainstream media and Alinsky tactics would help - “birthers” was clever and effective.

11 posted on 02/14/2010 8:49:22 PM PST by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, Volume 33 Page 398 of 932 Monday, January 28th 1839

12 posted on 02/14/2010 8:58:24 PM PST by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

I can’t follow all the twists and turns with this, but I do think something is wrong here.

My theory is the father named on the long form is not who The One claims.

Or he is listed as born white.

I also worry this may be a set up. In that everything is in order but they are saving this to discredit his detractors one day.


13 posted on 02/14/2010 8:58:44 PM PST by FL911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FL911

Then Barack Hussein Obama, has decieved not only the American public but world leaders and this would be a crime against humanity.
People were sucked into the deception and those lies. Fraud and forgery are just that criminal acts.


14 posted on 02/14/2010 9:03:25 PM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
Center column 5 paragraphs up:

The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who
belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but
will include every other class of person.

Senitor Jacob M. Howard Congressional Globe,Senate, 39th Congress, Page 2890, 1st Session May 30th 1866

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11

______________________________________________________________________________________

Center column 3rd paragraph down:

Source:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=071/llcg071.db&recNum=2
>! you have to turn to page 1291 !>

Bingham states: I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill],
which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the
jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language
of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen… . . –
John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866”

15 posted on 02/14/2010 9:06:51 PM PST by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

I think you are a bit worng. The children you describe are native born citizens, and this caegory is NOT syononymous with natural born citizens. Most native born are also natural born, but to be natural born BOTH parent must be US citizens at the time of the child’s birth, and the child must be born in the Unties States of America.


16 posted on 02/14/2010 9:15:58 PM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy fourth edition
Under Jus Soli, the following is written “The Supreme Court’s first holding on the sublect suggested that the court would give a restrictive reading to the phrase, potentially disqualifing significant number of persons born within the physical boundries of the nation. In Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94, 5 S.CT. 41, 28 L.ED. 643 (1884), the court ruled that native Indians were not U.S. citizens, even if they later severed their ties with their tribes. The words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” the court held, mean “not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiange.” Most Indians could not meet the test. “Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indian Tribes, (an alien through dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more ‘born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’*** then the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government ***. Id. at 102.
It continues that Congress eventually passed legislation with the ‘Allotment Act of 1887, that conferred citizenship on many Indians.

The fact remains, the Court held, complete and sole Jurisdiction. As I have held that being born anywhere in the United States, jurisdiction is required, sole and complete, and Barack Hussein Obama was already claimed by British jurisdiction under the British Nationailty Act of 1948, and as such fails the United states Constitutional requirement of a Natural Born Citizen.

Title 8 and the 14th Amendment both state; All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

So explain how “not merely subjct in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiange.”

So to ‘what’ degree was Barack Hussein Obama under US Jurisdiction at birth? Knowing that he was already under British jurisdiction, and how that being only partial or to whatever degree you impose not being in conflict with “completely subject to”?


17 posted on 02/14/2010 9:16:03 PM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Last post was to everyone. sorry


18 posted on 02/14/2010 9:17:07 PM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta

We are not taliking here about native born American ctizens, we are talking about natural born American citizens and we would all do well to avoid conflating these very different terms.


19 posted on 02/14/2010 9:17:26 PM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Barry is not a NBC. Daddy was a British subject. Because he was the frontrunner of the MSM, they overlooked that requirement.


20 posted on 02/14/2010 9:26:45 PM PST by machogirl (First they came for my tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine; Velveeta
Historically the term Native-born and Natural-Born has been used interchangeably.

The constitutional requirement for the President of the United States to be a natural-born citizen had one purpose according to St. George Tucker:

That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, wherever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. …The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box.

21 posted on 02/14/2010 9:30:07 PM PST by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: greeneyes; Spaulding; syc1959
I posted the following to an earlier thread:

"Unless they are all collectively blind and stupid -- which we know they are not -- Obama, Beck, Rush, O'Reilly, Levin, Hannity, Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy + other 4 Supremes, Pelosi, Reid, and Biden all know one thing: He ain't a Constitutionally-defined Natural Born Citizen.

"Since 2007, the game board has favored the Dems. Congress has been controlled by the Dems. No investigation of Obama -- Congressional or media -- would ever take place with the Dems in control of Congress. The USSC is powerless to act even if it takes a case and makes a finding.

"So our guys all play along for the moment -- "plausibly deniable" -- Our guys are in the business of making sure we focus on the fact that we've got to take power back in Congress FIRST. The BC thing how ever true it is, will be a distraction of efforts in the near term to focus our united efforts to "Flip the House."

"It will come all out. Be patient. Timing is everything. Revealing Obama as the usurper he is must be a well-planned strategy.

"Keep the BC thing out there and going and let Taitz and WND do their thing, BUT let none of us allow ourselves to be distracted by it!

"We've got a big job to do between now and November, and at the moment, we’ve got bigger fish to fry in the House races.

"Step 1 of this strategy MUST be to win the House back in 2010. Failing to do so will allow the usurper to stay right where he is now.

"We win the House in 2010 and we get this:

"House investigations may be called and possibly led by any number of new, fresh, tea-party cultivated conservatives elected in 2010. If we win the House we control the investigations.

"Start with a subpoena of his college transcripts. Expect HUGE discrepancy between what he has portrayed about himself and what really is. Feed it to the blogs and conservative media. Bring academics up to Capitol Hill to testify under oath about pressure they have had from the WH to this point. This will get legs. Bank on it.

"Subpoena his biographical publishers for fact vetting they did or didn't do at the monograph stage. Get them under oath.

"Step by step. Drip by drip. You notice I haven't even mentioned BC yet?

"Then subpoena his passport records. Get the bastards working in that office to testify about the passport investigation screw up in 2008. Get names. Under oath.

"Subpoena each Sec'y of State that certified the duplicate eligibility certs for Obama. Make them talk. How did they certify? On what basis?

"Subpoena Pelosi, next. This oughtta be fun especially in light of the Sec’y of State testimonies. Look for “mis-statements,” aka bald-faced lies.

"(Still haven't done anything with the BC yet, have I?)

"Get the Social Security Admin in there. Ask why and how about the multiple SSN's for Obozo, the multiple names, etc. All under oath.

"See where we're going?

"He's below 50%. Some one will crack. Some one will spill. No one will willingly die to save his skin.

"See who's ready to flip in the media and invite them to make a career leap into the investigative journalism record books a la Woodward and Bernstein. Sic Breitbart on this too, along with James O’Keefe.

"It is a Constitutional FACT that Obama is not a natural born citizen. The BC subpoena from HI will be the LAST thing needed to bury this guy at that point. Oh it will come to light for sure. But the head of steam will have been built around the other investigations to the point that the BC thing will be the cherry on top -- not the sole focus.

"It will come out. Be patient. First thing is get the (R)’s back into power in the House.

"Then investigate once you have all the levers of power to do so. This will grab the attention of the media. Especially once the academics reveal how Obama played the media for the fool.

"The rest will make Watergate look like a garden party.

"Keep the powder dry. You'll be able to use it. Just not now. Keep your eyes on the prize.

"We won it for Brown. Let's help pull this win over the goal line and then let the real games begin!

"Obama's comment about questioning his "citizenship" -- not natural born citizenship, mind you, merely "citizenship" (i.e., not the issue at all) at the prayer breakfast was a Chicago-style taunt while at the same time trying to neutralize the issue as the butt of a joke all the while conveniently hiding the fact in plain sight. It's just like that "plausibly deniable" middle finger flip off he did to McCain during the campaign.

"The media are looking to make a caricatures with labels: "truthers," "birthers," "Birchers," etc. It's all the same to them. Using Alinsky's tactics, you can polarize, isolate and destroy those who wear the labels the radicals have designed for them. Hannity, Rush and Beck won't give them that target, because they will define with dismissive lables those they wish to destroy with the ultimalte object to neutralize the efficiency of an otherwise laudable conservative effort to expose what will be known some day as the fraud of the century.

"There will be a time to take Obozo down with the BC and much more -- we can take Obozo down once we have the tools finally and the levers of power at our conservative disposal to be able to do so effectively.

"Now is not the time for the BC stuff. Stay focused on taking back Congress. then let the investigations begin. The Democrat Party as we now know it may not even survive."

FReegards!


22 posted on 02/14/2010 9:30:39 PM PST by Agamemnon (Intelligent Design is to evolution what the Swift Boat Vets were to the Kerry campaign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
"“Now is not the time for the BC stuff”"

I have developed a keen interest in this matter.
I am not giving speeches at the Tea Party's, calling
my congressman, writing the News Papers or interfering
in any way with Sarah Paulin’s campaign.

For most of us this is a debate and a learning experience
as we explore the history and better yet the intent of our
Constitution.

There is no harm being done here.
If Jim Robinson objects to our use of his site for our
debates and inquiries then we would obviously comply as it
is his personal property.

I for one appreciate the information that is being
exchanged here. It is knowledge and the process (research)can be used
to fight other Unconstitutional expansions of big government.

23 posted on 02/14/2010 10:16:46 PM PST by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
"So to ‘what’ degree was Barack Hussein Obama under US Jurisdiction at birth? Knowing that he was already under British jurisdiction, and how that being only partial or to whatever degree you impose not being in conflict with “completely subject to”?"

House Report No. 784, dated June 22, 1874, stated,
“The United States have not recognized a ‘double allegiance.’ By our law a citizen is bound to be
‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.”

William Lawrence and James F. Wilson

This national rule prevents us from interpreting natural-born citizen under common law rules because it eliminates
the possibility of a child being born with more than one allegiance.

24 posted on 02/14/2010 10:44:23 PM PST by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FL911
" I also worry this may be a set up. In that everything is in order but they are saving this to discredit his detractors one day. "

What day would that be ?
before the November elections ? or after ?
What's the point to discredit the detractors after the November elections ?
Why spend $1.5 million - $2 million for this kind of setup ?
Wouldn't he would have done this already ? since his poll numbers are way down ?
25 posted on 02/14/2010 10:50:56 PM PST by American Constitutionalist (There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: basil
Your comments apply to citizenship status, but not to the term Natural Born Citizen(NBC) as it pertains to the constitutional requirement for president. I am no expert either, but I have done considerable research into the subject, and I do read the articles posted here.

The definition of NBC was generally accepted to mean that both parents were citizens when the child was born within the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. There is plenty of evidence that the framers of the constitution had this definition in mind. There is not dispute that such children meet the constitutional requirement once they are age 35.

As to other circumstances there are doubts, which have not necessarily been definitively defined by adjudication. The term natural born has deteriorated with popular usage, but that does not change what the law is.

The US Dept. of State's Foreign Affairs Manual Vol. 7 states the following: “the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a person for constitutional purposes”.

I have read enough on the subject to make up my mind what the constitutional requirement is. I do read additional articles when posted, in case there is something additional, that could change my mind, but so far there has been nothing.

To me the birth certificate is a moot point with respect to Obama’s eligibility. His father was a foreign national, and he has apparently been a citizen of 3 other countries. One could even say he is truly a citizen of the world, with all kinds of entangling and foreign influences and allegiance - not the unfettered citizen that the constitution requires. JMHO.

26 posted on 02/14/2010 11:19:40 PM PST by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla

While I agree with Tucker’s points, it is too bad he misquoted the Constitution, thus inadvertently helping to perpetuate the confusion, and giving wrongful weight to some injudicious later court decisions.


27 posted on 02/15/2010 12:13:59 AM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dryman
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”

Yep, from its dungeon in Hawaii, and then FREE THE OTHER LONG FORM from the Oval Office.

28 posted on 02/15/2010 8:37:51 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveTesla
I wrote: “Now is not the time for the BC stuff”

You wrote:

I am not giving speeches at the Tea Party's, calling my congressman....

For most of us this is a debate and a learning experience....

There is no harm being done here....

I for one appreciate the information that is being exchanged here....

Dave, I'm not quite sure how what you have posted in response to my posting relates to anything I posted.

Please clarify.

FReegards!


29 posted on 02/15/2010 8:50:40 AM PST by Agamemnon (Intelligent Design is to evolution what the Swift Boat Vets were to the Kerry campaign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FL911
My theory is the father named on the long form is not who The One claims.

Pure nonsense.

There is a divorce decree in Hawaii with his Kenyan father "Barack Obama" named on it with his mother. There is no way to get around that little piece of legal evidence -- no matter what rabbit trail the One wants us to travel down to obfuscate the obvious fact right in front of our eyes that his father was a Kenyan national and thus he is not an Article II natural born citizen of the United States.

30 posted on 02/15/2010 8:55:01 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
So... you are saying that only clones can be natural born citizens?

Because based on your weirdly edited extract, Congress is looking there at excluding the rights of natural born citizens from anybody who has parents.

lol
31 posted on 02/15/2010 10:34:43 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

What a stupid statement.


32 posted on 02/15/2010 10:39:34 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Stupid?

Did you not read Syc’s post?

LOL


33 posted on 02/15/2010 10:45:05 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

Yes. Natural born citizens are children of two citizen parents.


34 posted on 02/15/2010 10:53:05 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Too bad Syc’s reference here does not say that.


35 posted on 02/15/2010 10:55:03 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins
In plain simple english ‘natural-born citizens who are or shall be born of parents‘ from the United States.
36 posted on 02/15/2010 10:57:21 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Again, too bad Syc’s reference here does not say that.


37 posted on 02/15/2010 11:04:57 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

That was a direct quote from the link.


38 posted on 02/15/2010 11:10:18 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

wigieFool can’t read.
Don’t blame him, it was his public education.

Wiggie - back to your colring books.


39 posted on 02/15/2010 11:22:52 AM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

But it was not a quote of the reference. It was Syc’s goofy interpretation of it.


40 posted on 02/15/2010 11:32:33 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

There ya go again!


41 posted on 02/15/2010 11:47:50 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

No. There I go, still.


42 posted on 02/15/2010 11:48:24 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

43 posted on 02/15/2010 11:49:58 AM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Alinski much, Syc?


44 posted on 02/15/2010 11:50:41 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

It can be plain english in front of their face and Obama trolls will say “It doesn’t say that!”.


45 posted on 02/15/2010 11:51:06 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

nope, you do though.

wiggie -english must be your second language cause stupidity seems to be your first.


46 posted on 02/15/2010 11:55:20 AM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

Yawn


47 posted on 02/15/2010 11:56:28 AM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: EnderWiggins

thats right troll, back under your rock....


48 posted on 02/15/2010 12:02:19 PM PST by syc1959
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: syc1959
This is all moot unless you have a workable plan to remove the SOB from office.
49 posted on 02/15/2010 12:05:53 PM PST by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syc1959

A lot of pols and Judges are about to be declared guilty of treason.


50 posted on 02/15/2010 12:10:15 PM PST by Waco (Wanna buy an FBI file,,,See Hillary, she's got 900 of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-81 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson