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

To: fireman15
”The natural born citizen requirement for the presidency was intended to prevent a person with divided loyalties from assuming the office.”

Says who? Certainly John Jay did not say that in his letter to Washington. He instead was worried about a foreigner becoming President, and in case you were unaware, dual citizens are not foreigners. They are dual citizens.

”Obama’s life from the day he was born is a swamp of conflicting information, loyalties, associations with foreign interests and radical America haters. There is no need to rehash it all here, but Obama was not the one we have been waiting for; he is the one the framers of the constitution were hoping to protect us from. Unfortunately we have judges and people like you, EnderWiggins who would argue that no one has any “standing” to even raise the questions we have discussed here in court.”

Those are all great reasons not to vote for him. None of them is a Constitutional disqualification from eligibility for the Presidency.

”NO matter how you twist things around... the truth here is that no verifiable documentation has been provided to the public that proves anything about the details of Obama’s birth.”

Other than a COLB that meets perfectly the United States Department of States regulations for proof of citizenship at birth, you mean. You know the one.

Now, if that is not good enough for you, then you have the recourse of withholding your vote. Just as I’m sure you have already refused to vote for every other presidential candidate who did not show you their long form birth certificate.

”The other fact whether that you cannot reasonably dispute is that teams of lawyers have been working on Obama’s behalf since before the election to prevent the documentation of Obama’s life from being unsealed in dozens of lawsuits.”

I dispute that without any genuine fear of contradiction. In the past two years no more than 10 hours total have been spent in court by any lawyers for Obama even responding to these suits. Your fantasy of “teams of lawyers” being involved in this issue is, well… frankly just weird.

”I have noticed that in your arguments you make misstatements that attempt to confuse the issues such as your accounting of who spent the money for the teams of lawyers who are keeping Obama’s records sealed. It is complete obfuscation on your part and may work well at the sites that you are more accustomed to posting at but is fairly transparent here.”

Well aren’t you the clever one. Can’t slip a thing by you. Except of course that you are the one who said Obama was spending the money when he’s not. I think you need to look up the word “obfuscation.” I don’t think it means what you think it means.

”You argue that no one has the right to demand to see Obama’s long form birth certificate. You ask who am I. As far as I am concerned anyone in the world should be able to ask to see Obama’s long form birth certificate. He is in a position to hurt everyone in the world. We all can be harmed by the most powerful man in the world. We all have already been harmed by him. He is an irresponsible person who lies nearly everytime he reads from his teleprompter. His policies are a disaster.”

For starters, please do not put words into my mouth that I never said. You absolutely have the right to demand to see anything you want to demand. You have the right to stand on a rooftop in Washington DC and demand to see Obama’s birth certificate, Joe Biden’s hair plugs and Angelina Jolie’s underwear. All of that is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Knock yourself out.

And all three of them have the right to say, “No.”

And you can then go on to vote accordingly.
19 posted on 02/17/2010 4:29:30 PM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: EnderWiggins

ob·fus·cate (bf-skt, b-fskt)
tr.v. ob·fus·cat·ed, ob·fus·cat·ing, ob·fus·cates
1. To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand: “A great effort was made . . . to obscure or obfuscate the truth” (Robert Conquest).
2. To render indistinct or dim; darken: The fog obfuscated the shore.
3. The types of nonsense EnderWiggins posts to confuse a simple issue.

Q. Why is Obama still using teams of lawyers to prevent the unsealing of verifiable documentation about the relevant facts of his life?
A. He is hiding something.
Q. What is wrong with the president hiding relevant facts about his life?
A. Other persons or even foreign interests may know what he is hiding and this creates an opportunity for them to unduly influence his decision making process.
Q. Does Fireman15 know persons who have obtained security clearances and could Obama have passed a background check.
A. Yes Fireman15 knows persons who have received security clearances. Every one of them has agreed that Obama would not have even the slightest chance of passing a background check if he refused to provide the documentation that has been requested.
Q. How absurd is this situation to a person of normal intelligent with the slightest amount of common sense?
A. Extremely absurd.
Q. Why does EnderWiggin not find this situation absurd.
A. ???
Q. Does EnderWiggins have a hidden agenda?
A. ???
Q. Is EnderWiggins just blindly following his Messiah Obama?
A. ???

20 posted on 02/17/2010 5:20:02 PM PST by fireman15 (Check your facts before making ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

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

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