Posted on 08/17/2011 1:23:03 PM PDT by rxsid
“He thinks like a Kenyan, talks like a Kenyan and acts like a Kenyan. That is why he is hellbent on “fundamentally changing” the US.”
Even though Barry acts like a hellbent Kenyan foreigner, he may have inherited his anti-American traits from communist Frank Marshall Davis and through his friendship with long-time best-buddy Bill Ayers.
I can and do agree that we do not and will not know the truth until independent investigators are allowed to view the original ‘birth records’. I do, however, see Obama as acting like a Kenyan by virtue of his anti-American birthright and upbringing. At least Arthur was raised American. Obama was foreign-bred and foreign raised, and nurtured to despise the USA. We see working out in front of us on a daily basis the wisdom of the Founders in limited POTUS to natural born citizens.
At least some of us do. The rest seem quite on board with the destruction of everything American about America.
“Arthur’s father naturalized and became a citizen, and Arthur lied his butt off about the date when that occurred...Frantic questions were raised but Arthur managed to deflect them with obfuscation.”
I haven’t seen any examples of Arthur lying about the date when his father naturalized. I’m not sure I’ve seen any instances of Arthur ever commenting on the date of his father’s naturalization at all.
So what lies or frantic questions about his father’s naturalization date have you seen?
Come on Birthers. You've accused BO of not being a natural born citizen because he was born in Kenyan, born in America to a Brit, and born in America to two Americans(??? never had figured out that one), all in the same thread. Just work in the Birther theory that he was born in Canada, and you will have hit for the cycle.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, people who don't think the 2012 election will hinge on folks who support BO, and his policies, until they discover (in Birther fantasy land) that BO was born out of wedlock, on American soil, to two American citizens, we have an election coming up in 14 1/2 months.
OK, I read that, but I’m not seeing any examples of Arthur lying about the date of his father’s naturalization.
There’s a quote from Arthur about his dad’s age when he immigrated to the US, and how old his dad was when he was born, but nothing about when his dad was naturalized as a citizen.
You said up above “The controversy was over the date at which Arthur’s father was naturalized. Arthur lied like a rug about it, and that is a fact.”
Where in this article are the examples of that?
I’m not going to repost the entire article here. I don’t think that’s even allowed. If you can’t see what I’m talking about from this excerpt, then I can’t help you:
We’ve also uncovered many lies told by Chester Arthur to the press which kept this fact from public view when he ran for Vice President in 1880. Garfield won the election, became President in 1881, and was assassinated by a fanatical Chester Arthur supporter that same year.
How ironic that the allegations started by Arthur Hinman in his pamphlet entitled, “How A British Subject Became President”, have turned out to be true…but not for the reason Hinman suggested.
Hinman alleged that Arthur was born in Ireland or Canada as a British subject. It was bunk. It’s been definitively established that Chester Arthur was born in Vermont. But Hinman turns out to be correct anyway since Chester Arthur was a British citizen/subject by virtue of his father not having naturalized as a United States citizen until Chester Arthur was almost 14 years old.
That means Chester Arthur was a British subject at the time of his birth.
We’ve uncovered news clips exposing a thorough trail of lies, all of which served to obscure Chester Arthur’s true history of having been born as a British citizen.
Chester Arthur’s lies came during his Vice Presidential campaign in 1880. His fraudulent attempt to obfuscate family history provides context and evidence that in 1880 it was recognized that having been born as a British citizen would make one ineligible to be President or VP. His falsification of family history indicates he was aware of POTUS ineligibility.
When I first read ‘Dreams from My Father’, it was possible to see that the book was complete fiction and that (1) Obama Sr wasn’t Barry’s father and then later that (2) Ann Dunham wasn’t Barry’s mom.
Therefore I never really focused on the NBC issue even though it is a legitimate issue if it is assumed that Kenyan Obama Sr is Barry’s father.
“I’m not going to repost the entire article here.”
That’s unnecessary; I already read the entire article. And it doesn’t have any comments from Arthur about when his father naturalized.
So I don’t need you to repost the entire article. Just post the individual quotes from Chester Arthur where he lied about when his father was naturalized. Or if not direct quotes, then contemporary references to claims he made about his father’s naturalization as a US citizen.
You said he lied like a rug about it, so surely you have at least two examples of that.
Okay, you won me over. Arthur never lied about his eligibility. In fact, no questions were ever raised about it. The article mentions no lies at all. In fact, it documents that Arthur was as honest as the day is long. You can read it from start to finish and never encounter the least doubt as to Arthur’s integrity. In fact, the issue of eligibility never came up at all! Arthur was born of two citizen parents, never lied about it, and anybody who says otherwise is mistaken.
/s
So you say Arthur lied a lot about when his father was naturalized as a US citizen, but you’re incapable of providing even ONE example of such lying?
And when asked to back up a simple factual claim that you’ve made multiple times, you retreat into sarcasm?
Can you actually produce any instances of Arthur lying about his father’s naturalization date or not?
You are obsessed. My point is that Arthur lied about his eligibility, and he did. You’re point is what, that he was a boy scout and never told a lie? That no questions arose as to his eligibility? That no details of his past were ever obfuscated or subject to attempted investigation?
It’s a sick obsession, but if it makes you happy go hog wild. While you’re at it, why not insist Obama is honest too? He never lies, right? Anything out of his mouth is true, correct?
In fact, Arthur and Obama are a pair of lying liars. A point you seem incapable of grasping.
“My point is that Arthur lied about his eligibility, and he did.”
Your point, as expressed in at least two posts above, was that Arthur lied about when his father naturalized. That’s what I quoted and specifically asked you about. And you haven’t produced any examples of Arthur lying about when his father naturalized. Can you?
“You’re point is what, that he was a boy scout and never told a lie?”
No, my point is that he never lied about when his father naturalized. My point is that your specific claim was false.
Or rather, I’ve concluded it’s false based on the information currently available to me. I asked if you could give any examples where he DID lie about when his father naturalized. And so far, you haven’t been able to.
Man, I hope I never become as obsessed about *anything* as you are on this one point. Bottom line: Arthur lied about his eligibility. I’m sorry you can’t see that.
Have a great life.
“Man, I hope I never become as obsessed about *anything* as you are on this one point.”
Yeesh. And here I just thought I’d try to confirm a factual claim you made.
So when you wrote:
“Arthur’s father naturalized and became a citizen, and Arthur lied his butt off about the date when that occurred.”
and when you wrote:
“The controversy was over the date at which Arthur’s father was naturalized. Arthur lied like a rug about it, and that is a fact.”
you were just making stuff up, and hoping no one called you on it. And then when someone DID call you on it, and wouldn’t immediately fall for your diversionary tactics, you finally resorted to personal insults about obsession.
So I’m done here. You’re clearly not going to produce any examples, because you don’t have any, and were just telling lies about Arthur to start with. I didn’t know that at first, but I think it’s pretty obvious now.
Help me out, Vickery. Since you signed up on FR, have you posted anything critical of Obama?
Link, please.
It’s a sincere question. Since you’ve been here, have you made one post critical of Obama?
What’s your track record on conservativism? I’ve never seen you on a pro-conservative thread. Please provide the most pro-conservative quote you’ve made since joining FR, along with a link.
Surely you didn’t join a conservative site JUST to attack so-called birthers. I’m sure you’re as appalled as the rest of us at the direction Obama is taking the country, and no doubt somewhere in these threads you’ve posted (1) a scathing critique of Obama’s anti-American policies, and (2) an eloquent statement of your conservative principles.
I eagerly await both links.
We don’t talk any more. How about a link to one very mild criticism you leveled against Obama? Nothing earthshaking, just something he did that you didn’t care for, and that you posted about. Surely there is one measely comment you’ve made that fits that description. I’m so ‘curious’, if you get my drift, to read it.
Thank you in advance.
Well thanks for playing. I look forward to seeing you on future eligibility threads [since those are the only ones you ever post on]. I’ll be sure to say hi.
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.