Posted on 12/19/2008 12:23:50 PM PST by Red Steel
I'd just like to add that Berg was not just "one of the first" but was "Numero Uno." Back on August 21, he was the first person to file a lawsuit in Federal court, challenging Obama's qualifications, contending that Obama was born in Kenya to a British citizen, adopted by an Indonesian citizen who passed along his citizenship to OBama, and therefore, he was not a "natural-born" citizen.
Regardless of what you think of the man or his past exploits, he got the ball rolling at a time that none were coming forward to challenge Obama in Federal court, and for that we owe him a debt of gratitude.
And, if people think that Obama will be "home free" if he makes it through Inauguration on Jan 20, they need to think again. These issues will not go away.
I found an easy way for people to figure out who is Barack Obama. Simply go to the Fight The Smears website, and take every single denial they have made, and every charge of "smear" and turn them completely around.
Whenever Leftists say "Night" think, "Day."
Most Democrats are dopey and perfectly capable of getting lost and confused on their own while voting, but I wonder whether they have coordinators who tell them to mark the critical races and then mess up the ballot to get a second ballot in the pile in case of recount. It shouldn't be hard to conduct a fair election, but the problem is only one side wants to follow the rules.
I seriously doubt Hawaii or the Feds would have turned mommy with her newborn baby away after returning from overseas back in 1961 even if she did not have copy of an U.S. BC. All she would have had to show is some paperwork that the baby was hers like showing Obama's Kenyan BC. The officials may have told her to naturalize her baby and let her pass through, but she may not have followed their official instructions all the way and she only pursued an Hawaiian state issued birth record.
However, your idea of filing a FOIA request for State Department records to see if Obama was born abroad is a good idea.
Thanks. I agree. This will haunt Obama until he comes clean.
However, I got to admit that the Birth Announcement was a clever idea. Moma Obama must have sent an e-mail to the Hawaii newspaper to cover up the fact that her baby and future American President was born in Kenya.
That doesn't change the human fact that if a lawyer takes on a controversial case and defends it vigorously, his own reputation is affected by it to one degree or another. You seem to believe that my view of taking controversial clients is black-and-white; whereas I think that it is a slippery slope and a matter of degree.
But while we're on the subject: Like many Americans, I am offended by the tactics used by today's trial lawyers of impugning the witnesses and interrogating victims as if they are perpetrators when the client they are defending is most obviously a lowlife to anyone with a shred of integrity. I am offended when a lawyer makes outraged, bald statements of the accused's innocence to the press and make lurid accusations against the victim/accusers that drag them through the mud, when their client's innocence is not yet proven. It is my hope that DNA evidence will not only help convict the truly guilty, but also help protect the innocent from such disgusting tactics.
I think many Americans have learned the hard way to distrust lawyers and their aggressive, holier-than-thou, above-the-law shenanigans. I have personally known attorneys and district attorneys who casually broke the law in their personal lives, yet gleefully prosecuted citizens with a dramatic self-righteousness rarely seen outside of Hollywood.
I think no one is above the law, and defending a client is no excuse for trampling the truth just to score a courtroom victory.
Lying down with dogs does not make a lawyer a flea. That's where you and I differ. It's a matter of degree, not an absolute doomsday prediction. Lighten up. See post 128.
We have a disagreement. Not in 1961. They are not going to send Mommy a resident of Hawaii, a US Citizen, back to Kenya with her newborn baby. They'll give her instructions on what to do and let her pass.
While I do not remember how it was for me when Mama Trumandogz brought me to the States, I do know that she had to have my documentation.
And I was born not long after Obama.
Maybe you should lighten up. I’m not being that tough on you. Your reasoning is still specious though. It assumes that judges and justices are too dumb to look at the case before them and judge it on its merits. That they will look up the cases the attorney before them has represented and make assumptions about the case they are hearing based on an association with a past client/case. If that is the case our entire legal system is an exercise in futility from the get go.
Good night, and have a pleasant tomorrow and a good Christmas.
Sorry if I bruised your tender ego. Thanks for the non-sequitur response though.
Bored me is more like it. Good evening.
Interested enough to keep posting. Do any of your posts follow a logical rationale? lol
True. Has anyone found the relevant Hawaii Statutes that were in effect in 1961?
Don’t know about that, but it does seem to debunk the a BC Truther theory.
Why would I lie? My post is true.
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.