Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama’s Birth Announcement in 1961 confirmed
The Post and Email ^ | Dec. 11, 2009 | John Charlton

Posted on 12/11/2009 1:04:21 AM PST by Electric Graffiti

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450451-488 next last
To: tired_old_conservative
>"I think it's too much for anyone to have to answer to hysterical people in denial. "

He's the one denying US proof of his citizenship.

If you cant put up, you should shut up.

Hysterical? Who in their right mind would fork out the kinda cash he has over a $12 document?

Put up or shut up!

Super messiah cant even show proof of citizenship! It's a FACT!

Until he shows his original LFBC his citizenship is only hearsay! And everybody knows it!

401 posted on 12/12/2009 10:26:39 PM PST by rawcatslyentist (Jeremiah 50:31 Behold, I am against you," O " you most proud, said the said the Lord GOD of hosts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
Slogans and rage. The twin hallmarks of the birther in his natural habitat.

“He's the one denying US proof of his citizenship.”

As I noted, he has provided proof consistent with Hawaii's stated documentation practices. Hawaii isn't disputing it. That's a closed book in legal space. You simply refuse to acknowledge or accept that because you can't stand Obama so much that it's driven you around the bend. You've let him get inside your head, to use a sporting analogy.

“If you cant put up, you should shut up.”

What does this pointless phrase mean to you? Do you really think it demonstrates anything other than unfocused anger? Obviously I can't provide Obama’s birth certificate; it's his, not mine. That doesn't change the response I gave above. I routinely give far more detailed factual responses than the people bellowing “free the long form.”

“Put up or shut up!”

Again. Please note that I give details. You chant slogans. Which connotes actual thought?

“Super messiah cant even show proof of citizenship! It's a FACT!”

No, it's not. It seems like a fact to you because you don't want to accept that he gave proof, but that doesn't make it a fact. It makes it what is more commonly called a delusion.

“Until he shows his original LFBC his citizenship is only hearsay! And everybody knows it!”

No. Only the people in that fever swamp with you know it, and that's because you've allowed Obama to deprive you of your rational faculties. If you would defeat your enemy, you must first know him. Dispensing with delusions about him is essential.

Scream all you want. That doesn't turn delusions into facts. Birtherism is the kind of self-destructive stuff Conservatism had to purge itself of in order to set the stage for Ronald Reagan.

402 posted on 12/13/2009 2:25:04 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
When you have the tenacity and knowledge to even remotely put together what Beckwith has, then you can cast stones.

When develop the imagination and creativity to make up put together what Beckwith and you have then I'll be just as bad.

And I notice that you didn't include the history that would show that in every single case you quoted, my post was in response to an insult first directed towards me. Unlike you and people like you, my stones are never cast first.

403 posted on 12/13/2009 4:37:49 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 388 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
You don’t see the FReepmails. You can rest assured many laugh their asses off.

Simple pleasures for simple minds no doubt. I'm glad that I provide a source of amusement for you and your buddies. After all, y'all do the same for us so it's only fair we return the favor.

404 posted on 12/13/2009 4:41:51 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
That article was dated this year 2009!!!

It did not tell what the rules were in the 60, 70, and 80ties???

405 posted on 12/13/2009 5:01:51 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative; rawcatslyentist
That is wrong. If Obama obtained US citizenship by birth,

Keep Tap-Dancing to the choreography of ballet dancer Rahm. You skipped mentioning his BRITISH citizenship!!!

406 posted on 12/13/2009 5:19:57 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative; rawcatslyentist
Birtherism is the kind of self-destructive stuff Conservatism had to purge itself of in order to set the stage for Ronald Reagan.

He also bluntly said: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall". And he bluntly called them "An Evil Empire" to your pal's huge chagrin. He certainly did not shy away to express opinions that was NOT in line with the P.C.!!!

407 posted on 12/13/2009 5:34:15 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
Ok you've convinced me, and anyone else reading this article.

We should accept a photoshopped image that looks almost like a real BC.

We shouldn't ask questions about his nationality because you said we shouldn't.


Sorry bub. I ain't drinkin the foolaide! No cigar for Fidel! Why don't you axe Larry to pass the meth pipe?

408 posted on 12/13/2009 6:06:55 AM PST by rawcatslyentist (Jeremiah 50:31 Behold, I am against you," O " you most proud, said the said the Lord GOD of hosts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
“Now why in the world would Stanley Ann risk a felony conviction and commit fraud to get her son citizenship, when she could have easily obtained it through legal means?”

It could have been Madelyn Dunham who, in the first week after BHO II was born, may have been aware of how easily HI birth and US citizenship could be established and filed a report of home birth not knowing when or if Stanley Ann would return from Kenya.

It seems to me that there some kind of serious falling out between Stanley Ann and her parents (beyond just getting away from BHO Sr) for her to have moved to Seattle with an infant at age 18 just one month after the birth. Most new mothers cling to their mothers and vice versa.

This falling out leave open the possibility that a parent or parents may have been taking actions that were not coordinated with their daughter.

409 posted on 12/13/2009 7:46:42 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
“A court in Indiana has upheld existing Supreme Court precedent that you don't have to have two citizen parents to be an NBC.”

This appears to be incorrect to this admittedly non-lawyer.

There is no such precedent. Dicta doesn't set precedent. The opinion in Wong only declared plaintiff to be a citizen , not a natural born citizen, as the description of the case by the court clearly states. Confusing dicta conflating English natural born subject with citizen doesn't count as precedent.

An Indiana Appeals Court falsely interpreted dicta in Wong Kim Ark to mean that you can be a dual citizen at birth subject to a foreign power and still be an NBC, even if it is your your father that is foreign (we never passed the ERA).

In the Minor v. Happersett case SCOTUS specifically said it had not yet ruled on whether persons who didn't have two US citizen parents born on US soil could be NBC, and SCOTUS cited Minor in deciding Wong without refuting it.

Subsequently, SCOTUS has not ruled on any case on point with Obama’s eligibility, so there is no precedent for the Indiana court to cite. A case de nouveau for Obama would seem to be needed.

See D’Onofrio’s cashed blog page (including his his deletions of his amusing insults to SCOTUS, which may account for why he as taken down his blog):

http://74.6.239.67/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=Minor+natural+born+citizen&fr=hp-pvdt&u=naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/scotus-in-wong-kim-ark-and-minor-v-happersett-rightfully-punted-on-natural-born-citizen-current-court-purposely-fumbled/&w=minor+minors+natural+born+citizen+citizens&d=SZiXYt29T4RS&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=v0ghwynogrYhQtuDqw4BQw

410 posted on 12/13/2009 8:26:28 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
“Obama doesn't have to prove the negative. You have to prove he did something wrong. And let's see... Hmmm. To date you have no legally actionable cases a court will act upon even defined, let alone meaningful evidence to dispute any of the above.”

I disagree.

Judge Carter, after hearing oral arguement from Kreep and Taitz, said “I haven’t made up my mind yet.” That, in my view, indicated that it was a close decision and close decisions can be reversed on appeal, which is pending!

Further, Judge Carter refuted the DOJ contention that POTUS was exempt from quo warranto and specifically referred the plaintiffs to the DC District Court. In quo warranto the burden of proof would be on Obama, and just this week D’Onofrio announced that he will bring a quo warranto action in that court on behalf of the Chrysler dealers.

Unfortunately, (non-lawyer guessing here) D’Onofrio would be forced to abandon his quo warranto action if the Chrysler dealers accept an out-of-court settlement offer. I certainly hope that doesn't happen!

411 posted on 12/13/2009 8:52:43 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

D’Onofrio’s Chrysler dealer quo warranto:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2401072/posts?q=1&;page=1#1


412 posted on 12/13/2009 8:57:57 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Brytani
“At age 6 (from what we have been told) Obama was adopted by an Indonesian citizen, Lolo Seotoro. At that point his name was legally changed to Barry Seotoro and he moved to Indonesia becoming an Indonesian Citizen. We know he was listed as an citizen of Indonesia from his school records.”

Brytani:

I have seen no documentation of adoption of Obama in HI or Indonesia and I don't consider school record entries to be conclusive. Lolo could have just made the claims when registering Barry in school to save face or avoid problems.

It is certainly possible that Barry was adopted and also made an Indonesian dual citizen but this has no bearing on whether he had NBC status at birth, and only Obama himself could have renounced that.

It does remain highly suspicious that Obama attended Occidental by all appearances as a foreign student in the foreign student dorm surrounded by Muslims as would be appropriate for an Indonesian or Kenyan Muslim citizen.

Only discovery of Obama’s original vital records and further discovery on whatever they reveal (and discovery on competing Kenya BCs) plus a SCOTUS ruling will satisfy me as to his eligibility!

413 posted on 12/13/2009 9:15:02 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

D’Onofrio was retained by the Chrysler dealers, according to the thread you linked. If they settle, there would be releases exchanged and the absence of a justiciable issue. Therefore a quo warranto would be dismissed if brought.

“When the subject-matter of the action is moot, applications for quo warranto are generally dismissed.4”

http://www.constitution.org/cmt/antieau/ant-ext2.htm


414 posted on 12/13/2009 9:30:36 AM PST by Canedawg (Bring lawyers, guns and money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: Canedawg
This is what I would expected. Thanks.

Even if D’Onofrio’s case gets dropped due to settlement, the legal pathway for others wanting to bring quo warranto will have been publicized widely as soon as it is filed,if filed.

The good news is that Obama’s enemies in all parts of the political spectrum are multiplying by the day. I suspect that the far left will soon be looking at attacking Obama’s eligibility as a means to defeat the escalation in Afghanistan by getting cut-and-run Biden in office.

415 posted on 12/13/2009 9:49:04 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: MilspecRob

Yeah, you said that before. I took as much stock in it then as I do now.

I never mentioned social security benefits. It is tied to employment and addresses. It’s a different animal. In school you take your child’s BC when they start kindergarten along with shot records and that follows them all through school and is transfered to college. If it gets lost then you cannot go on to college without it.You must get a copy and hand it over. One of our sons was not lost but we had a dickens of a time getting the schoolrto forward it with records.

DMV a child in California is 15 1/2 or 16 and they want proof they are not giving a ID to someone underage or someone stealing a ID.

Passports they want to know who is traveling where from the US. If they are citizens.

I cannot imagine any of you who consistently post in favor of Obama,want anyone in the White House whom you have no clue who he is. After 9/11 our commander in chief has no verifiable background and you condone that consistently.

Take a good look at the guy you condone.

http://www.xomba.com/obama_spider_web


416 posted on 12/13/2009 10:04:26 AM PST by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: danamco

“He also bluntly said: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. And he bluntly called them “An Evil Empire” to your pal’s huge chagrin. He certainly did not shy away to express opinions that was NOT in line with the P.C.!!!”

What color is the sky in your world? Acknowledging facts isn’t P.C. Reagan wasn’t some nut case insisting that up is down and living in denial like this birth certificate nonsense.


417 posted on 12/13/2009 10:16:54 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
“We should accept a photoshopped image that looks almost like a real BC.”

No. You should ask yourself why no one in the state of Hawaii is disavowing it. People falsely claiming to have been born in your state aren't protected by privacy laws. Hawaii could answer that question today, and would if the information it had contradicted Obama. You mindlessly insist it is photoshopped because you simply can't deal with reality.

418 posted on 12/13/2009 10:20:44 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
The Indiana opnion clearly acknowledges the common understanding of natural born ciizen based on a lot of history, which is born here. I didn't say that was a flat out Supreme Court precedent.

And yes, of course, every court that doesn't do what the birthers want is doing something false. Obviously there is no honesty or professional competence outside birther circles. That's how paranoid conspiracy theories work. It just gets more and more obvious what they really are as more and more court rulings pile up.

419 posted on 12/13/2009 10:25:47 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
“Judge Carter, after hearing oral arguement from Kreep and Taitz, said “I haven’t made up my mind yet.” That, in my view, indicated that it was a close decision and close decisions can be reversed on appeal, which is pending!”

So dicta are irrelevant, but one can read volumes into a judge simply being polite and dispassionate, which is his job. His opinion sure doesn;t read like a close call.

Cling to whatever hope you want. But no on versed in the law believes that appeal has a snowball's chance in heck. To believe that, you simply don't understand the reasons why dismissal was granted.

420 posted on 12/13/2009 10:29:38 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 411 | View Replies]

To: OafOfOffice
“Take a good look at the guy you condone.”

No one is condoning Obama. That's simply a blatant attempt to change the subject to avoid unpleasant (for you) facts about the law. We respect the rule of law bequeathed to us by our Constitution. We are defending simple sanity, not Obama. What you don't get is that, in the incredible event that a court did rule it wanted to see Obama’s birth certificate, we would accept that. We respect the rule of law and our court system. Birthers don't unless they get the ruling they want. Which they won't with the nonsensical cases brought to date.

421 posted on 12/13/2009 10:35:37 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

Do you get paid by the post or hourly? I was thinking you get a power nap in if hourly and you could be more rrfreshed and think clearer.


422 posted on 12/13/2009 10:47:31 AM PST by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: OafOfOffice
“Do you get paid by the post or hourly? I was thinking you get a power nap in if hourly and you could be more refreshed and think clearer.”

Thanks for the tip, but no one with anything on the ball is going to take advice from you on how to think clearly. The fallacy with that has been demonstrated far more definitively than any issues with Obama’s birth certificate.

423 posted on 12/13/2009 11:08:48 AM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

That hurt really bad. I may never recover.

Take your insults and your pseudo legal wisdom and try to have a nice day.

And don’t forget to say Hi to Axelrod or Soros whoever pays you to post their spin.

and get some rest. Maybe some gingko.


424 posted on 12/13/2009 11:12:30 AM PST by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
Reagan wasn’t some nut case insisting that up is down and living in denial like this birth certificate nonsense.

The problem is that you simply are tooooo OLD and toooo TIRED. Even as you claims your worked on his campaign, which I doubt, the real President of our era, would have asked your usurper to produce proof of his eligibility on par with Governor Sarah Palin. Your W.H./Aporn talking points is what is NUTTY, and we don't agree with your stalkings at all!!!

425 posted on 12/13/2009 11:39:27 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: danamco
“He also bluntly said: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. And he bluntly called them “An Evil Empire” to your pal's huge chagrin. He certainly did not shy away to express opinions that was NOT in line with the P.C.!!!”

That's actually the point.

Regan confronted the actual issues with intellectual honesty and a realistic view.

He didn't rant about conspiracies.

He didn't keep repeating things that were demonstrably incorrect as though repetition made it true.

He didn't insult or call people names when they did not agree with him.

He didn't accuse judges of treason when they ruled against him in accordance with the law.

He didn't make up baseless stories or engage in wishful speculation about how things just maybe might have been when not a shred of proof existed.

He believe illogical arguments from Internet cranks.

He didn't accuse people of association with his adversaries when they reached different conclusions. As in: “to your pal's huge chagrin...”

He certainly didn't accuse people of being paid lackeys of his opposition when they presented contrary views.

In short, he wasn't PC, but neither was he irrational or blinded by anger.

So, yeah. Reagan is a good example of behavior that needs to be emulated.

426 posted on 12/13/2009 12:04:57 PM PST by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: danamco

“He believe illogical arguments from Internet cranks.”

OK... Too contemporary.

No Internet back then... Though I’m sure there were ARPAnet cranks...


427 posted on 12/13/2009 12:12:11 PM PST by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: danamco

Well, I’m glad I chose the screen name I did, since you obviously don’t have the wits to come up with anything on your own.

Reagan would have thought you were a fool. He’d have been nice about it, though.


428 posted on 12/13/2009 12:23:52 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: OafOfOffice
“And don’t forget to say Hi to Axelrod or Soros whoever pays you to post their spin.”

I guess I don't expect an answer, but I am curious. Is this “anyone who disagrees with Birthers is paid” stuff just a generic defense mechanism that pops out, or do you honestly believe that? It's sad if you do, but I'd have never believed people were capable of half the stuff on these threads if I hadn't read them with my own eyes.

429 posted on 12/13/2009 12:27:32 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo
Exactly.

The Birther crowd is about as unReaganesque a group as you'll ever see. Reagan had a fundamentally positive view of the world and eagerly sought out opportunities to engage with people, even those who held views with which he didn't agree. He wasn't a paranoid conspiracy freak lashing out at anyone who failed to support his delusions.

430 posted on 12/13/2009 12:30:46 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
“The Indiana opnion clearly acknowledges the common understanding of natural born ciizen based on a lot of history, which is born here. I didn't say that was a flat out Supreme Court precedent.”

TOC:

Yes you did. You might want to tone down the bombastic ad hominem broadsides against “birthers” as you have now undermined your own credibility.

You said:

“A court in Indiana has upheld existing Supreme Court precedent that you don't have to have two citizen parents to be an NBC.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2405214/posts?page=294#294

431 posted on 12/13/2009 12:51:54 PM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Fine. I will gladly concede the distinction. What so many fail to get, however, is that there is a very clear historical basis in the law, articulated in Ark, for the broadly accepted understanding that NBC = born here. That's why not a single legal scholar of merit nor any sitting member of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch, considered it a matter of concern when Barak Obama ran for President and was elected, despite it being a matter of public record that he didn't have a citizen father. And it's as close to certain as anything in human affairs go that no court is going to reopen that issue.

As for credibility among birthers, why would anyone care about that? It's a given that you lose all credibility with them the instant you show the minimal objectivity to acknowledge inconvenient facts they deny.

432 posted on 12/13/2009 1:23:15 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

“Quite the opposite...”

What was that a picture of??


433 posted on 12/13/2009 1:34:17 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

” Birtherism is the kind of self-destructive stuff”

So, was Obama a dual citizen at birth or not?

Answer that question, please. Don’t embelish, please. I would like for you to answer that question, please.

I bet you won’t answer it.


434 posted on 12/13/2009 1:47:52 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: OafOfOffice
>> I have. His mother was American therefore he is natural born.

> Show us the proof she was American.

Was she a Kenyan, too?

You've bought into some kind of fantasy where ordinary middle class people in 1961 or 1922 were as affluent and mobile as people are today.

The average income in Peru Kansas isn't high now and probably wasn't in 1922, and the Paynes don't appear to have been very wealthy.

They would have gone off to Europe or the Caribbean with Mrs. Payne pregnant to have a baby in some foreign country where conditions were probably worse than at home?

435 posted on 12/13/2009 1:49:13 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Very very good pic hahahahah


436 posted on 12/13/2009 1:51:50 PM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
“So, was Obama a dual citizen at birth or not?

Answer that question, please. Don’t embelish, please. I would like for you to answer that question, please.

I bet you won’t answer it.”

Yes, he was.

So what? There's nothing in the Constitution that says that precludes one from being a natural born citizen. There is an obvious historical legal basis, noted in the Supreme Court's Ark decision and the recent Indiana decision, for still considering him a natural born citizen. It's so noncontroversial outside of birther circles that no one, including Dick Cheny, had any problem facilitating the inauguration of Obama knowing his birth story full well.

And why would I be afraid to truthfully answer a question? It's not like I'm a birther or anything.

437 posted on 12/13/2009 2:08:55 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 434 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

“So what? There’s nothing in the Constitution “

So when the Founding Fathers grandfathered themselves eligible because some were born here, but not natural born citizens, they must have been birthers?

They knew what they were doing. I know what they were doing. You don’t. I get it. You are smarter than the founding fathers. LOL


438 posted on 12/13/2009 2:20:01 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 437 | View Replies]

To: Lower55

“What was that a picture of??”

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court swearing BHO in as President.


439 posted on 12/13/2009 2:20:44 PM PST by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says that (being a dual citizen at birth) precludes one from being a natural born citizen.”

A natural born citizen must have two Citizen parents. There is a difference between a citizen, a native born citizen and a natural born citizen.

Citizen....citizen by any and all means
Native born citizen....born in United States(obama is this,Supposedly)
Natural born citizen....Born in USA to TWO US citizen parents (this classification was ONLY for presidential qualifications, and has nothing at all to do with ANY citizenship cases ever heard in any venue)*so far

All the cases that people cite thinking they might define NBC meaning, do not, cannot, and will not do so.

It is what it is, whether some sheep choose to deny it or patriots choose to accept it.

The truth usually comes out, and I would rather be wrong by inquiring, than wrong by defending a lie.


440 posted on 12/13/2009 2:39:41 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 437 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo

“The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court swearing BHO in as President.”

No, sorry it is not. LOL

I just KNEW you would fall for my question.


441 posted on 12/13/2009 2:41:41 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
“A natural born citizen must have two Citizen parents. There is a difference between a citizen, a native born citizen and a natural born citizen.

Citizen....citizen by any and all means
Native born citizen....born in United States(obama is this,Supposedly)
Natural born citizen....Born in USA to TWO US citizen parents (this classification was ONLY for presidential qualifications, and has nothing at all to do with ANY citizenship cases ever heard in any venue)*so far”"

That is your opinion only, not a fact. To date, reality doesn't seem to be respecting your opinion. At some point, rational people begin to factor that into their thinking.

If anyone is sheep, it's the birthers chanting the same tired old slogans devoid of thought. The conceit that this makes you a patriot compared to others is just that—a conceit. And not a very well-grounded one, either.

442 posted on 12/13/2009 2:47:59 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: danamco

That article was dated this year 2009!!!
It did not tell what the rules were in the 60, 70, and 80ties???


That’s true but if a person orders a copy of their Certification of Live Birth in the 21st century, they are sent the short form C.O.L.B.ever since 2001 “when the department went paperless.”


443 posted on 12/13/2009 3:10:44 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
I just KNEW you would fall for my question.

Then please, indulge us. What in the fantasy world of birtherdom is that a picture of?

444 posted on 12/13/2009 3:18:20 PM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

“Then please, indulge us. What in the fantasy world of birtherdom is that a picture of? “

Not sure what it was, but it wasn’t the swearing in of Obama. That happened behind closed doors.


445 posted on 12/13/2009 3:24:14 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: Lower55
Not sure what it was, but it wasn’t the swearing in of Obama. That happened behind closed doors.

Oh, brother...

I should've guessed.

446 posted on 12/13/2009 3:27:56 PM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative

“If anyone is sheep, it’s the birthers”

Being a sheep means going with the crowd. The birthers are doing just the opposite.

Birthers are more like the wolf. You’re more like a sheepdog, working for the shepherd, trying to protect the sheep. Your efforts could be considered honorable, until the sheep realize they’re being led to slaughter.


447 posted on 12/13/2009 3:32:55 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

“Oh, brother...

I should’ve guessed. “

Yep, should have guessed...lol


448 posted on 12/13/2009 3:33:52 PM PST by Lower55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: x
You've bought into some kind of fantasy where ordinary middle class people in 1961 or 1922 were as affluent and mobile as people are today.

I never mentioned anything about being affluent, any era or travel. I posted Madelyn Lee Payne was initially from Peru, Kansas. I have no clue if she grew up wealthy or poor. I never mentioned any travel either.

449 posted on 12/13/2009 4:05:44 PM PST by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

To: x
They would have gone off to Europe or the Caribbean with Mrs. Payne pregnant to have a baby in some foreign country where conditions were probably worse than at home?

Who posted Madelyn's mother went away to have a baby?

450 posted on 12/13/2009 4:07:41 PM PST by OafOfOffice (Constitution is not neutral.It was designed to take the government off the backs of people-Douglas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 301-350351-400401-450451-488 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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