Posted on 10/11/2010 5:38:46 PM PDT by kristinn
Anything is possible, and that is less unlikely than some other scenarios I can think of.
That’s a good line!
Nice overreaction. You did notice the word “IF” at the beginning of my previous post?? I’m going by what the best avialable evidence tells us. We have evidence Granny and SAD (not Barak Sr.) lived at the address listed in the newspaper birth announcement, and that SAD was in Washington state the same month the baby was born. The HI DOH has admitted through responses to UIPA requests that Obama’s birth records were amended, meaning the original birth records DO NOT prove Obama was born in Hawaii. The law allows unattended births to be registered by anyone with knowledge of the birth. All this explains why Obama doesn’t want to show the LFBC. It would call into question the veracity of the claim of Hawaiian nativity. It also explains why the DOH doesn’t want to release the LFBC, yet still claims other vital records verify his birth in Hawaii (which are probably supplementary records filed later with the state). It would also explain how the birth announcements were placed in the newspapers in 1961. Feel free to provide an alternate explanation.
Do you know what the term ‘hypocrite’ means?? Tapper undermines his pointless namecalling by following up on Axelrod’s claim that a birth certificate has been available to ‘people’ by saying, “The long form?”.
Wanna bet? If Hillary is VP before June 2011, AND Obama is gone by September, you win. Otherwise, I win. Sound good to you? How much are you willing to stake?
If that's the case, then he would be a Natural Born Citizen no matter where he was born.
However, I suspect that Obama Sr.'s first marriage was some sort of triabl ceremony that did not carry the force of law even in colonial Kenya.
At any rate, it's all moot, as the short form the Obama has publicized is just as good for the purposes of proving birth in the US as is the long form.
He's made it clear he thinks birthers are “whackjobs”. He equates them with truthers. He was using the “long form” birther argument to illustrate the absurdity of the defense Gibbs was using to justify their foreign money accusations against the Chamber of Commerce. Tapper was suggesting neither was supported by evidence, and both were equally nutty. Consistent in his point...nothing hypocritical about it.
Tapper has made it clear he is not a birther, and wants nothing to do with them.
Only in birtherville is this seen as a validation of their quest.
Thanks R.S.
Were there words I used you don't understand?? He asked for a clarification he shouldn't have needed if he really think this is a 'whackjob' issue. You offered a rather dumb explanation in his defense.
What no points or odds. I don’t hear any scenario’s. Just like a republican part of ‘No’.
Are they getting ready to dump Obummer? By they, I mean the powers that be within the Democratic party.
That's how I see this re: Tapper.
The fact that he inquired (albeit, once with no follow-up) about the long form specifically shows that he knows (knew) the distinction between the alleged short form on the WWW, and the not released copy of the original long form.
Couple that with other recent developments, such as: Dem Whip: GOP majority will issue birther subpoenas and it seems like the RAT's are starting to worry that the truth may finally see the light of day it deserves!
b.t.w. I would ask Tapper how someone born (by birthright) a subject to the crown of her majesty the Queen of England could possibly be a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S. regardless of where he was born?
That's assuming Sr. was his legal father at birth. If he wasn't, then the follow-up questions become...what was he legal name at birth? Was it "Obama?" If not, why did he take his oaths under that name? Also, what then, of the forged gov't document on his campaign website?
Any way it's looked at, ole' Barry is the largest political fraud perpetrated on the United States of America.
Similiarly you said Obama would be out 3 months later, so I translated that to mean September. The end of September is exactly three months after the end of June. But okay, I can give you another few months if you want. Say year-end 2011.
So you win if Hillary is VP by end of June of 2011, AND Obama is gone by year-end 2011. Do you find that acceptable?
I believe he was just clarifying which specific birther nutjobs he was referring to.
Vice President Joe Biden
2 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
3 President pro tempore of the Senate Daniel Inouye
4 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
5 Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner
6 Secretary of Defense Robert Gates[2]
7 Attorney General Eric Holder
...
All but two are appointed by, BO: Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate.
All laws he has signed, all appointments, ExO would be null and void. Hillary would have to be confirmed by the congress to be VP in a small window after legal after BO is found not eligible and before he is removed in order to be on the list legally...and IMO even that would be null and void.
Hill/billy have known about his “situation” and would be part of the conspiracy....Even the Berg case, since she was not a party to, but Berg a follower of Hill, will not save them. The case would be used to prove she knew, but not excuse her from complying....IOW she's got her tit in a ringer.
Ask Justice Thomas said the problem is evasive (2nd meaning of the word- meaning needing a great deal of study)
Hannity about 5 minutes ago, brought up where is Obama's birth certificate?
Really? Good to hear!
Hannity then brought up where is Obama's birth certificate?
Tisk, tisk. You obviously don't know the Constitution very well. The President does not appoint the Vice President. Go back and read the 12th Amendment.
I have this feeling Clinton and Obama have each other in a Mutually Assured Destruction standoff. Obama probably holds some pretty bad info on them and they on him.
Nope. Even in his first book, Obama admits he didn’t know for sure if his parents were ever married, and he didn’t really want to know. So it’s something more embarrassing than that. Also, coming from an unwed single mother is NOT something to keep a good person out of the White House any more.
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.