FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
lol thats funny stuff some need to read up on what they state first
Who's Sick Of Obama Yet?
- Thread starter AKRevo47
- Start date
- Status
jrh72582
Well-Known Member
Look - Obama is the president. You can talk about this tin foil theory all day, but he is the president. Period. Talk about his policies and what you don't like about his presidency, but why go on about this specific topic when it's a dead issue.
I was upset that Bush stole the presidency from Gore, but once it was clear that he was going to be the president, I got over it and stopped complaining about it because it was a dead issue. The supreme court made a ruling, it's over!
I was upset that Bush stole the presidency from Gore, but once it was clear that he was going to be the president, I got over it and stopped complaining about it because it was a dead issue. The supreme court made a ruling, it's over!
t@intshredder
Well-Known Member
Required? By whom? He is The President. If it were a requirement, like you claim, how did he get elected?I keep seeing the copy. I'm sorry, but the original is a requirement for the Presidency of the United States. There is an original. Produce it.
Jrh, back to your logic problems again...
You have accepted that Obama was born here, ergo he is a citizen. I have not accepted this. Obama's mother was NOT a US Citizen, so the rest of your mish mash falls away.
Next.....
Let's see the Columbia admissions form and let's see a bona fide original birth certificate. Let's stop the evasion and put it out there.
C'mon BARRY!!!
So a few right wing zealots want more proof? Yeah ...I'm sure that's high-up on Obama's list of "to-do's".
FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
see jrh your what is wrong with america. Your one of the lazy ones who just takes what he is given and does not stand or use his rights as a citizen to speak freely or opose the wrongs we are given from our governemnet. You would be the one sitting in his chair if we wer invaded saying" Why should I fight we are getting taken over anyways"...What did you do to show your dissatisfaction in the Bush vote? Did you speak aginst Bush during his years or just say well guess I have to like it? I am not talking of doing anything personal to Obama yeah he was elected by people who never voted, didnt care to vote, and had no idea of his political past or his platform stance. basically the uneducated non voting part of society who just wanted someone to give them things for nothing. Now on your accusation of a stolen presidency. Can you please let me know exactly how that was done by Bush himself or would you care to rephrase that statement to be specific and not a blanket statement put on Bush? Are you one of the people who also accused Bush of making Katrina to get rid of the poor and black population in New Orleans as thats a great one too. The man the dems called an idiot can control mother nature with pin point accuracy...
t@intshredder
Well-Known Member
Ugh ...this pointless, classless rant makes me wish that voting were an earned privilege, rather than a Constitutional right.
FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
It would take 15 minutes to produce a hospital issued birth certificate that would end all doubt or question.. Your telling me he would rather spend years defending this, making speeches, having groups attack his name then just spend 15 minutes and issue it with a quick statement and move on? So either he can't or his is just the stupidest man on earth take your pick
FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
yes if it was an earnwed privledge Obama would never even got the party nomination as he scrapped the barrel of non educated non voters with promise of grandure and great help...Take that vote away he would have been in single digit results would have been great
t@intshredder
Well-Known Member
There's a third option: he's unconcerned (like the rest of the country) what right wing zealots have to say regarding foolish conspiracy theories.
medicineman
New Member
So, how do you know all these things, who voted and who's lazy? Are you a certified clairvoyant, or are you just a tired ass right wing psycho. Believe me, I voted and screamed plenty about that psycho Neo-Con Bush. The "non-educated, non-voting" people had had it with Neo-con run-away right wing politics, and came out of the proverbial woodwork to throw the bums out. My hope is that once activated, these same people will continue to vote and keep right wing war-mongers out of national politics for a long long time, You're welcome.
FilthyFletch
Mr I Can Do That For Half
medicine glad you jumped in without reading as usual as you would have seen I answered direct to the words he typed not yours not anyone else. I have met many people who do the same thing who say oh well doesnt matter what can we do..he falls into that and I even then asked him specifically what he did and he has not been back to reply yet so i wait. Im gald you were mad and made your voice heard but if you support what he was saying then you would have to shut up say nothing and except it and like it and from what I know of you i doubt you would go that route correct? You make your voice heard even though its crazy you do that even when you do not read before speaking you toss out your opinion so you have to make your choice do you defend his just take it in the ass atitude or do you defend your way of speaking up? can only be one way or the other pick a side
CrackerJax
New Member
Yah, he has spent over a million bucks because he is .... unconcerned.
medicineman
New Member
I guess you didn't read the fine print. Look closely on the bottom of the birth certificate and concede your idiotic ramblings.
"This document serves as Prima Facie evidence of birth in any court proceeding"
Prima facie (pronounced /ˈpraɪmə ˈfeɪʃiː/, from Latin prīmā faciē
is a Latin expression meaning on its first appearance, or by first instance; at first sight. The literal translation would be "from first face", prima first, facie face, both in the ablative case. It is used in modern legal English to signify that on first examination, a matter appears to be self-evident from the facts. In common law jurisdictions, prima facie denotes evidence which unless rebutted would be sufficient to prove a particular proposition or fact.Most legal proceedings require a prima facie case to exist, following which proceedings may then commence to test it, and create a ruling. This may be called facile princeps, first principles.
Nuff said.
Legal rebuttal please?
t@intshredder
Well-Known Member
You keep saying that and I keep asking for proof. Round and round we go!
Donkeypuncher
Active Member
its not that i'm sick of him its that he's SOOO dam overrated i did vote for him only because mccain creeps the hell out of me, just something about that guy doesnt sit right with me. But i digress, ok yes he is black that is a big change in the line up BUT lets not forget he is the first hawaiian president either. and again he like many other president(not all) is going back on what he basically preached during is campain...dillhole
CrackerJax
New Member
Read this letter which was sent to Robert Murdoch via certified mail. This lawyer knows his stuff, and is dead on about the Obama falsehood .....
Editor’s note: The following is a letter written by John D. Hemenway, Esq. that was sent to NewsCorp CEO Rupert Murdoch via certified mail.
May 14, 2009
Dear Rupert,
You will likely not have retained a clear memory of me from Worcester College in the early fifties. Much time has elapsed from when we both read “P.P.E.” under Asa Briggs and the others. I had looked forward to cementing our friendship when the death of your father caused you simply to “disappear” from those at Worcester.
Much later, during several visits to my Washington, D.C. home, my moral tutor, David Mitchell, filled me in on the magnificent assistance you provided the College. Perhaps you also had something to do with the “Mitchell Building” erected just off Walton Street.
Everyone who shares your views is pleased at the nearly unprecedented success story you have made of your life. I was very pleased when you became an American, even if some persons attributed your motivation as calculated to expand your economic interests. Pure jealousy! You and your accomplishments have been good for us all.
From time to time, I try to keep up with interesting details concerning your news empire. From that reading, I am certain you and I have many opinions in common. I subscribe to the N.Y. Post, which one can acknowledge is “tabloidish,” but describes real N.Y. City life and the Post’s editorial staff certainly offers solid opinions pertaining to U.S. governmental problems. “Fox News” also makes an outstanding contribution to public awareness of the issues confronting the country.
You may recall the vital contribution Worcester’s Provost John Masterman made to the winning of WWII; he was a key figure, as I remember, in organizing the counter-espionage effort against the Nazis. I write you now concerning a problem nearly of that magnitude.
Rupert Murdoch, Chairman, N.Y. Post 1211 Avenue of the America New York, N.Y. 10036
That problem is this: the man now occupying the White House is likely Constitutionally unqualified to hold the office. As an adopted American, you will have studied the U.S. Constitution better than many Americans, and from P.P.E. studies know that the Constitution has flexible clauses and hard, literal clauses. One of the latter is the requirement of Article II, Section 1, which states: “No person except a natural-born citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of the President.”
There are indications that Obama cannot meet that requirement. As an attorney, I facilitated a lawsuit (Hollister vs. Soetoro et al.) in the United States District Court (D.C. Circuit) demanding that Obama produce his birth certificate or satisfactory substitute evidence. There are about 20 similar lawsuits across the nation. In my case, U.S. District Court Judge Robertson (a Clinton appointee), who summarily dismissed the case, and is rumored to be seeking an Obama appointment, wrote that Obama’s eligibility had been “blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry.” In other words, he accepted internet “blogs” in lieu of actual evidence.
He ordered me to “show cause” why I should not be sanctioned for promotion of a “frivolous” lawsuit. (It is significant that, although dismissed, none of the twenty odd similar legal actions have been designated by the responsible judge as “frivolous.”
Other lawsuits have usually been dismissed for “lack of standing” including a lawsuit brought by Presidential candidate, Ambassador Alan Keyes. If anyone has standing, it is an actual Presidential contender. I provided Judge Robertson 37 pages of explanation as to “why I should not be held in contempt” and he decided to “reprimand” me instead of his threatened sanctions. That case is now under appeal.
Any rational person with even partial knowledge of the facts must know that Obama-cum-Soetoro is desperate to conceal something he does not want known. I believe he is hiding the fact that he and his campaign conspired to assert eligibility for the Presidential office to which he well may not be entitled. In other parts of the world, this would be known as a coup d’etat.
Yet, “mainstream” news services, members of officialdom, judges, including justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have all failed to demand documentation to prove or disprove Obama’s qualifications to serve in the White House.
It is as if a 53% vote is a substitute for an actual determination of the legal qualifications of Obama to be President. It is also evident that consequential people in America all believe the “vetting” of qualifications to be a presidential candidate should have been someone else’s responsibility. Revelation of this massive collapse of the fundamentals of the electoral process (ensuring candidate eligibility) at this point would make some very important people look hopelessly incompetent and inept.
Sadly, that includes your “Fox News.” There are reports that top management of Fox instructed its commentators to stay away from the subject – a strange position for a service that deservedly won a reputation for “fair and balanced” reporting. I cannot believe that you would issue such an order, with your good sense. Was it Roger Ailes or someone else? When I worked with Accuracy in Media (AIM) several decades ago, news manipulation by Ailes never filled the staff with confidence. On May 1, Sean Hannity referred to Ailes as his “boss!”
It is also disturbing that a report circulates that a Saudi national who bought enough stock to win a seat on the board of Fox’s parent company, a Saudi prince, asked you to stop Fox from referring to Muslim youth unrest as “Muslim” riots – he boasted later at a conference in Dubai, that after a phone call to you, thirty minutes later, Fox removed the banner from the bottom of its screen, “Muslim” riots. Given this revelation, many FOX devotees are wondering why the eligibility issue has been ignored by your network.
This constitutional question is one of vital importance to the U.S. It is not as if we wanted to startle our contemporaries with actions calculated to stir up our contemporaries as you once did at Worcester with your bust of Lenin. Or as I did when ruffling feathers of our stuffy dean (who guarded the door of “his” library from allowing anyone actually to touch one of his rare books). After you left for Australia to tend to family problems, I hung a huge American flag from the windows of the Nuffield Building on the 4th of July. The dean’s order (conveyed to me by my scout) still rings in my ears, “Take that damn thing down!”
The “natural-born” clause in our Constitution is a rigid, not a flexible clause. In that respect, it is analogous to the banning of “cruel or unusual” punishments, a clause dear to the hearts of our founding fathers. They certainly heard tales from their grandfathers drawn directly from English experience of ingenious cruelties accompanying the crime of “Regicide” after “dictator” Oliver Cromwell died peacefully in his bed. The fact that the English could not devise a way to govern themselves without inviting the king back may suggest that you modify somewhat your prediction (which I read somewhere) that this will be the last British generation that will live under a monarchy! I recall the first review of my educational “progress” at term’s end in “Hall” at Worcester when David Mitchell described my understanding of English history as limited to “King John was a bad king!”
Since you are now an American, and a good one, too, I have no doubt that you will seek to support the Constitution every way you think wise. Consider that, having won election on a campaign that promised “openness and transparency,” Obama now has spent close to $1 million for concealment of his birth and academic records, which are the only means to prove his eligibility. A birth certificate would cost less than $20.00 to request from the State of Hawaii.
Obama has produced no documents at all that would support his claim to eligibility to office. Is it no longer responsible to claim that “the public has a right to know the truth?” Moreover, even if born in Hawaii, as he claims, Obama’s travel to Pakistan (when Americans reportedly were banned from travel there) in 1981 raises other, complicated issues.
Why did his supporters produce a misleading “certification of live birth” instead of an actual vault birth certificate? Forensic experts have testified that the Certification of Live Birth is a forgery; written on a laser printer, when such printers were not available in 1961.
This evokes shades of Richard Nixon’s problems with typewriters (not just once, re: Alger Hiss; but a second time, when Nixon was caught back-dating documents for the I.R.S.) It makes me proud that in his secret tapes, Nixon referred to me, saying, “Fire the son-of-a-bitch, he’s done this before!” – a reference to my testimony before the Senate against incompetent or dishonest Nixon appointees, such as Helmut Sonnenfeldt (known locally as “Kissinger’s Kissinger) who failed confirmation as Deputy Secretary of Treasury because of my testimony before the Senate Finance Committee.
I also testified against the first “career” foreign service officer ever to fail confirmation in the 182 year history of the U.S. Senate: Howard Mace, who was Director of Personnel of the Department of State, who lost his appointment as Ambassador to Sierra Leone. Senate testimony may ultimately prove useful in this Obama matter, despite the composition of the Congress at this time.
Nixon’s firing order directly led me to study law at Howard University, the prestigious largely African-American University in Washington, D.C. Nixon’s denunciation of me, in fact, boosted me in the eyes of the Dean at Howard and got me to this point.
In conclusion, I can tell you this as fact. America badly needed your brilliant creation: Fox News. But if Fox News really is to be a voice for rational conservatism in the United States, it cannot ignore this vital constitutional question: We have a man occupying the White House who refuses to disclose the very documents that would legitimate his Presidency. Was it not a cover-up that undid Richard Nixon? Please instruct your personnel from Roger Ailes on down that they are encouraged (not forbidden) to report all of the news, including that pertaining to Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
With best regards, your supporter, friend, and admirer, John D. Hemenway
Yes, it's all nonsense. Wake up and smell the coffee, you've been had!
Editor’s note: The following is a letter written by John D. Hemenway, Esq. that was sent to NewsCorp CEO Rupert Murdoch via certified mail.
May 14, 2009
Dear Rupert,
You will likely not have retained a clear memory of me from Worcester College in the early fifties. Much time has elapsed from when we both read “P.P.E.” under Asa Briggs and the others. I had looked forward to cementing our friendship when the death of your father caused you simply to “disappear” from those at Worcester.
Much later, during several visits to my Washington, D.C. home, my moral tutor, David Mitchell, filled me in on the magnificent assistance you provided the College. Perhaps you also had something to do with the “Mitchell Building” erected just off Walton Street.
Everyone who shares your views is pleased at the nearly unprecedented success story you have made of your life. I was very pleased when you became an American, even if some persons attributed your motivation as calculated to expand your economic interests. Pure jealousy! You and your accomplishments have been good for us all.
From time to time, I try to keep up with interesting details concerning your news empire. From that reading, I am certain you and I have many opinions in common. I subscribe to the N.Y. Post, which one can acknowledge is “tabloidish,” but describes real N.Y. City life and the Post’s editorial staff certainly offers solid opinions pertaining to U.S. governmental problems. “Fox News” also makes an outstanding contribution to public awareness of the issues confronting the country.
You may recall the vital contribution Worcester’s Provost John Masterman made to the winning of WWII; he was a key figure, as I remember, in organizing the counter-espionage effort against the Nazis. I write you now concerning a problem nearly of that magnitude.
Rupert Murdoch, Chairman, N.Y. Post 1211 Avenue of the America New York, N.Y. 10036
That problem is this: the man now occupying the White House is likely Constitutionally unqualified to hold the office. As an adopted American, you will have studied the U.S. Constitution better than many Americans, and from P.P.E. studies know that the Constitution has flexible clauses and hard, literal clauses. One of the latter is the requirement of Article II, Section 1, which states: “No person except a natural-born citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of the President.”
There are indications that Obama cannot meet that requirement. As an attorney, I facilitated a lawsuit (Hollister vs. Soetoro et al.) in the United States District Court (D.C. Circuit) demanding that Obama produce his birth certificate or satisfactory substitute evidence. There are about 20 similar lawsuits across the nation. In my case, U.S. District Court Judge Robertson (a Clinton appointee), who summarily dismissed the case, and is rumored to be seeking an Obama appointment, wrote that Obama’s eligibility had been “blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry.” In other words, he accepted internet “blogs” in lieu of actual evidence.
He ordered me to “show cause” why I should not be sanctioned for promotion of a “frivolous” lawsuit. (It is significant that, although dismissed, none of the twenty odd similar legal actions have been designated by the responsible judge as “frivolous.”
Other lawsuits have usually been dismissed for “lack of standing” including a lawsuit brought by Presidential candidate, Ambassador Alan Keyes. If anyone has standing, it is an actual Presidential contender. I provided Judge Robertson 37 pages of explanation as to “why I should not be held in contempt” and he decided to “reprimand” me instead of his threatened sanctions. That case is now under appeal.
Any rational person with even partial knowledge of the facts must know that Obama-cum-Soetoro is desperate to conceal something he does not want known. I believe he is hiding the fact that he and his campaign conspired to assert eligibility for the Presidential office to which he well may not be entitled. In other parts of the world, this would be known as a coup d’etat.
Yet, “mainstream” news services, members of officialdom, judges, including justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have all failed to demand documentation to prove or disprove Obama’s qualifications to serve in the White House.
It is as if a 53% vote is a substitute for an actual determination of the legal qualifications of Obama to be President. It is also evident that consequential people in America all believe the “vetting” of qualifications to be a presidential candidate should have been someone else’s responsibility. Revelation of this massive collapse of the fundamentals of the electoral process (ensuring candidate eligibility) at this point would make some very important people look hopelessly incompetent and inept.
Sadly, that includes your “Fox News.” There are reports that top management of Fox instructed its commentators to stay away from the subject – a strange position for a service that deservedly won a reputation for “fair and balanced” reporting. I cannot believe that you would issue such an order, with your good sense. Was it Roger Ailes or someone else? When I worked with Accuracy in Media (AIM) several decades ago, news manipulation by Ailes never filled the staff with confidence. On May 1, Sean Hannity referred to Ailes as his “boss!”
It is also disturbing that a report circulates that a Saudi national who bought enough stock to win a seat on the board of Fox’s parent company, a Saudi prince, asked you to stop Fox from referring to Muslim youth unrest as “Muslim” riots – he boasted later at a conference in Dubai, that after a phone call to you, thirty minutes later, Fox removed the banner from the bottom of its screen, “Muslim” riots. Given this revelation, many FOX devotees are wondering why the eligibility issue has been ignored by your network.
This constitutional question is one of vital importance to the U.S. It is not as if we wanted to startle our contemporaries with actions calculated to stir up our contemporaries as you once did at Worcester with your bust of Lenin. Or as I did when ruffling feathers of our stuffy dean (who guarded the door of “his” library from allowing anyone actually to touch one of his rare books). After you left for Australia to tend to family problems, I hung a huge American flag from the windows of the Nuffield Building on the 4th of July. The dean’s order (conveyed to me by my scout) still rings in my ears, “Take that damn thing down!”
The “natural-born” clause in our Constitution is a rigid, not a flexible clause. In that respect, it is analogous to the banning of “cruel or unusual” punishments, a clause dear to the hearts of our founding fathers. They certainly heard tales from their grandfathers drawn directly from English experience of ingenious cruelties accompanying the crime of “Regicide” after “dictator” Oliver Cromwell died peacefully in his bed. The fact that the English could not devise a way to govern themselves without inviting the king back may suggest that you modify somewhat your prediction (which I read somewhere) that this will be the last British generation that will live under a monarchy! I recall the first review of my educational “progress” at term’s end in “Hall” at Worcester when David Mitchell described my understanding of English history as limited to “King John was a bad king!”
Since you are now an American, and a good one, too, I have no doubt that you will seek to support the Constitution every way you think wise. Consider that, having won election on a campaign that promised “openness and transparency,” Obama now has spent close to $1 million for concealment of his birth and academic records, which are the only means to prove his eligibility. A birth certificate would cost less than $20.00 to request from the State of Hawaii.
Obama has produced no documents at all that would support his claim to eligibility to office. Is it no longer responsible to claim that “the public has a right to know the truth?” Moreover, even if born in Hawaii, as he claims, Obama’s travel to Pakistan (when Americans reportedly were banned from travel there) in 1981 raises other, complicated issues.
Why did his supporters produce a misleading “certification of live birth” instead of an actual vault birth certificate? Forensic experts have testified that the Certification of Live Birth is a forgery; written on a laser printer, when such printers were not available in 1961.
This evokes shades of Richard Nixon’s problems with typewriters (not just once, re: Alger Hiss; but a second time, when Nixon was caught back-dating documents for the I.R.S.) It makes me proud that in his secret tapes, Nixon referred to me, saying, “Fire the son-of-a-bitch, he’s done this before!” – a reference to my testimony before the Senate against incompetent or dishonest Nixon appointees, such as Helmut Sonnenfeldt (known locally as “Kissinger’s Kissinger) who failed confirmation as Deputy Secretary of Treasury because of my testimony before the Senate Finance Committee.
I also testified against the first “career” foreign service officer ever to fail confirmation in the 182 year history of the U.S. Senate: Howard Mace, who was Director of Personnel of the Department of State, who lost his appointment as Ambassador to Sierra Leone. Senate testimony may ultimately prove useful in this Obama matter, despite the composition of the Congress at this time.
Nixon’s firing order directly led me to study law at Howard University, the prestigious largely African-American University in Washington, D.C. Nixon’s denunciation of me, in fact, boosted me in the eyes of the Dean at Howard and got me to this point.
In conclusion, I can tell you this as fact. America badly needed your brilliant creation: Fox News. But if Fox News really is to be a voice for rational conservatism in the United States, it cannot ignore this vital constitutional question: We have a man occupying the White House who refuses to disclose the very documents that would legitimate his Presidency. Was it not a cover-up that undid Richard Nixon? Please instruct your personnel from Roger Ailes on down that they are encouraged (not forbidden) to report all of the news, including that pertaining to Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
With best regards, your supporter, friend, and admirer, John D. Hemenway
Yes, it's all nonsense. Wake up and smell the coffee, you've been had!
medicineman
New Member
I say, give him some more time. If we don't get a public option out of the medical quagmire, we'll know we've been had. Changing the private sector will be like putting lipstick on the proverbial pig.
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
Truer words have never been spoken. Good thing you don't understand "proverbs", too.
PS- You frequently comment on your advanced age. Who managed to keep you alive, thus far? Single payer health care? Or have you just always been in perfect health?
medicineman
New Member
I'm a Viet Nam vet, hence the true single payer medical, But, I also have teamsters retirement medical and medicare now, so I'm pretty well covered. When you read my posts about health care, rest assured it is not about me, but about all those un-insured and underinsured that are getting fucked each and every day by the greedy fuck insurance companies and HMOs.Truer words have never been spoken. Good thing you don't understand "proverbs", too.
PS- You frequently comment on your advanced age. Who managed to keep you alive, thus far? Single payer health care? Or have you just always been in perfect health?
CrackerJax
New Member
Your entire retirement is based on someone else's dime...... no wonder you can't be objective... 
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
If people are uninsured, how can the insurance companies be to blame?
- Status