Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Discuss Presidential or Prime Minister elections for all countries here.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

The basis of that ruling is what's known as an argument from ignorance. For example, if you don't send me all your underwear, you admit that you wear female undergarments. Given that I've received none as of yet, it's admitted you are a little fruity. :)

ETA: Naturally Biden would replace him if something did happen to him, in the worst case.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester;1033116 wrote: One would think but he would have gotten into the VP unconstitutionally. Will he be accepted as the Pres, and then who do you think Biden would pick to be his VP?

Hillary?


Given that Hillary's supporter is waging the lawsuit, and her husband appointed the judge, I don't think most democrats would see that as a legitimate choice.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Accountable »

She did come in second for the nomination. :yh_think
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:36 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Nomad »

Jester;1033116 wrote: One would think but he would have gotten into the VP unconstitutionally. Will he be accepted as the Pres, and then who do you think Biden would pick to be his VP?



Hillary?


The DNC would probably have to convene then re-nominate and I dont think theres any question they would stick with Biden. He himself did not participate in an unconstitutional act.

Anyway it appears to be a moot point perpetuated by right wing zealots.

See Below:



Born in the U.S.A.

August 21, 2008

Updated: August 26, 2008

The truth about Obama's birth certificate.

Summary

In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.

Analysis

Since we first wrote about Obama's birth certificate on June 16, speculation on his citizenship has continued apace. Some claim that Obama posted a fake birth certificate to his Web page. That charge leaped from the blogosphere to the mainstream media earlier this week when Jerome Corsi, author of a book attacking Obama, repeated the claim in an Aug. 15 interview with Steve Doocy on Fox News.

Corsi: Well, what would be really helpful is if Senator Obama would release primary documents like his birth certificate. The campaign has a false, fake birth certificate posted on their website. How is anybody supposed to really piece together his life?

Doocy: What do you mean they have a "false birth certificate" on their Web site?

Corsi: The original birth certificate of Obama has never been released, and the campaign refuses to release it.

Doocy: Well, couldn't it just be a State of Hawaii-produced duplicate?

Corsi: No, it's a -- there's been good analysis of it on the Internet, and it's been shown to have watermarks from Photoshop. It's a fake document that's on the Web site right now, and the original birth certificate the campaign refuses to produce.



Corsi isn't the only skeptic claiming that the document is a forgery. Among the most frequent objections we saw on forums, blogs and e-mails are:

The birth certificate doesn't have a raised seal.

It isn't signed.

No creases from folding are evident in the scanned version.

In the zoomed-in view, there's a strange halo around the letters.

The certificate number is blacked out.

The date bleeding through from the back seems to say "2007," but the document wasn't released until 2008.

The document is a "certification of birth," not a "certificate of birth."

Recently FactCheck representatives got a chance to spend some time with the birth certificate, and we can attest to the fact that it is real and three-dimensional and resides at the Obama headquarters in Chicago. We can assure readers that the certificate does bear a raised seal, and that it's stamped on the back by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka (who uses a signature stamp rather than signing individual birth certificates). We even brought home a few photographs.







The certificate has all the elements the State Department requires for proving citizenship to obtain a U.S. passport: "your full name, the full name of your parent(s), date and place of birth, sex, date the birth record was filed, and the seal or other certification of the official custodian of such records." The names, date and place of birth, and filing date are all evident on the scanned version, and you can see the seal above.

The document is a "certification of birth," also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate, but their short form has enough information to be acceptable to the State Department. We tried to ask the Hawaii DOH why they only offer the short form, among other questions, but they have not given a response.

The scan released by the campaign shows halos around the black text, making it look (to some) as though the text might have been pasted on top of an image of security paper. But the document itself has no such halos, nor do the close-up photos we took of it. We conclude that the halo seen in the image produced by the campaign is a digital artifact from the scanning process.

We asked the Obama campaign about the date stamp and the blacked-out certificate number. The certificate is stamped June 2007, because that's when Hawaii officials produced it for the campaign, which requested that document and "all the records we could get our hands on" according to spokesperson Shauna Daly. The campaign didn't release its copy until 2008, after speculation began to appear on the Internet questioning Obama's citizenship. The campaign then rushed to release the document, and the rush is responsible for the blacked-out certificate number. Says Shauna: "[We] couldn't get someone on the phone in Hawaii to tell us whether the number represented some secret information, and we erred on the side of blacking it out. Since then we've found out it's pretty irrelevant for the outside world." The document we looked at did have a certificate number; it is 151 1961 - 010641.



Blowup of certificate number

Some of the conspiracy theories that have circulated about Obama are quite imaginative. One conservative blogger suggested that the campaign might have obtained a valid Hawaii birth certificate, soaked it in solvent, then reprinted it with Obama's information. Of course, this anonymous blogger didn't have access to the actual document and presents this as just one possible "scenario" without any evidence that such a thing actually happened or is even feasible.



We also note that so far none of those questioning the authenticity of the document have produced a shred of evidence that the information on it is incorrect. Instead, some speculate that somehow, maybe, he was born in another country and doesn't meet the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural-born citizen."



We think our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, who also dug into some of these loopy theories put it pretty well: "It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice of the world’s biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything’s possible. But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what’s reasonable has to take over."

In fact, the conspiracy would need to be even deeper than our colleagues realized. In late July, a researcher looking to dig up dirt on Obama instead found a birth announcement that had been published in the Honolulu Advertiser on Sunday, Aug. 13, 1961:



Obama's birth announcement



The announcement was posted by a pro-Hillary Clinton blogger who grudgingly concluded that Obama "likely" was born Aug. 4, 1961 in Honolulu.



Of course, it's distantly possible that Obama's grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday. We suggest that those who choose to go down that path should first equip themselves with a high-quality tinfoil hat. The evidence is clear: Barack Obama was born in the U.S.A.

Update, August 26: We received responses to some of our questions from the Hawaii Department of Health. They couldn't tell us anything about their security paper, but they did answer another frequently-raised question: why is Obama's father's race listed as "African"? Kurt Tsue at the DOH told us that father's race and mother's race are supplied by the parents, and that "we accept what the parents self identify themselves to be." We consider it reasonable to believe that Barack Obama, Sr., would have thought of and reported himself as "African." It's certainly not the slam dunk some readers have made it out to be.

When we asked about the security borders, which look different from some other examples of Hawaii certifications of live birth, Kurt said "The borders are generated each time a certified copy is printed. A citation located on the bottom left hand corner of the certificate indicates which date the form was revised." He also confirmed that the information in the short form birth certificate is sufficient to prove citizenship for "all reasonable purposes."

–by Jess Henig, with Joe Miller

Sources

United States Department of State. "Application for a U.S. Passport." Accessed 20 Aug. 2008.

State of Hawaii Department of Health. "Request for Certified Copy of Birth Record." Accessed 20 Aug. 2008.

Hollyfield, Amy. "Obama's Birth Certificate: Final Chapter." Politifact.com. 27 Jun. 2008.
I AM AWESOME MAN
User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

FactCheck.org does not carry more authority then a court of law, Nomad. There is no consequence to faking out fact check, is there?:thinking:



It really is curious that they just didn't produce and go on legal record with their proof once and for all.. it should have taken five minutes of one of their legal staffs interns time...:sneaky:



Have someone ask McCain, if you want... I bet they have the documents at the ready -just waiting to be asked...:D
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:36 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Nomad »

[quote=flopstock;1033214]FactCheck.org does not carry more authority then a court of law, Nomad. There is no consequence to faking out fact check, is there?:thinking:



Of course. But the document exists thats why its not in the news. If it were a real issue not just a BTS conspiracy it would be forefront in the news.
I AM AWESOME MAN
User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

Nomad;1033230 wrote:

Of course. But the document exists thats why its not in the news. If it were a real issue not just a BTS conspiracy it would be forefront in the news.


Then why didn't they answer and produce it? a law clerk could have run it in... they didn't. there are 8 suits around the country.. this would have resolved them all presumably.. yet they didn't produce..:thinking:
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
G-man
Posts: 4534
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:13 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by G-man »

source

Despite rumors circulating on the internet, a decision has not been reached by the judge in the lawsuit pending against Barack Hussein Obama in Federal Court in Philadelphia.

[...]

The confusion appears to be caused by the “proposed” orders that are typically attached to a motion, when filed by a party. When the Plaintiff in the Philadelphia case, Philip Berg, filed a motion asking the court to determine that Obama admitted the allegations of the lawsuit by not responding, he attached a proposed order. If that order is signed by the judge, it would have the result that is being spread through the internet. Until that point, no ruling has been made.


Signature text removed at the request of a member.



Participate in The unOfficial Forum Garden Scavenger Hunt 2009!



User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Galbally »

What a bizarre story. My god, if this is what the Republicans are banking on to ensure Obama doesn't get in, then the term "clutching at straws" comes to mind! :thinking:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

Galbally;1033360 wrote: What a bizarre story. My god, if this is what the Republicans are banking on to ensure Obama doesn't get in, then the term "clutching at straws" comes to mind! :thinking:




no dear... this was stirred up by a hillary backer... can't you even believe it??:rolleyes::wah:



'we the people' crack me up sometimes...:D
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Oscar Namechange »

So why doesn't Barry Ali hussain Osama go all out to prove it??

It's his own shirking that is causing all the outrage.

It's nothing to do with who has raised the debate... it's the proof that counts.

Just because it was a Clinton supporter who has raised this, means nothing. Any citizen could have argued this. He needs to prove it once and for all.

Where are the hospital records of his birth?





Saudi Arabia no doubt???
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:36 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Nomad »

Jester;1033783 wrote: Well so much for discussion...



Something so easily proved, and he so staunchly refuses to present his actual birth certificate to prove it demonstrates that he is hiding something. It's probably that he never regained his citizenship following being adopted.



But, it doesn't matter, there is hardly anything left of the constitution anyway, its been whittled down and not followed so much that the document isnt about we the people any more, its about the special interest liars that would rather bury the truth than have it come to light.



There is something really wrong in america when no one verifys basic facts such as this.



I am about to return from leave to active duty, where I am oath and duty bound to follow the UCMJ and the all those appointed over me including the POTUS and it may very well be that If Obama is elected unconstitutionally I will have to make a choice about whether to honor the office of the president of the united states or the man in the office. Under Clinton I followed orders and honored the office but couldnt even look at him or hear him as he spoke. I have more respect for Barack Obama than I do Clinton, yet I wont honor Barack Obama in any capacity if he gets in office till this issue is settled in a court of Law.



Some of you are laughing and think this is funny or some desperate attempt to thwart the man because he is hated, and for me thats just not the case. I'm not someone who can look the other way on matters of justice, it's just not in me. When I return to active duty and I cross January 20th and this issue isnt settled in court I may have to turn myself in to the provost and refuse to do my duty for an unconstitutional president. My oath is to protect and defend the constitution, and I wont serve an unconstitionally elected president.



My career is on the line, my service record is on the line, and my personal honor and integrity is on the line.




I respect that.

Theres a but though....

Technically your serving the Commander in Chief but the movement in its entirety is far reaching beyond the initial order.

The purpose as a whole has little to do with your actual obligation to the President and more to do with objectives already in place.

If that makes sense.....I know what I mean.
I AM AWESOME MAN
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester, might I remind you the fundamental principle of the justice system is that a person is innocent until proven guilty ... not vice versa.
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Oscar Namechange »

yaaarrrgg;1036686 wrote: Jester, might I remind you the fundamental principle of the justice system is that a person is innocent until proven guilty ... not vice versa.


So why does he not just prove the doubters wrong?? It's simple. Here we have registration of birth either by the hospital or the mid-wife attending the home birth or follow up birth.

Where are these records?????

It makes one awfully suspicious does it not??????
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
qsducks
Posts: 29018
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:14 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by qsducks »

G-man;1033349 wrote: source

Despite rumors circulating on the internet, a decision has not been reached by the judge in the lawsuit pending against Barack Hussein Obama in Federal Court in Philadelphia.

[...]

The confusion appears to be caused by the “proposed” orders that are typically attached to a motion, when filed by a party. When the Plaintiff in the Philadelphia case, Philip Berg, filed a motion asking the court to determine that Obama admitted the allegations of the lawsuit by not responding, he attached a proposed order. If that order is signed by the judge, it would have the result that is being spread through the internet. Until that point, no ruling has been made.


Philip Berg is the biggest A$$hole in Philly. Always grasping at straws and running against the usual people. He's a freekin moron. Sometime the papers let him run "propaganda" in the editorials.
User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/484146/-/tlhnhg/-/



US Judge rejects Obama-born-in-Kenya claim



By KEVIN KELLEY, Nation Correspondent in the USPosted Sunday, October 26 2008 at 14:31



A US federal judge on Friday rejected a lawsuit claiming Senator Barack Obama is ineligible to seek the presidency because he was either born in Kenya or is a citizen of Indonesia.



The US Constitution requires that a person be born in the United States and be a citizen of the country in order to be eligible to serve as president.



Judge Richard Barclay Surrick ruled that Philip Berg, an attorney in the state of Pennsylvania, lacked standing to bring such a suit.



The claim filed by Mr Berg, a supporter of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, is one of several desperate attempts by Senator Obama's opponents to block what appears to be his increasingly likely victory at the polls on November 4.



Segments of the US right wing will be disappointed by the court decision thwarting this move to depict Senator Obama as less than an authentic American.



Many of the same extremists have sought to link Senator Obama closely to Prime Minister Raila ................
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

what does 'lacks standing' mean?:-2
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

never mind...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php? ... geId=79086

Judge dismisses Obama birth certificate lawsuit

.............

In a 34-page memorandum that accompanied the court order, the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick concludes that ordinary citizens can't sue to ensure that a presidential candidate actually meets the constitutional requirements of the office.

Surrick defers to Congress, saying that the legislature could determine "that citizens, voters, or party members should

police the Constitution's eligibility requirements for the Presidency," but that it would take new laws to grant individual citizens that ability.



"Until that time," Surrick says, "voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring."..............
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Oscar Namechange »

Jester;1036830 wrote: Apparently it doesnt matter, I heard today that on friday the case was dropped. The judge ruled that it was both frivolous and that the filer did not show damages enough to file a claim such as he did.

So, instead of an answer to a very important question we have nothing.

The proof to me will be in which name he uses when he swears the oath of office.

If he is honest and uses his legal name (Barry Seateo) instead of his alias (Barack Hussein Obama), I might be pursuaded to give him the benifit of the doubt.

You may not know the Jester principle, it says, when you hide the truth your probably lying.


What will happen when he swears in to the name of "Barry Hussain".????
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

oscar;1036792 wrote: So why does he not just prove the doubters wrong?? It's simple. Here we have registration of birth either by the hospital or the mid-wife attending the home birth or follow up birth.

Where are these records?????

It makes one awfully suspicious does it not??????


What you should be asking is why Berg isn't being taken seriously by the judge or the defendants? That's the question you should ask yourself.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester;1036839 wrote: Yeah that means Surrick has no balls...


It's a good thing we got away from the lynch-mob system.
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester;1036856 wrote: Excuse me that wasnt his ruling read the link that Floppy posted. The common voter cant sue. Isnt that stupid? Talk about disenfranchisement...


As I understand you can sue but must establish harm from the action. Berg didn't establish anything, except that he was a nut job with a laundry list of demands. :)

McCain could sue, and probably could make a good case that he had standing (since he's going to lose the election) ... but he of course knows that it's a frivolous lawsuit, and he'd be laughed out of court.

ETA: I also find it interesting that you don't respect the judge's decision. If he agrees with you, you respect the decision, if he does not, you attack the judge. Do you see the bias in all this?
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester;1036892 wrote: It's an elaborate system of big words and BS that keeps the common person in the dark... feel like a mushroom yet?


I was more than satisfied with the documents that Obama released directly on the web to everyone. Don't you think the state department in Hawaii would have refuted this if it's a forged document? Are they in on it too? Do you think there's some sweeping conspiracy from coast to coast?

I'm not sure how much more proof he can provide. If you have a paper copy, you'll just claim it's counterfeited. If an expert verifies that it's for real, you'll just attack the expert's opinion. The reason is because you have allowed your hatred of a person to cloud your judgement on this issue. :)

However I will leave you with some words of wisdom:



Always remember, others may hate you. But those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself.

-- Richard Nixon

Remember that God has enabled you to become an example of love, forgiveness and brotherly coexistence ... I call on you not to hate because hate does not leave a space for a person to be fair and it makes you blind and closes all doors of thinking and keeps away one from balanced thinking and making the right choice.

-- Saddam Hussein

User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15897
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Bryn Mawr »

Jester;1033045 wrote: This week in federal court in Eastern Pennsylvania a legal case declared Barack Obama to not have legal US citizenship. He is therefore neleigable to seek the office of the POTUS.



Argue the merits of the case on the other thread:

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=41046

This thread asks two questions:

Since Barack Obama is not a US citizen what who should he/democrats call to replace him?

If Barack Obama continues and illegally and unconstitutionally becomes POTUS, how will congress and our laws act on this process of electing a man that is technically ineligable to be President?


How can a court in a sub-division of one state of the union rule on a matter affecting the whole union? Surely the only appropriate jurisdiction would be a federal court?
User avatar
guppy
Posts: 6793
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 5:49 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by guppy »

I know one thing.i started reading along on this a while back..and am very curious to the outcome..surely, surely..the democratic party checked out his citizenship before endorsing him....if they didnt..oh my gawd..what a waste of time and money..that could have been spent endorsing a legal citizen of America as president..if this turns out to be he isnt elegible..It astounds me that he got this far...without anybody knowing..:-3
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15897
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Bryn Mawr »

guppy;1037243 wrote: I know one thing.i started reading along on this a while back..and am very curious to the outcome..surely, surely..the democratic party checked out his citizenship before endorsing him....if they didnt..oh my gawd..what a waste of time and money..that could have been spent endorsing a legal citizen of America as president..if this turns out to be he isnt elegible..It astounds me that he got this far...without anybody knowing..:-3


Which makes it so unlikely as to be unbelievable.
User avatar
flopstock
Posts: 7406
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:52 am

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by flopstock »

Bryn Mawr;1037246 wrote: Which makes it so unlikely as to be unbelievable.


Would someone question a U.S. senator running for president? Fact of the matter is that unless someone showed up with ...oh... say a british/french or austrian accent, I don't know that we would ever question citizenship.



We know that Arnold is foreign born, there was talk about changing things so that he could run, at one time. For some reason I think Dukakis's parents were imigrants... but even then there was no question raised about him, that I am aware of.



It's just not one of those things you think about... until someone, somewhere, says... now wait a minute..:thinking:
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.

Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6

User avatar
guppy
Posts: 6793
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 5:49 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by guppy »

[quote=Jester;1037248]Agreed, but stranger things have happened.



I think the problem is that the certificate he used to file for eligibility is not a legal birth hard copy, so now its being questioned. It is a widely accepted legal document though, and thats why its typically good enough to be proof.



But with something like this I want verification of the real thing and I think the adoption in indonesia legality needs to be reviewed and verified that he has legal citizenship.[/quote



oh i definitely agree...
yaaarrrgg
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:29 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by yaaarrrgg »

Jester;1037221 wrote:

My personal opinon is that Barack is a socialist who is wrong for this country, he will take us down the road of extreme taxation by taxing small business, and settling the cost of the recovery of this recession clearly on the shoulders of trickle down taxation on goods and services when the small business raise thier prices for goods and services or go out of business. He'll add to the deficit, reduce the mission of the military and give the terrorist a free green light to rebuild. He and Powell will inact their inneffective doctrine of sanctions that do nothing to the enemy but punish the common person trying to live under them, anbd do nothgin tot change the export of terrorism from those countries.

Obama is a tax and spend typical, socialist democrat, he is much like Jimmy carter, think back to Jimmy's years, will ya? We had economic recession and a weak foriegn policy buy a pacifist wuss. It got us attacked by terrorists and ruined the livelyhoods of most of the common people livign on wages under $$70G/year. Farms in our area went belly up right and left, and there wasn't much work to be had in the towns.

Thats a carter/obama presidency all over again. It's basically Carters second term.




Well, that's a much better reason to vote against Obama. As long as we are not personally attacking him and just talking about his policies, I won't suspect a personal dislike of the guy was the motivating factor.

I do disagree though with the assessment that he's a "socialist." Obama's views on economics are very similar to Warren Buffet's. Warren Buffet pays, for example about 19% in taxes, where as his employees that make less than him pay about 33%. I don't think that's fair, and neither does Buffett. Now unless you are willing to call Buffet a socialist, I don't think that label means anything. But surely, the guy must understand something about economics and human nature to be the wealthiest guy in the U.S.

Most small businesses are likely to see a tax cut under Obama.

Carter gets a lot of blame for crippling the economy, but it's largely an unfair criticism. What he inherited was a bad situation (peak oil, inflationary pressures from Nixon price controls, going off the gold standard) and eventually Reagan got the credit for turning the economy around. The only significant thing Reagan did was import a lot of oil to push the peak oil problem off to a future generation (which we are seeing now). But consider this ... had Kerry been elected in 2004, he likewise would have gotten blamed for the economy tanking. But that had been in the works for quite some time.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15897
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Barack Obama's Unconstitutional as POTUS

Post by Bryn Mawr »

flopstock;1037258 wrote: Would someone question a U.S. senator running for president? Fact of the matter is that unless someone showed up with ...oh... say a british/french or austrian accent, I don't know that we would ever question citizenship.



We know that Arnold is foreign born, there was talk about changing things so that he could run, at one time. For some reason I think Dukakis's parents were imigrants... but even then there was no question raised about him, that I am aware of.



It's just not one of those things you think about... until someone, somewhere, says... now wait a minute..:thinking:


The party putting him up for election would check him out six ways from Sunday - not just for eligibility but also for any past history. To do any less would be gross negligence not to say dumb.

Return to “Presidential Elections Campaigns”