100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: KEEP INELIGIBLE Barry OFF 2012 ELECTION BALLOTS! | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Well, the thing about Obama is that he was born in Hawaii. His father was a student in Hawaii at the time of Obama's birth. His parents were wed in Hawaii shortly before his birth. There are records for all of this. Plus notice of his birth was published in two Honolulu newspapers - a matter of public record which can be verified through periodical archives. All of these records and documentation prove the Kenyan birth certificate was a fake. Did Obama live in multiple places when he was young? Yes, he did, but that was after his biological father had divorced his mother, leaving yet another record in Hawaii. The move to Indonesia did not occur until Obama was 6 years old, and he only stayed there until he was 10, one year short of the required minimum residence for Indonesian citizenship. So the one remaining question has been dual citizenship. Because of Kenyan law, Obama did indeed have the right to claim Kenyan citizenship through his biological father. However, Obama never did claim it which is a matter of both U.S. and Kenyan documentation. That's because Obama would have had to file paperwork with both renouncing U.S. citizenship. There is no such documentation within either government, causing Obama to lose any claim to citizenship in Kenya. Any remaining issues are a matter of reading citizenship laws, which I personally have done. Hence I know anyone here can do the same. With McCain, the situation is different in that he was born in another country to American parents, one of whom was serving in the U.S. military at the time. Since the term "natural-born citizen" has never been clearly defined with U.S. law (including the Constitution), the debate is over whether McCain qualifies due to parentage while his father was deployed overseas. If U.S. citizenship laws regarding the Canal Zone had been altered just a few months sooner, there would be no question as to McCain's citizenship status at all. So the debate over Obama's citizenship is nothing more than a witch-hunt. It has nothing to do with clarifying the term "natural-born citizen" within U.S. law, otherwise McCain's case would receive more attention. Instead, this is about simply crucifying Barack Obama because: a) he's half-black, b) he's Muslim, and c) he's a Democrat. The issue did not surface just recently. The first surfaced in 2008 during the Democratic primaries. In fact, the initial questions of Obama's birth were linked to Hilary Clinton's campaign, not the Republican Party. However, it is Obama's opponents outside the Democratic Party which have allowed the accusations to persist, the famous being Donald Trump. If some people do not want to believe any of this, I can't make them do the research themselves. They certainly aren't going to believe anything I tell them. They'll only be convinced by seeing it for themselves. All I can say is that enough documentation exists, and not all of it is from government sources. Kudos! ..but, I still think we should disband! Drop the SS crap. Everyone is a name. A place. Not a number. Leave that for assembly lines. xD except there is more than one John Smith or Jim Brown,, etc,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did you know that there is a better case against Sen. John McCain's citizenship status? He was born in Panama, but because of the laws regarding the Canal Zone, McCain did not receive citizenship until months after his birth. Because he was not born a citizen under territorial laws, it is questionable whether he is a natural born citizen despite having American parents. This issue was brought up in 2008, but it had not been nearly as publicized as the questions surrounding Obama's citizenship status. That's called a double-standard. Come to think of it, how do we you are a natural born citizen? If we cannot believe any documentation you provide because of the government, then all we have is the word of whatever witnesses you provide. But how do we know they aren't lying? In fact, how do we know that your parents were U.S. citizens? Perhaps we should strip you of your right to vote until you can furnish indisputable proof of your citizenship. Maybe I should be stripped of it too, for the same reasons. My God! Perhaps we should strip everybody's right to vote until they can prove absolutely beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are indeed U.S. citizens. Uh-oh, that would disqualify every elected official from public office. In fact, we would have to disband the government because without any eligible voters, we can't hold any elections. Not to mention, we can't even find any eligible candidates because they cannot adequately prove citizenship. All because we cannot trust the government to even furnish accurate proof of our births. thank you so much I thought I had been slipped crazy pills why dont people see the double standard in proof if any of us had a document with a state seal for ANY right or privilege in this country only to be denied and told to provide further proof and then had SWORN statements from those state officials that the document was valid and accurate,, and were still told ''we dont believe you'.,....we would have a FIT..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The courts will decide if Hussein is eligible to hold office.
But, afore he leaves, check all those spoons to see if he been burnin' crack. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gotta love those birthers. Eyup. Just as Einstein said, "Insanity is pursuing the same course of action over and over again, expecting a different result." -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
except there is more than one John Smith or Jim Brown,, etc,,,,, Jim Brown... ...did he play on the Bears or the Browns? Hm. Maybe it was the Vikings? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thank you so much I thought I had been slipped crazy pills why dont people see the double standard in proof if any of us had a document with a state seal for ANY right or privilege in this country only to be denied and told to provide further proof and then had SWORN statements from those state officials that the document was valid and accurate,, and were still told ''we dont believe you'.,....we would have a FIT..... Not me! I'd ask which islands aren't 'claimed territories' yet. I'd live there. :P Just saying.. Don't want my awesomeness in your country? How much to buy that one? xD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eyup. Just as Einstein said, "Insanity is pursuing the same course of action over and over again, expecting a different result." -Kerry O. ..but that's what politics is, ain't it? Or does a worsening result count towards a 'different' result? Well, I guess so. :/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
except there is more than one John Smith or Jim Brown,, etc,,,,, Jim Brown... ...did he play on the Bears or the Browns? Hm. Maybe it was the Vikings? I thought he was the king of soul, actually,,lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
except there is more than one John Smith or Jim Brown,, etc,,,,, Jim Brown... ...did he play on the Bears or the Browns? Hm. Maybe it was the Vikings? I thought he was the king of soul, actually,,lol ..James Brown? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gotta love those birthers. Eyup. Just as Einstein said, "Insanity is pursuing the same course of action over and over again, expecting a different result." -Kerry O. Oh you mean like we do, voting in the same corrupt politicians over and over again expecting something different? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no, the question of whether he is actually ELIGLIBLE to hold the Presidency isn't relevant at all........... 
You're not the only one that tires of all the nonsense. Kleisto, you need to go back to read my post in this thread. You entered a bit after the fact. I saw it, and quite frankly I think they are lying. I don't trust them as far as I can throw em. They've lied to many times to be credible to me now. hey have proven themselves untrustworthy over and over again, so pretty much anything that will come from them is gonna be suspect to me. If they tell you something is good, chances are it's bad, if they tell you something true, it may not be at all. Call me what you will for that, but when they have shown a penchant for deceit many times over, they don't deserve my trust. The fact that the media has taken to calling people who questions this, "birthers" says something also. It tells me they don't have other arguments to back up their claims, so they must resort to insults instead to make us look stupid. They do it all the time. If what they say is true, it'd stand on its' own, there would no need for that. it doesnt matter who we 'trust', it matters who the law establishes as reliable sources when you have the STATES government verifying a document, is a citizen gonna have substantial 'evidence' that they are somehow in volved in a conspiracy to 'lie'? what court case have you EVER heard of where a state government entity is found guilty of such conspiracy and deceit? You just proved my point. There's a reason the courts always tend to side in favor of government, and telling the truth has nothing to do with it. And in the rare case the courts DON'T, it's buried and never heard about again, just ask Jeanniebean for examples of that. Im proving the hypocrisy , not a point the statement that we dont 'know' people havent lied or conspired because thats what people do,,,,then refutes any reason to believe those who are contesting his eligibility they are 'people' who might have agendas too it just amazes me that people are so DETERMINED to try to prove something that is almost impossible to prove , why its so important for them to do so with THIS president,,,,, that the HAWAIIAN state officials would lie ,but disgruntled citizens and lawyers who have some peculiar personal hatred for this president wouldnt,,,,is a ridiculous argument and a ridiculous case When all government has shown me is a propensity to lie and cover up many times, you bet your *** I'm going to question them. And it's not just this president either, it's the system as a whole that we hate. This is just a sign of the problems. Regardless we're not going to go away no matter how much you may want us to, we demand the truth, and aren't gonna settle for anything less. Maybe you wanna drink the kool aid you're being fed but we're damn sick of it. And you still proved my point anyway, the courts by and large are in the backpocket of the government, very rare is it anymore they rule in our better interests. THAT's why you never hear of cases like you spoke of. yep, some want the 'truth',,the one they believe I think this applies to you more than me, you and others like you are afraid to face the reality that your government doesn't care about you like you think. It would require a total overhaul of what you know and believe, and it scares you, so you cling to what you know instead, no matter how irrational. It is quite common. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gotta love those birthers. Eyup. Just as Einstein said, "Insanity is pursuing the same course of action over and over again, expecting a different result." -Kerry O. Oh you mean like we do, voting in the same corrupt politicians over and over again expecting something different? Maybe I didn't use those exact words.. ..but I so said that first. :/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 01/09/12 11:16 PM
|
|
Oh no, the question of whether he is actually ELIGLIBLE to hold the Presidency isn't relevant at all...........
You're not the only one that tires of all the nonsense. Kleisto, you need to go back to read my post in this thread. You entered a bit after the fact. I saw it, and quite frankly I think they are lying. I don't trust them as far as I can throw em. They've lied to many times to be credible to me now. hey have proven themselves untrustworthy over and over again, so pretty much anything that will come from them is gonna be suspect to me. If they tell you something is good, chances are it's bad, if they tell you something true, it may not be at all. Call me what you will for that, but when they have shown a penchant for deceit many times over, they don't deserve my trust. The fact that the media has taken to calling people who questions this, "birthers" says something also. It tells me they don't have other arguments to back up their claims, so they must resort to insults instead to make us look stupid. They do it all the time. If what they say is true, it'd stand on its' own, there would no need for that. it doesnt matter who we 'trust', it matters who the law establishes as reliable sources when you have the STATES government verifying a document, is a citizen gonna have substantial 'evidence' that they are somehow in volved in a conspiracy to 'lie'? what court case have you EVER heard of where a state government entity is found guilty of such conspiracy and deceit? You just proved my point. There's a reason the courts always tend to side in favor of government, and telling the truth has nothing to do with it. And in the rare case the courts DON'T, it's buried and never heard about again, just ask Jeanniebean for examples of that. Im proving the hypocrisy , not a point the statement that we dont 'know' people havent lied or conspired because thats what people do,,,,then refutes any reason to believe those who are contesting his eligibility they are 'people' who might have agendas too it just amazes me that people are so DETERMINED to try to prove something that is almost impossible to prove , why its so important for them to do so with THIS president,,,,, that the HAWAIIAN state officials would lie ,but disgruntled citizens and lawyers who have some peculiar personal hatred for this president wouldnt,,,,is a ridiculous argument and a ridiculous case When all government has shown me is a propensity to lie and cover up many times, you bet your *** I'm going to question them. And it's not just this president either, it's the system as a whole that we hate. This is just a sign of the problems. Regardless we're not going to go away no matter how much you may want us to, we demand the truth, and aren't gonna settle for anything less. Maybe you wanna drink the kool aid you're being fed but we're damn sick of it. And you still proved my point anyway, the courts by and large are in the backpocket of the government, very rare is it anymore they rule in our better interests. THAT's why you never hear of cases like you spoke of. yep, some want the 'truth',,the one they believe I think this applies to you more than me, you and others like you are afraid to face the reality that your government doesn't care about you like you think. It would require a total overhaul of what you know and believe, and it scares you, so you cling to what you know instead, no matter how irrational. It is quite common. the truth that the government doesnt care about us, I believe, as government is an entity the truth that noone in a position of government cares about us, I dont believe, as it defies the likely odds Im not scared of people not caring about me, not anymore than others are 'scared' of not living in a utopia where they do whatever they want whenever they want with the only rule being survival of the fittest,,, I just know that caring is a characteristic that isnt exclusive to any career or industry, which necessitates that NOT CARING isnt either,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im not scared of people not caring about me, not anymore than others are 'scared' of not living in a utopia where they do whatever they want whenever they want with the only rule being survival of the fittest,,, Breaking this down... You are not scared of people not caring about you. Comparison to this is: Others not being scared of living in a lawless, dog eat dog, utopia So... You are scared of not being cared for.. or.. ..are you saying people don't fear a lawless world? I'm confused. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im not scared of people not caring about me, not anymore than others are 'scared' of not living in a utopia where they do whatever they want whenever they want with the only rule being survival of the fittest,,, Breaking this down... You are not scared of people not caring about you. Comparison to this is: Others not being scared of living in a lawless, dog eat dog, utopia So... You are scared of not being cared for.. or.. ..are you saying people don't fear a lawless world? I'm confused. they are the same thing, a world where NOONE cared about me , would be a world where NOONE cared about anyone but themself, and a world where everyone just focused on what they wanted exclusively.... and yes, Im scared of that happening,,,,but its not as simple as being 'scared' of not being cared for in general, I dont need EVERYONE to care for me, but I do prefer those with authority to have a general 'concern' for being fair and considerate,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
they are the same thing, a world where NOONE cared about me , would be a world where NOONE cared about anyone but themself, and a world where everyone just focused on what they wanted exclusively.... and yes, Im scared of that happening,,,,but its not as simple as being 'scared' of not being cared for in general, I dont need EVERYONE to care for me, but I do prefer those with authority to have a general 'concern' for being fair and considerate,,, Well, thank you for clearing that up.. ..and confusing me with something else. However, we both know if I ask.. I'll become even more confused. Thus, I shall refrain. :P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
they are the same thing, a world where NOONE cared about me , would be a world where NOONE cared about anyone but themself, and a world where everyone just focused on what they wanted exclusively.... and yes, Im scared of that happening,,,,but its not as simple as being 'scared' of not being cared for in general, I dont need EVERYONE to care for me, but I do prefer those with authority to have a general 'concern' for being fair and considerate,,, Well, thank you for clearing that up.. ..and confusing me with something else. However, we both know if I ask.. I'll become even more confused. Thus, I shall refrain. :P 
and I will try to retire for the night,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodnight. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who is John Galt?
And what is Kleisto's standard - his litmus test - for separating truth from falsehood? Because as of yet, none of us have been able to find a standard he will accept. Without a standard, there is no truth because everything comes under suspicion, including the existence of my hand, attached to my body, and typing this message upon my laptop. So it would be quite helpful in better understanding Kleisto's point of view if he would clue us in on what standard he uses for judging truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Truth:
the state of being the case; the body of real things, events, and facts You have a hand. Truth. You can move this hand. Truth. You can also prove it is attached to your body. Truth. However. "Everyone on Earth has a hand." Would be a statement; and for this case, an opinionated one heard from a outside source. By outside, meaning simply; not you. i.e.; The media tells you that and says it is fact. That is not a 'truth'. Even if we knew nothing of the said existence of 'amputation' or 'birth defects'. The only truth that those like me will accept would be to seek out every single human living on the planet and see their hands. When it is discovered that all people do in fact have a hand; then it is now a 'fact', or a 'truth'. That is the type of truth thinking I seek. Not taking truth because 'he', 'she', 'they' told you it to be so. Most arguments have been resourced from another source. That is something not acceptable with this frame of mind because you only take truth as what you, yourself, can prove to be just that. Everything else is just an opinion, or a statement to only be taken at said value. That is the very fabric of an idea that many can accept because they tend to associate everything into the idea that nothing is true; ergo , your statement about a hand. At the same time and on the same aspect; you telling me you have a hand doesn't necessarily mean you have a hand. It just means you are telling me you have such. For all I know, it could be a speech recognition software program; or you could be extremely talented with your toes. Therefore.. What I believe it boils down to is this one simple idea: These two sides are both very strong opinions in those who holds them minds and an 'acceptable' agreement to each will never be truthfully made. One will always doubt the other. This is an argument, or debate, or whatever you wish to refer it as, that I have seen at least 35 times since I joined on New Years Day. That, IMO, is the best way I think I can try to describe both positions, as I, being the individualistic patron I am, take neither side wholeheartedly, because my opinions are to diverse. To put it even more as blunt as I can to prove that this type of debate is both pointless and a waste of time allow me to tickle some fancies with one more analogy. You post a thread: The rose is red. His position states that he has never seen a rose, and thus, the rose is not red until he sees one. You take a rose from your garden and hand deliver it to him. He would still not accept this as truth, because it is no longer in its natural environment; and thus, the concept of tampering said rose to fit your proclamation, is far more likely because of his distrust of the very source of the argument. Henceforth: The only way to prove to him that the rose is indeed red would be to take him to the very source of it; i.e., the garden, and show him where this garden of roses thrives. Even despite this... He may still refuse to accept this as truth because of the simple fact you are the source, that is your garden, and there is the possibility that the entire garden has been tampered to fit your statement. Thus, you would then have to present a seed from an outside source for him to grow his own roses; however, the cycle would begin all over again, because... Who is this source? I know him not! In conclusion... This is an argument that will never reach a proper conclusion. It has two sides that are far to variant of each other and are too 'stubborn' if you will to alter their view to accept one or the other as 'truth'. Thus the very definition of truth should be changed. Truth: What an individual proclaims in his own judgment to be fact. Because ultimately, that's what truth is. I believe that is the best way I can describe the difference between your two opinions and if I am wrong, I am more than positive you will let me know. :P - fin. |
|
|
|
|
