Image

OFF: Obama Admits He Was Born in Kenya!

User avatar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... whKuunp8D8

I have never seen this before, Comrades, maybe you have.

I, I, I just don't know what to say here.

Perhaps you can help me?

User avatar
Comrade Pamalinsky - this is simply not the CURRENT TRUTH. That's all there is to it.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

User avatar
PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TO THE

BIRTH CERTIFICATE COPY FUND
(Help Obama Prove His Citizenship)

urgent.jpg

User avatar
PROG OFF: Is that first clip authentic? It looks mashed up and you can't see his face when he says the key words...

The sad part is that even if he was legally elected, every single thing he has done since is treason and he should be arrested, tried and sentenced to 57 years of roadside garbage cleanup (1 year in each of these great United States).

PROG ON: Stupid Birthers! They won't let us kill babies but they bitch and moan about the ones that didn't get aborted!

User avatar
Well, I dunno, Comrades but, here's what Aretha Franklin has to say. i tend to believe her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK155B2 ... re=related

User avatar
[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]

May Krasnodar offer up a really crappy scenario ?

1. Impeachment of Obama is impossible because the Democrats control the Senate.
Just like with Bill Clinton, they won't rock the boat during an election year.

2. Obama, who is always looking out for #1 as his first priority, doesn't want to live under any threat of future legal action. He also wants his post-office gov't perks.

Therefore, there is the distinct possibility that if he is not re-elected, Dear Leader Barack Hussein Obama will resign from office sometime during the first two weeks of Jan. 2013.

Starting Nov. 5th ,the lame-duck President could seek revenge for his rejection by way of issuing " executive orders" and pardons.

That would make our national treasure, Joe Biden , acting President. Biden would then be free to pardon Obama from any and all crimes against The Constitution as well as the people of the United States. ( see Gerald Ford & Nixon )

Under this scenario, Obama could just walk away .... with Secret Service protection and a healthy pension.

Pretty slick.

And who knows... Joe Biden just might win the Nobel Peace Prize for his actions !


[img]images/clipart/Prog_On.gif[/img]

( But surely he is a man of honor, as he has so often shown us. I know that he would never do anything such as I have laid out. Right ? )

User avatar
Good God, Kraz, I never thought of that. (I think I'm gonna faint.)

User avatar
Never underestimate the wrath of a full-blown, rejected narcissist !


User avatar
This clown is a lifelong liberal from Penn. His assistant is a felon in violation of California parole.
He likes to file frivolous lawsuits and crusades for money. He never does anything, legal or otherwise, against dear leader.
His law license may have been pulled, I have no up to date info.

User avatar
Image
I yield to no one in opposing the re-election of President Obama (and in having previously opposed his election in 2008), yet the strength of those desires does not blind me to facts pertaining to the claims that Obama is not a "natural born citizen." Videos (and articles) challenging what the Republican Governor of Hawaii confirmed in 2008 contain so many specious arguments that it's tiresome that they continue re-surfacing, and this video is no less specious.

First, NOWHERE in the U.S. Constitution does it require that for a person born in the United States to be deemed a "natural born" citizen it must be also shown that both of such person's parents were already United States citizens.

Read it for yourself-- It's not rocket science:
The Fourteenth Amendment states:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (Italics added by me] Source: https://archives.gov/exhibits/charters/ ... 11-27.html . (This was not a situation such as a child being born in the U.S. with both parents being foreign diplomats and thus immune from criminal prosecution under laws of the United States and thereby subject to diplomatic laws allowing their removal as personnae non gratis.)

This section applies disjunctively to two classes of "persons": (a) those "born" ... in the United States" and (b) those "naturalized" in the United States. Other provisions of the Costitution confer upon Congress the power to define, and prescribe requirements for, "naturalized" citizenship, but NOWWHERE does the Constitution limit the term "born" with language to limit its meaning to a person "born" of parents having U.S. citizenship (by birth or otherwise.)

For a court to construe the Constitutional recognition of citizenship to "All persons born ... in the United States" as impliedly requiring that such persons' parents must be citizens would constitute what most of us favoring common-sense interpretation of the Cosntitution would unhesitatingly (and correctly) characterize as "legislating from the bench."

It's not rocket science to discern that a person aquiring U.S. Citizenship by the process of being "born" in the United States is a "natural born" citizen. The Founders were not using "natural born" to distinguish vaginal deliveries from Caesarean-section deliveries but rather to the process of being "born" at a location within the United States.

It should be reasonably obvious to anyone not blinded by political/ideological opposition to Obama that Michelle Obama's reference to Kenya as Barack Obama's "home country" was no different than when many of us as Americans refer to countries of our parents/grantparents etc. as our "home" countries. It's just a figure of speech.

The audio snippets of Obama repeating accusations made by others (e.g., "I was born in Kenya") were obviously not asserted by Obama as true but rather for the purpose of describing the accusations. Limbaugh does this (quite effectively) quite often when he says with sarcasm: (I'm paraphrasing): "We conservatives just want children to starve," etc. when he's in the process of mocking his opposition's accusations against him in particular and conservatives in general.

Regarding the adoption issues, for centuries, a child born in the U.S. of one parent with American citizenship and the other parent with a foreign citizenship thereby acquires dual citizenship. It it true that an American citizen can lose his/her citizenship by renouncing it or by adopting the citizenship of another country in which the laws of such other country require such renunciation for citizenship to be granted/recognized in such other country, but a parent can't renounce the American citizenship of the parent's minor child. Only the child can do that after reaching majority (adulthood).

These kinds of specious claims and arguments serve Obama best by enabling his supporters to paint all his opponents with the same brushes with which creators of videos such as this one deserve to be painted.

Finally, that there may be some arguable flaws in the process by which Obama's subordinates recently published a "long form birth certificate" doesn't alter the fact that none of such flaws is competent to undermine the fundamental question of whether he was born in Hawaii rather than merely whether the process of proof involved a number of relatively easily explainable flaws.

There are, no doubt, many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans whose birth records evince flaws and errors. Starting typing data onto a form on one typewriter and then making corrections on a different one or making corrections by reinserting the papber back into the same typewriter and then failing or being unable to precisely realign the paper on the platen with whatever was the original position both vertically and horizontally. Many people today forget the imprecision of the old typewriter instruments and the manner in which people used them-- especially when they're in a hurry or concentrating on other things.

A different question remains unanswered pertaining to his college records. Inexplicably, the same media that demanded the most trivial details about George W. Bush's college records seems to suffer from a total lack of curiosity regarding why Obama has refused to release his college records. it's certainly legitimate to demand that he authorize release of all such records. Absent his doing so, one could legitimately wonder whether some or all of the funding for such college attendance may have rested upon assertions of the foreign nationality of his adoptive father and his earl-childhood education in madrassas in Indonesia.

We should all be mindful of an important fact of reality in any debate-- making weak arguments diminishes a yet-unpersuaded listener to give proper credit to our strong arguments. Making weak arguments is self-defeating.


--KOOK

User avatar
Dear Kook,


[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img]I am most honored that you chose to inhabit my new post and spend some serious effort in your reply.

I am not a "birther", per se. But, I am quite "befuddled" by the hidden documents "O" appears to have. Why hide, I ask?. Why, indeed! A reason for this could make the case for his impeachment! Not that this will happen, but instead, will lessen his credibility.

I am terrified by what his re-election might assuredly bring to our country! I wish to bring this question up in the most honest way I can. I do not wish to befuddle anyone, or be befuddled myself.

The whole issue is most perplexing. And dire. I say this to you most respectfully.

User avatar
Dear Pamalinsky,

Image
I owe YOU an apology and I hereby apologize to YOU. What do I mean? In expressing my disdain (contempt would be a better word) for the proponents of the Obama-isn't-a-natural-born-citizen claims (hereafter "OIANBC" claims), I failed to make clear that I was intending to direct my disdain/contempt towards them and not you.

The person most directly behind, and responsible for, the OIANBC claims is Jerome Corsi, who, among other things, has previously lent support to outlandish (and demonstrably bogus) 9-11 Truther theories claiming the U.S. government brought down the twin towers. Even Ron Paul has pandered to supporters of the moral outrage which that theory constitutes.

For our side to appear to lend support to (or grant credence to) the OIANBC claims just gives ammunition to Obama supporters seeking to persuade independents (a large percentage of whom we know to be extremely ignorant of history in general and politics in particular since they glean most of their "knowledge" on the subject from what they see/hear in the popular culture and can be motivated in 2012 -- as they were in 2008-- by the Left and the Same-Stream Media to vote for Obama and leftist politicians supporting him) that most of us opposing Obama are either lunatics or bigots or both.

Our side needs (and the country needs) for the coming election in November to be, and to be perceived as being, a wholesale repudiation of Obama's (and the Left's) collectivist philosophy and not as a triumph of "birthers."

In a battle for hearts and minds of people "outside our (political) choir," it's strategic folly to adopt the tactic of making every conceivable argument against one's opponent now matter how weak the argument because doing so makes the less-informed targets of our efforts of persuasion more likely to discount our strong arguments.

Weak tactics can (and often do) destroy a strong strategy.

Just my opinion, which I hold and express with what is probably an insufficient degree of humility. No one's perfect-- that's my excuse/rationalization. (I also need to write shorter sentences.)

--KOOK
Last edited by KOOK on 3/25/2012, 5:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason for editing this post: typo (and probably still didn't find them all)

User avatar
Kook!
I do so love you! Your clarity soothes my asthmatic lungs! And heart! I breathe easier now! Thank you, my dear friend! I love your laser-like thoughts, even though you may use longer-than-necessary sentences, according to you. (I do the same thing and am doing my best to break the habit. So far, so good!)

Your clarification is a balm to my heart!


User avatar
ThePeoplesComrade wrote:
greys for pres.jpg

Comrade Peoples Comrade,

Why do you torture me so? I've repeatedly asked you not to display my twin brother's picture. I guess he and I may have to appear at your residence some dark evening and create some missing time. My twin brother looks a lot like the shape/form that I've adopted except that his head is even bigger (because he has more gray matter). Watch your back. On the other hand, you may enjoy the Cosmic Joy Ride in our highly-futuristic Algae-Powered star-ship.

--KOOK

User avatar
Beam me up Kookie! And fire up those warp drives. We have an out of this world campaign to run. Ron Paul, eat your heart out. Let's scat before Dennis Kucinich sees us.

User avatar
ThePeoplesComrade wrote:Beam me up Kookie! And fire up those warp drives. We have an out of this world campaign to run. Ron Paul, eat your heart out. Let's scat before Dennis Kucinich sees us.

Since you alluded to Scotty, and while we're on the subject of aliens (including the Star Trek type), the now-deceased actor who played Scotty was an alien (Canadian)-- In fact, he was a "Canadian Hero of the D-Day Enterprise" (I hope Google Videos still work here):


--KOOK

User avatar
ProgOff.jpg
Personally, for me whether he's a natural born citizen or not has always taken a back seat to "why all the lies and forgeries?" His ballyhooed "long form birth certificate" is demonstrably a forgery, as is his selective service card. Anyone who hasn't seen the press release by Sheriff Arpaio really owes it to themselves to go here and watch it. The people doing the investigation aren't Barney Fife types, they're professionals, and there is really no doubt whatsoever that the "birth certificate" was forged using software, and done recently.

Again, to me the real question is "Why?" What is so bad about this man's origins that he and the powers that be will do this? Why does he have a Connecticut social security number when neither he nor his alleged parents ever lived there?

I also find the recent report by the retired mailman who delivered to the Ayers family many years ago quite interesting.

The bottom line is that I believe we have a true Manchurian candidate in the Oval Office who was groomed at least from early adulthood and possibly earlier to be President in order to take down this country. He just yesterday told Russia's Medvedev - the comment was caught on live microphone - that he'll have "more flexibility" to deal with things after his election. I wonder just how flexible he's planning to be?

If they're successful in this obviously long range plan, what we've known as the United States of America will most likely be over soon after November's election. The fact that whomever is pulling the strings hasn't even bothered to produce higher quality forgeries, as in the birth certificate, suggests either an arrogance that's amazing or a belief on their part that the deal is sufficiently done that it doesn't matter if it's found out.

"May we live in interesting times."
ProgOn.jpg

User avatar
The Natural Born Citizen clause as stated in the Constitution:

NaturalBornCitizenClause.jpg

Source

It depends on what the definition of is, is. In other words, "I never had sex with that woman".

I wonder if the Supreme Court has defined sex?

We all thought prior to Bill Clinton that oral sex was sex, but we were wrong. (If your wife doesn't fall for it, give her a correct and proper Muslim beating and yank her ears).

What is the Current Truth Definition of "Natural Born Citizen"? That is what counts in the Progressive Lexicon.

Accusations of forgery concerning the submitted birth certificate misunderstand the correct procedures for virtually authenticating Current Truth. In other words, if Natural Born Citizen requires being physically born within the borders of the United States, this is what proof would look like.

Narrow and unprogressive minds have difficulty with Innovative Truth ™.

User avatar
Why don't these idiots get it? The state is supreme! Reeducation camps or firing squads await those who do not agree. States choice!

User avatar
Image
R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote:
ProgOff.jpg
...
Anyone who hasn't seen the press release by Sheriff Arpaio really owes it to themselves to go here
...

Why does he have a Connecticut social security number when neither he nor his alleged parents ever lived there?

I also find the recent report by the retired mailman who delivered to the Ayers family many years ago quite interesting.
...


As one who has seen the press release and video released by Sheriff Arpaio (as well as having studied numerous other analyses and videos about the long-form birth certificate), it seems reasonably obvious to me that the ocr-scanning/layers analyses as presented in that video (as well as several others previously released/published) set up straw men and then knock them down. I don't believe the methodology employed in such videos would render such analyses admissible in a courtroom (assuming the judge were to correctly apply standards governing admissibility of proffers of such evdience under the Rules of Evidence pertaining to the admissibility of scientific/expert-opinion evidence).

I don't think Arpaio actualy understands this-- i.e., I think he's been persuaded by "expert" evidence without understanding its flawed nature. The assertion that "anyone who hasn't seen [Arpaio's release and the accompanying video opinions]" ostensibly implies that "anyone" who has done so (and is not a blind Obama supporter) would thereby know Obama was not born in Hawaii. Considering myself to be included the descriptive term "anyone," in "anyone [who has seen] ...," I must say that my existence refutes the assertion. I'm certainly not, and have never been, an apologist for Obama, so I won't waste time refuting any implication that my opinion constitutes a blind or obtuse loyalty to Obama.

It's at least theoretically possible that the then-Republican Governor of Hawaii knowingly and falsely said she had seen the original and was confident of the correctness of her assertion that Obama was born in Hawaii. It's at least theoretially possible that she is stupid, was unable to perceive that the original certificate she viewed was a forgery created decades ago, or that she's a part of some conspiracy to enable a non-natural-born citizen to become President. I don't buy any of such theories.

I've also seen a number of videos and image-exemplars purporting to show that what is purported to have comprised the elements of the original birth certificate (from which the long-form copy is purported to have been made) was itself fraudulent. In my opinion, none of those alleged "flaws" establishes forgery. Virtually every such "flaw" is readily explainable.

Whether incompetence or errors may have occurred in the process of producing a "long form" facsimile of an original birth certificate is a radically different set of issues than the issue of whether the original (from which the facsimile was made) was fraudulently created decades ago in the era of typewriters.

Similarly, although there are ostensible flaws in the content/structure of the seclective service card, I don't find forgery to be the most likely explanation for same.

Finally, regarding the Social Security card having been issued with a number associated with Connecticut, the issues asserted by those who contend the card is fraudulent simply do not exclude other possible explanations such as other instances in which comparable "errors" have occurred in the issuance of Social Security cards.

It's my opinion that a desire to believe such frauds have been perpetrated needs to be stronger than objective analysis in order for such assertions of fraud to be deemed persuasive.
I'm familiar with the report of the mailman. His assertions seem to me to be founded mostly on conjecture. If I were a juror, I not even be close to being persuaded that his assertions are accurate. What I find more worthy of pursuit would be efforts to obtain the entirety of Obama's college and law school records.

If my recollection of what Breitbart said at CPAC before his death, information pertaining to Obama's collegiate and law school records will be forthcoming at suitable times. It appears that the initial release of one video follows the pattern set by Breitbart regarding ACORN-- i.e., a serial release of videos over a protracted time in order to afford the ACORN defenders ample opportunities to crawl further and further out on limbs of denial. It's reported that Bannon now has all those videos. I assume that thus far, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. I await the timely, serial releases of additional videos in the future with great anticipation fueled by Breitbart's assertion that the effects of the releases of such videos will be devastating.


Just my opinion.

--KOOK

User avatar
[img]images/clipart/Prog_Off.gif[/img] I received this response today from a friend who proudly voted for O.

This response is to the original video, the subject of this post.

Since Hotmail would not allow me to just "cut-and-paste". I retyped it just so you can see. Here it is:

Nice to hear from you. When you listen to the first part of the video when Obama admits he is not a citizen-tell me what you notice about video-take some time to look at it again before answering it. Ok-do you get it?

THE VIDEO IS CUT OFF MIDWAY THROUGH IT. THE FULL VIDEO SHOWS HIM MAKING FUN OF THAT STATEMENT. The Justice dept has done a full investigation of this-yes I know Eric Holder is his appointee. Why does this craziness persist? Even Newt Gingrich, who is behind some of thie, has stopped. All Obama relatives and African diplomats can't even agree on which hospital he was born at in Kenya.


Pamalinsky, an interesting paradigm started about thirty years ago with its genesis from the mid 1960's. When Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid, Womens Rights, Equal Opportunity Acts, WIC Act, Office of Economic Act, Head Start et al he commented the he just lost the democratic south for generations.

When Reagan was elected, it only reinforced this [olitical shift. He was very clever in convincing middle and poor working class that big government is ruining our lives. The right wing/tea party/wealthy/corporate interests have finessed the people that need the government the most, to do their bidding. This is not just my belief. There have been now two influential books written on the subject by historical/political scholars (no political affiliation) that illustrate how the above group uses clever spin to influence the people that need the government the most. However, these impressionable citizens are not innocents. They already have many of these biases, so it is not hard to influence them.

Pamalinsky, we hope you are not drifting towards this type of social darwinism. You are much smarter than that.

Lets email more about what is going on in our lives instead of the moronic politics of our time. It attempts to dumb us all down.

All the best

W & C


Editied to change my real name to Pamalinsky and to include the link to the definition of social Darwinism..

User avatar
Pamalinsky, it's best for all of us if we just go along with the program. After all, even The Newt™ says that there's nothing to see here, so let's just move along.

The fact that the 20th century saw 300 million people dead as a result of what they're now trying to accomplish in the USSA is JUST SILLY! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You don't BELIEVE that, do you? Probably made up by the Tea Party, to be honest. After all, WE WEREN'T THERE, now, were we?? HMMMM???

My goodness gracious, Dear Leader has PROVEN that He's Who He says He is (hard to keep up with all the necessary capitalizations here), so why should we be concerned? Shoot, a questionable Social Security Number + a questionable Selective Service card + no record of what he said/did in college + a long form birth certificate that was 100% provably constructed using Photoshop or other similar software = 0!!! Or maybe "O", but hey - move along, now. Definitely nothing to see here. I'm sure that pretty much all of us would find similar discrepancies were we to look into our credentials and official documents. Hey, that's just how it is, right?

Go with the flow, Pamalinsky. Keep your head down.

Nothing.
To.
See.
Here.

User avatar
Yeah, R.O.C.K., I'm keeping my head down. But, I have eyes on the top of my head! Just like a flounder! (bottom feeder)

User avatar
Ever read 1984? You'll see the boot as it's coming down...

User avatar
R.O.C.K. in the USSA wrote: The fact that the 20th century saw 300 million people dead as a result of what they're now trying to accomplish in the USSA is JUST SILLY! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You don't BELIEVE that, do you? Probably made up by the Tea Party, to be honest. After all, WE WEREN'T THERE, now, were we?? HMMMM???

In support of your post, I found this comment, which I like, in response to the article!

Treyvon Martin and 17 Afghans killed by the Capitalist System? That's not a very productive system. Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Joseph Stalin, Che Guevera..... now THEY had a productive system. Just wish I could remember what they called it..... oh, right- Communism!


Read more: https://dailycaller.com/2012/03/26/communists-occupiers-infiltrate-sanford-trayvon-rally/#ixzz1qKYXVYOa

User avatar

What a glorious video link! This truly says it all.

the system.jpg

We must take control of the current unfair, unjust system, tear it down and start over. The details of what we will do when control is ours is a forever progressing work and impossible to delineate in advance. We are the People, our time is now. What we will do is of no concern because we are the right people at the right time.

One glaring truth is self evident. Some people have more than others. In the end, equal and fair distribution justifies any and every mean.


 
POST REPLY