We have been debating for over four years whether now presidential candidate Barack Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Just what is a “natural born Citizen?” Why should we require that he be a “natural born Citizen?” Here I will demonstrate that the Founders and Framers, for the preservation and survival of the constitutional republic as conceived under republican principles, demanded that future presidents be “natural born Citizens” and that Obama, even if he was born in Hawaii, is not a “natural born Citizen.” This means that he is not constitutionally eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military.
- BREAKING => CNN Goldman Sachs & The Rothschild Zionist Matrix: Landmark Case ~ Rothschildism Delineated From Abrahamic Judaism!!
- Damnable U.S. Senators Send Egypt Muslim Brotherhood 20 U.S. Taxpayer F-16 Fighter Jets & 200 Abrams Tanks: While They Crucify Our Christians! Senators Must Be Stopped!!!!!!!
- U.S. Sheriffs Are…
View original post 56,836 more words
Dogma and Geopolitics 
of all things this person as done as president, crimes against humanity, the destruction of the bill of rights and constitution, NDAA, al qaeda proxies running wild, and so on, the least of my worries is if being born in Hawaii qualifies him as “natural born citizen”
it amazes me some of the priorities of people when they had all the evidence they needed to try him for treason … go figure
Not to mention the Audacity to expect our appreciation for all he has done !!
The agenda is one of self interest. The spoils of war are being distributed amongst them. Those at the top are getting filthy rich at the expense of innocent lives. Blood money…….
Pingback: Obama The Impostor From Indonesia! « Political Vel Craft
The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth. It does not refer to the parents of a US-born citizen.
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
House Report No. 784, dated June 22, 1874, stated, “The United States have not recognized a ‘double allegiance.’ By our law a citizen is bound to be ‘true and faithful’ alone to our government.” It wouldn’t be practical for the United States to claim a child as a citizen when the child’s natural country of origin equally claims him/her because doing so could leave the child with two competing legal obligations, e.g., military duty.
Fourteenth Amendment
Whatever might have been the correct understanding of “natural-born citizen” prior to 1866, the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment certainly changes the view because for the first time we have a written national rule declaring who are citizens through birth or naturalization. Who may be born citizens is conditional upon being born “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States – a condition not required under the common law. The legislative definition of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was defined as “Not owing allegiance to anybody else,” which is vastly different from local jurisdiction due to physical location alone.
This national rule prevents us from interpreting natural-born citizen under common law rules because it eliminates the possibility of a child being born with more than one claim of allegiance.
The primary author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard, said the “word jurisdiction, as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.”
This remark by Howard puts his earlier citizenship clause remark into proper context: “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”
United States Attorney General, George Williams, whom was a U.S. Senator aligned with Radical Republicans during the drafting of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1866, ruled in 1873 the word “jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment “must be understood to mean absolute and complete jurisdiction, such as the United States had over its citizens before the adoption of this amendment.” He added, “Political and military rights and duties do not pertain to anyone else.”
Last I checked Obama Sr was not an American citizen. In addition Step Father Soetoro was not an American citizen either,but an Indonesian citizen. Which as I understand is also what Barry Soetoro Jr was. He was an Indonesian citizen having become so upon his adoption and consequent move to Indonesia where he attended school and it was a legal requirement. Even if he is an American citizen he held dual citizenship. Something that is strictly forbidden by the definition of Natural Born Citizen as we have seen when it comes to holding the Office of the Presidency. So are you calling the Constitution irrelevant or just the House report from 1874. Since there has been no proof presented that said Indonesian citizenship was indeed relinquished. Mr Obama Jr./ Barry Soetoro remains a dual citizen, therefore ineligible to run or hold the office of the President of the United States of America. Do you have information otherwise? Because if you do I would love to see it and it would be safe to say that a great many Americans would love to see it as well. Since Mr Obama has chosen to seal his college records and fights tooth and nail to keep anyone from discovery I suppose we will never know. But as long as the Constitution remains the law of the land ( much to his chagrin) he is ineligible no matter what you or anyone else wants to say. I welcome the information that would prove me wrong . Does it exist? No one knows. Can you present it ? I highly doubt it.
****Please do myself and our readers the courtesy of not quoting conservative groups or think tanks opinions as fact. As we are all aware that both sides of the aisle are bought and paid for by the same criminals.
Thank you for your input and have a wonderful day!! 🙂
******* Oh btw was it just oversight on your part or strategy to opine on this re-blog and not on the original piece? perhaps in hopes that one would not have a coherent response? Or the mere fact that the author of the original piece would have shred your argument to bits? In either case it would behoove you to bring this up with him I would venture to say it would be a most interesting exchange.
Re: Howard. He said some other things, as did others who wrote the 14th Amendment. For example:
“They became such in virtue of national law, or rather natural law which recognizes persons born within the jurisdiction of every country as being subjects or citizens of that country. Such persons were, therefore, citizens of the United States as were born in the country or were made by naturalization.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).
“A citizen of the United States is held by the courts to be a person who was born within the limits of the United States and subject to their laws.” Senator Jacob Howard, Cong. Globe 39th Cong., 1st Sess, 2765 (1866).
“Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens.”-Senator Lyman Trumbull, Cong. Globe 39th, 1st Sess 498 (1866).
“Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural-born citizens.” John Bingham, Cong. Globe 37th Cong., 2nd Sess. 1639 (1862)
But the real decision on what Natural Born means is not made by one or two members of the US Congress, even if they were among the writers of legislation. The US Supreme Court has to decide what the entire congress and all the state legislators that voted for an amendment to the Constitution meant. And the US Supreme Court ruled that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law, not from natural law, and that it refers to the place of birth, not to the parents of a US-born citizen. And in the Wong Kim Ark case, which BTW was AFTER Minor v. Happersett, the US Supreme Court ruled six to two (one justice not voting) that:
“It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”
Those words say that the meaning comes from the common law, and that it refers to the place of birth, and that that was the law in England, and in the 13 American colonies, and in the early states, and under the US Constitution.
That is why Edwin Meese, Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, had this in his book on the US Constitution:
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
Notice that neither the Wong Kim Ark ruling nor the Meese book makes any mention of dual citizenship?
Re Obama being an Indonesian citizen: That can easily be checked out and disproved. The method is very simple. It is to call the Indonesian Embassy and ASK (what a novel idea!), and if you do, you will find that Obama was never an Indonesian citizen and never had an Indonesian passport. You can check this for yourself. If you call, ask for the Press Officer.
Re Dual Citizenship affecting Natural Born Citizen status:
Dual citizens of the USA are full US citizens with all the rights of every US citizen, and the dual aspect has no effect on their Natural Born Citizen status. Moreover the idea that dual citizenship COULD affect is kind of weird, and not in keeping with good conservative principles that hold that foreign laws cannot affect US laws.
Dual citizenships don’t matter for NBC status. We are a sovereign nation and get to define who is a citizen of the US. Other nations have the same right, but the fact that they pass laws that make some citizens of the USA also citizens of their countries does NOT give their law the ability to make a US citizen not eligible to be president.
Otherwise, Mexico could say that anyone born in Texas is a citizen of Mexico—and eliminate anyone from Texas ever being elected president of the USA. Or Canada could say that anyone with a Canadian grandparent is a Canadian citizen. (They do, but that does not make someone with a Canadian grandparent not eligible to be president).
Just because a child is born to two US citizen parents doesn’t mean that the child isn’t a dual citizen of another country. Some countries consider grandchildren of citizens to be citizens. (Italy, Poland, Canada, Greece, Ireland, for example).
Obama is far from the first President, vice president or candidate with dual citizenship. Spiro Agnew was born to a Greek citizen father who wasn’t naturalized at the time, and thus Agnew was a dual citizen of Greece and the USA.
Ulysses S. Grant, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford and Lyndon Johnson were all eligible for French citizenship through ancestry. Eisenhower was eligible for German citizenship up until he fought against them. And Woodrow Wilson was a dual British/US citizen at birth because despite the fact his mother became a US citizen, she was a dual citizen of Britain and the USA, and since she had not renounced British citizenship, so Woodrow was dual citizen too.
Oh, and there is some speculation that Mitt Romney might be a dual citizen of Mexico because of his father’s place of birth. But, as discussed, it does not matter for Romney,and it did not matter for Grant or FDR or Woodrow Wilson or Obama because dual citizenship does not affect Natural Born Citizen status. If you were born in the USA and your parents were not foreign diplomats and you have not relinquished US citizenship, then you are a Natural Born US Citizen regardless of the citizenship status of your parents or grandparents.
Re: “Oh btw was it just oversight on your part or strategy to opine on this re-blog and not on the original piece?”
Actually, I was not aware that there was an original piece. Please give me the WWW address and I will attempt to post there (sometimes authors do not allow people to respond to their remarks).
Re not quoting conservatives. Sorry, my error. Here are some of the SEVEN state courts that ruled on Obama’s NBC status and the one federal court that ruled on Obama’s NBC status, and the one that ruled on John McCain’s NBC status. All, as you can see, refer to the Wong Kim Ark ruling by the US Supreme Court:
“Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling: “Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency,”
“Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
“Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”
“Purpura v. Obama (New Jersey 2012) ruling: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”
“Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion. [The judge cites Hollander and Ankeny]
“Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise”
“Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”
By the way, on October 1, the US Supreme Court rejected two appeals of the last of these cases, the Farrar case in Georgia.
I am very well aware of all the controversy surrounding this issue. I am not a birther, Although I believe the Author of this piece may be. I am however, a truth seeker. There has always been a differentiation between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen and that is the issue at hand. The secrecy and legal maneuvering that has been demonstrated by this administration does no help to make oe feel confident that all is as it should be. Only that which cannot stand up in the light of day is kept in the dark. He has not been forthcoming and if it was an honest desire to satisfy the doubts disclosure would have been the quickest way. That has not been done and the legal maneuvering has gone a long way in giving an issue which would have been laid to rest a very long time ago, into a very ugly and divisive issue.
True nothing will ever satisfy the rabid birthers, however for those on the sidelies feeling uneasy wondering what he is indeed hiding it would have gone a long way to provide peace of mind.
The author of this piece and a link to the original is at the top of this post right under the title. Reblogged from Political Vel Craft:
https://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/10/30/barack-obama-is-not-the-president-of-the-united-states-he-is-not-commander-in-chief-of-the-military/
They do indeed accept comments , albeit moderated.
I weary of this issue, it has gone on fro four years and I really do not see a resolution without honest disclosure, therefore I am done. The truth and the evidence must come from him otherwise this will continue to fester. Although it may very well be a moot point since he may not get a second term. So who knows………
Thank you again for your input and you have a wonderful day !
Re: “There has always been a differentiation between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen and that is the issue at hand..”
The difference between a plain citizen and a natural born citizen is very simple. An ordinary citizen includes two types of citizen, natural born and naturalized. A Natural Born citizen does not include naturalized. That’s all. That’s the whole difference. A Natural Born Citizen must be (1) a US citizen and (2) not naturalized.
That is the entire difference. That is what the seven state courts and one federal court found on Obama and one on McCain. And all nine of them ruled that any child born in the USA other than the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born Citizen. Not one court, including Minor v. Happersett, has ever ruled that two citizen parents are required to be a Natural Born US Citizen.
Sadly, politicalvelcraft does not allow me to post. There is no longer a posting mechanism on the cite that you show, and clearly the postings of another anti-birther, ehanock, were edited and severely limited. YOU, in contrast, are to be commended for allowing the facts to be posted.
Re: “What he is hiding.” When your teacher first taught you that 2+2=4, you might have asked for clarification once or twice. If after the third or fourth time the teacher said she was not going to explain anymore, it is STUPID to say that the teacher was hiding the real facts about 2+2=4. However, that is what the rabid birthers are doing. The officials in Hawaii of both parties have repeatedly confirmed that Obama was born there, and it is further confirmed by the Index Data and the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers that were sent to the papers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961. Birthers insist that Hawaii has not given adequate proof and that they are hiding something. Well, they aren’t hiding anything. There is proof that Obama was born in Hawaii and no proof that he was born in any foreign country, or for that matter anywhere else than in Hawaii.
I am sorry that he has chosen to limit comments or remove them altogether.
Again I would like to reiterate that I am not a birther. Therefore the long form birth certificate or lack thereof is not my issue. I do not consider myself STUPID by any stretch of the imagination. I believe myself to be reasonably intelligent able to discern whatever information is laid before me.
However, I have a strong aversion to being lied to and when one goes to the lengths that Mr.Obama has it does not sit well with me. Period and end of discussion a s I said I grow weary of this back and forth which will accomplish nothing without his presenting disclosure to quell the rumors to a dual citizenship having been used in Occidental College. Until that happens he is still hiding and that is all I see. There has been minimal transparency in a situation that was created even more volatile from the lack of understanding that there was more at stake than just the Birthers. It is missing a real concern of the people what has been created is a situation that feeds on doubts. Doubts fueled by the very secretive nature that he has chosen to adopt to be added to the many broken promises. Neither you nor I can fix this. The only one who can has no interest in doing so and therefore anything we may have to say here is a waste of time, because it will never correct the problem at hand.
Thank you again for your input.
There is also the originator of all the information Political Vel Craft placed on his blog. That person is Mario Apuzzo Esq. he has this information on his Blogspot you may want to contact him with your information and see what he may have to say . As he is better equipped to counter your information an be able to give sources or reasoning’s that I am unqualified for. As I am not an Attorney and he is. In fact he is the attorney that took his concerns to court and council for Obama opted to admit that his status of citizenship no longer had any bearing on his eligibility to remain on the ballot was a moot point because he was already President.Which I find an interesting approach. Rather than prove that he indeed is a natural born citizen to the court not the people , they went the route of he is already President so we don’t have to prove anything. Please feel free to contact him and share your thoughts. I am sure he will be more than willing to address your concerns.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Apuzzo does not let me post either.
Re: ” the rumors to a dual citizenship having been used in Occidental College…”
That came from an April Fool’s article originally posted on April 1, 2009.
Re “aversion to being lied to…”
Me too, and the birthers do it a LOT, adn even Apuzzo and politicalvelcraft have repeated their lies.
They lied when they said that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born there. They lied with the various forged “Kenyan birth certificates” that have been posted, and that they repeated. They lied when they said that Obama forged his social security number–when there are MILLIONS of errors in SS numbers. They lied when they said that Obama’s selective service card was forged by Obama (It actually was forged by the person who posted it). They lied when they said that someone had to have a foreign passport to enter Pakistan when Obama went there (actually there were no restrictions on US citizens going to Pakistan in 1982 either by the USA or by Pakistan). They lied when they said that Kapiolani Hospital did not exist in 1961 (it did and the Nordkye twins were born there one day after Obama).
These are all excellent reasons to hold birthers in contempt.
Re: “council for Obama opted to admit that his status of citizenship no longer had any bearing on his eligibility to remain on the ballot was a moot point because he was already President…”
The actual situation was that the case was held in New Jersey and Obama’s lawyer took the elementary step of checking the New Jersey law and found that the law does not require a candidate for president to prove her or his eligibility. Since the law did not require Obama (or for that matter Mitt Romney, or previous presidents or presidential candidates) to prove that they were eligible, Obama did not have to.
That is New Jersey law, if you do not like it, you can ask the governor of New Jersey (a Republican) to ask the legislature to change it, but until it is changed, no one has to prove his eligibility to be on the ballot in New Jersey.
All the more reason to open up and lay bare the truth to silence the lies and allow the truth to see the light of day. The longer one tries to hide something the bigger it gets. This is something that could have been avoided, however ignoring the situation only served to fuel the flames. One must wonder why the road to secrecy was taken. Persons such as myself who only want to know the truth and set this whole thing to rest wonder greatly at the reasoning behind the barring of access to records. It was a simple matter that could have been taken care of had he cared enough about the people to understand what was at stake. It is obvious he did not and now we have this mess and no one can decipher the truth from the lies anymore because no one bothered to set the record straight the way it should have.
I do not appreciate a civil servant, President or otherwise who does not care about the peace of mind of the people and community they serve. I take issue with the sense that because he is President he is beyond reproach and beyond the obligation to the Citizens he supposedly serves. I take exception to being called a racist because I question things that do not make sense to me. Being a Latina woman of color I take exception to being treated as if my concerns are that of limbic brain function zombies who are being eaten up by their racist hate mongering. All of which has been used by democrats to silence the questions. Not a very becoming premise for those defending a President.
Actually I find it rather puzzling that everyone with a question has been categorized as either stupid birthers or hateful racists. Especially since I am a Democrat and a woman of color it is rather ridiculous. So you see Obama and the Democrats have done themselves and us a great disservice. What they have done has neither served us as a Nation nor them as a Party. It has damaged their credibility and any respect they might have held in the eyes of those of us who refuse to be told what to think, but rather think for ourselves as opposed to party line hive mind
And so this is where we find ourselves today. offended , betrayed and no longer trusting of the system or the people who represent said system.
Re: “All the more reason to open up and lay bare the truth to silence the lies and allow the truth to see the light of day.”
What allegedly hidden facts are you referring to? Obama was born in Hawaii, as has been proven overwhelmingly, and there is not a shred of proof that he was born anywhere else.
Have I ever called you a racist? I do, however, believe that Trump’s asking the first American president of mixed race for his college and graduate school grades while he DID NOT ASK his opponent, a person who is entirely white, for his grades has the feeling of being racist. Sure, there are allegations that Obama hacked around at college especially at Occidental, but Romney could have done that too.
Once again, I did not say that you were racist. I said that Trump sure appears to be. And I say that his unfair offer (Romney deserved the right to earn $5 million for charity too) certainly seems to be racist.
So, what other things do you allege that Obama is hiding? Some birthers have asked him to publish his parents’ marriage license—as if it mattered—and his passport records (but no president ever has done that, and why would it matter anyway). And the allegation that he was a foreign exchange student comes from an April Fool’s article. It isn’t very sensible to check out the fantasies of April Fool’s articles is it?
However, your original claim was that Obama is not Commander in Chief of the US Military. Want to see the photos of them saluting?
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1024&bih=606&tbm=isch&tbnid=F1_KCko1ydFfsM:&imgrefurl=http://urbangrounds.com/2010/11/salvatore-giunta/&docid=tVAloqHrRFR0TM&imgurl=http://urbangrounds.com/wp-content/uploads/Salvatore_Giunta.jpg&w=485&h=362&ei=KLaWUO6FPInA0QGhloDABQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=357&vpy=152&dur=30&hovh=194&hovw=260&tx=165&ty=100&sig=107771693290648990883&page=1&tbnh=139&tbnw=195&start=0&ndsp=12&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:72
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1024&bih=606&tbm=isch&tbnid=GZohZnBSujzzkM:&imgrefurl=http://www.theage.com.au/world/obama-locked-in-a-war-with-his-generals-20100922-15mxi.html&docid=tw748oDX2CYWDM&itg=1&imgurl=http://images.theage.com.au/2010/09/22/1942892/420_salute_2309-420×0.jpg&w=420&h=279&ei=f7aWUOjoH8-30AHR24GoCA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=109&vpy=310&dur=85&hovh=183&hovw=276&tx=208&ty=124&sig=107771693290648990883&page=1&tbnh=140&tbnw=214&start=0&ndsp=12&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0,i:81
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1024&bih=606&tbm=isch&tbnid=xTS7LhrTTcYoDM:&imgrefurl=http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/30/president-obama-welcomes-new-chairman-joint-chiefs-staff&docid=MGxqjGL3OhcDAM&imgurl=http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/imagecache/embedded_img_full/image/image_file/p093011ps-0460.jpg&w=560&h=373&ei=FLeWULieIaaR0QGjn4DQDA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=562&vpy=310&dur=2327&hovh=183&hovw=275&tx=145&ty=118&sig=107771693290648990883&page=3&tbnh=143&tbnw=232&start=28&ndsp=16&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:20,i:163
Alrighty, it seems that no matter what I state you will not be satisfied until I agree with you and think as you do . That simply is not the case. I believe these conversations have reached a point of impasse as I grow weary of stating my opinion which is mine to state and yet you want me to adopt your opinion?
At no point in time have I stated that you called me a racist . I suggest you go back and read exactly what I said and the explanation as to why I said them. As far as the commenting goes I have allowed you to post your truths which seems to be more than anyone else has done. Therefore I call it done . The comments will stand as posted and anyone reading this is free to read and make up their own minds.
I say enough is enough and let us agree to disagree. Thank you for your input and you have a wonderful day. 🙂
Thank you for letting me post the facts. I repeat, I did not say that you are a racist, and I have no reason to believe that you are a racist. But why should you believe a racist like Trump? And why believe birther sites that have published lies such as the claim that Obama’s grandmother said that he was born in Kenya? She didn’t, and the transcript of that taped interview is easy to find.
Once again, thank you for allowing me to post the FACTS, and I have the citations for the facts too, if you would like to see them.
And you too have a wonderful day.
Obama, whose birth certificate was not forged and who really was born in Hawaii NOT IN KENYA—as his birth certificate, and the confirmation of the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii, and the Index Data file and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961 and the teacher who wrote home about “Stanley had a baby” ALL show—-was re-elected president of the United States last night. He won both a majority of the popular vote and a clear majority of the Electoral College vote.
Have a wonderful day.
here’s hoping you don’t get indefinitely detained, drone crash on your head, or have a conscious about how many innocent children are slaughtered for the dying US economy … have a nice day
Come back to gloat did you ?
I suppose it will be easy for you and people like you to sleep at night not having to think of all the innocents being killed in the name of the bullshit being slung on both sides of the aisle? It’s ok and everything is permissible as long as your man won right ?
When the George Bush Administration pushed for The Patriot Act there were mixed feelings but people like you who only care about their feelings and their needing to be right welcomed it . They said only those with something to hide need fear this law. But he was a Republican so it is ok that Democrats spewed their hate and their criticisms after all he was the bad guy, right ?
Now we have Obama a Democrat your MAN. Who promised to veto the NDAA and didn’t. He lied and proved that he is a liar by sending his legal goons to overturn the stay that was placed on the indefinite detention of American Citizens. I am presuming that you are an American Citizen correct? Oh yes I forgot……if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear right ? That is an inconvenient truth that you would prefer not to deal with, right? That truth does not sit well with that little fantasy that you have created for yourself with Obama being your version of Willy Wonka and the world being your playground of everything is hunky dory as long as you get your way, right ?
I suppose all those people who have been placed on a no fly lists and on a Presidential Kill list are all horrible terrorists who need to die without due process even if they are American citizens, right ? After all Al Awlaki’s 16 year old son was just another raghead pup who didn’t deserve to live, it just so happened that he was also very inconveniently also an American. Too damn bad right? No great loss just another dead kid who meant nothing in the scheme of things. Collateral damage that no one will ever miss, right? Because now as it stands we have only the rights that the Administration says we do. The constitution no longer means a damn thing. But you like it that way don’t you?
You may gloat all you want however, I will be honest and say that it will not be here. I am done with your holier than though hypocrisy. White washing all that is done so that it sits well with your conscience. You may be able to sleep at night , but let me let you in on a little secret you may not have fathomed as of yet…… Unlike you I pray every night that I am wrong and that this country will be turned around and he is not as evil or corrupt as everyone thinks he is. Unlike you I pray that he will do the right thing and all hell will not break loose and destroy what is left of the only country I know. Unlike you, if this country ceases to be the land of the Free as I have known it to be my entire existence then I will know in my heart of hearts that I did everything to reveal the truth not just the items that sat well with me.
You on the other hand will be responsible for the ills that befall your fellow Americans and innocents all over the world being killed by unmanned drones in wars that we should never have been involved in. Many of which have been manipulated by this Administration.
I can live with my having erred on the side of truth and love for this country. Can you live with having erred on the side of ego, narcissism , hatred and disdain for human life? For your sake I hope so.
As far as your previous remarks about the Military and his Being Commander in chief I suggest you start looking a bit further outside your circles and read about Armed force personnel who have been brought to task for exercising their right to free speech and say what they feel about Obama. I also suggest to you that you might look up a group called OathKeepers. A group made up primarily by former and active military men and women from all divisions of the armed forces who voice their displeasure at the direction this country is taking under the leadership of your precious Obama.
You say you don’t like to be lied to , but you lie to yourself . You do not seek all the truth just the truth that sits well with you. And so I say to you I hope for the sake of your soul and peace of mind you are right and I am wrong because I can accept being wrong . You on the other hand will not only have to deal with being wrong , you will also have to deal with the weight of guilt for all the lives taken by your man in the White House. let us hope God spares you from it being one of your own.
Any further comments placed here to gloat or further your twisted agenda will be deleted. And yes I have that right as this is my post.
Have a wonderful Day !!