Sanchez "When Obama Shows His Birth Certificate, I'll Show Mine!"
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
mr dude
Michael
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > WTG Mark!! You have stones!!!!
>
> > mr dude
>
The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated, but I am not
convinced that our current chief executive was born in the United
States. I’d lay odds he was born in Kenya. No birth certificate and
the testimony of his grandmother stating “Mombasa” when she was asked
about Obama’s birth place. Language/translation issues exclude the
tape as being a slam dunk, but it leaves questions that were never
resolved. The president of the United States should be able to prove
as a matter of course and without any strain that he was born in the
United States.
HVAC
> On Apr 7, 11:23 am, John C TX<johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> X-No-Archive: Yes
>>
>>> WTG Mark!! You have stones!!!!
>>
>>> mr dude
>>
>> Good one Dude.
>
> The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated
Mr. Dude isn't a xenophobe...He hates everyone
equally, no matter where they come from.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
IYM
yea - I not convinced either...I mean why not just say "here it is -
see?" and put the issue to bed. What's the big deal? They require me
to show my kids Birth Cert and proof of residency, Property tax bill,
and a utility bill to register my kid to got to kindergarten, and just
about a ton of other things as well, but you are not required to show it
and have a copy of it on public record to register to run for president
of the United States? This country truly is fubar...
BTW - I have to show all that crap, including my kids damn dental
information...DENTAL! WTF?!?! that her dentist needed to sign, so my kid
can get registered in NYS...and then she gets in class and there are 3
illegal...sorry - *undocumented* kids in her class that I'm paying for
though taxes...truly messed up.
Michael
> - Show quoted text -
The government is not representative of the people. It is partnered
with big business and special interest. The republicans will say that
a cure resides in fewer taxes and less controls over their partners
with their hands in the cookie jars. The democrats will tell you the
cure lies in more social programs, more taxes for their power base,
who also wants to put their hands in the cookie jar for a free lunch.
Of course, they will also point to the fact that 4 % of the population
owns half the wealth. As if more taxes will do anything to end
neolordship. Neither of what either party is selling will fix
anything... Nor will they have the brains or balls to stand up to the
special interest groups that are responsible for horrendous foreign
policy that diminishes American people. Perhaps a guy like NJ's own
Christie on a popular ticket with a guy like Rubio might give us a
chance, but that is about it. Perhaps a "Christie like" guy can get
in there and do to the pharma industry and oil companies, special
interest what he is trying to do to the unions. Short of that, or
Teddy Roosevelt's reincarnation, we are pretty much on the way to
being a nation of surfs under the control of lordship. Next time you
get your balls felt up at an airport after your X-ray, consider what
the end game migh be.
Michael
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 08:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated, but I am not
> >convinced that our current chief executive was born in the United
> >States. I d lay odds he was born in Kenya. No birth certificate and
> >the testimony of his grandmother stating Mombasa when she was asked
> >about Obama s birth place. Language/translation issues exclude the
> >tape as being a slam dunk, but it leaves questions that were never
> >resolved. The president of the United States should be able to prove
> >as a matter of course and without any strain that he was born in the
> >United States.
>
> can be born abroad to US parent(s) and you will be a natural born
> citizen.
> --
> graybeard
Nice of you to point that out.
Obama's father was not a US Citizen by any account.
If Obama was born in Kenya, the laws on the books at the time of his
birth states that U.S. citizenship may only pass to a child born
overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the US
citizen parent was19 years of age or older. Obama’s mother was only 18
at the time. So... U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed to
him and Obama could not be registered as a “natural born” citizen. So
he would be ineligible to be the presidency pursuant to Article II,
Section 1 of the Constitution. Even if Obama could have been legally
“natural born,” that citizenship was forfit on or around 1967 when he
and his mother left for Indonesia, where Stanley Ann Dunham married
Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.
Dig ????
Papa Carl
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:458d3235-8b5e-4b1c...@d28g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Dig ????
Put on your tinfoil hat Michael...they are beaming stuff down at you...it's
a big conspiracy. BTW...I demand you post your birth certificate to this
group, I always suspected you.
Papa Carl
"graybeard" <gray...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:m5m0q69q3c0l870rc...@4ax.com...
>
> You are apparently unfamiliar with Snopes, because they have refuted
> this argument several times, including here:
>
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
>
> where they quote Hawaiian officials and others as verifying the
> authenticity of Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate, and here:
>
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp
>
> where they show that the Kenyan certificate is a badly done forgery.
>
> Only a fanatic refuses to accept any evidence, no matter how firmly
> established, which is contrary to their position, and prefers to simply
> believe unswervingly in a cause supported only by spurious claims. I
> would hope that you are a bit more open-minded.
> --
> graybeard
Definition of a fanatic...someone who has a cause, doubles his efforts,
redoubles his efforts and forgets the cause. Their aim is no longer "the
truth" it is an obsession now.
Ritchie
>
> The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated, but I am not
> convinced that our current chief executive was born in the United
> States. I’d lay odds he was born in Kenya. No birth certificate and
> the testimony of his grandmother stating “Mombasa” when she was asked
> about Obama’s birth place. Language/translation issues exclude the
> tape as being a slam dunk, but it leaves questions that were never
> resolved. The president of the United States should be able to prove
> as a matter of course and without any strain that he was born in the
> United States.
I am not convinced myself. Why not just show the BC and get it over-
with? Because they are hiding something is the logical answer.
Deadmeat
According to right wing christian nut jobs, life begins at conception.
When Obama's parents were married they were in the U.S. and she was
pregnant with Obama. Therefore, he was already a life and in the U.S.
Case closed.
Papa Carl
"Ritchie" <ritch...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1fe61e8f-9bd1-4d2a...@f2g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
The birth certificate has been shown...along with the birth announcement in
the freakin newspaper in Hawaii. You could show movies of him being born on
the beach with Diamond Head behind it and you guys would persist.
Ritchie
> "Ritchie" <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
And people are such strong supporters that they will swallow anything
they give them. Personally I don't care anymore because the he is in
there for another five years because of his sheep. I trust no one that
comes out of nowhere and gains such enormous popularity so quickly.
Ritchie
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >... I trust no one that
> >comes out of nowhere and gains such enormous popularity so quickly.
>
> --
> graybeard
And if I was around during that time I most likely wouldn't have
trusted him either :)
Ritchie
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >comes out of nowhere and gains such enormous popularity so quickly.
>
> --
> graybeard
It also describes the Antichrist :)
Papa Carl
"graybeard" <gray...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Ritchie <ritch...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>... I trust no one that
>>comes out of nowhere and gains such enormous popularity so quickly.
>
> --
> graybeard
Yup...Buddha, Mohamed and several others too, but most especially Jesus. I
don't trust politicians in general, but most definitely do not trust
conservative Republic party ones.
Papa Carl
You mean Glenn Beck??????
Michael
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
nice ad hominem...
where did i suggest a conspiracy ??? i'm suggesting that obama was not
born in the united states.
i will not post my birth certificate in a public forum, but if you
like, I will send you a scan of my birth certificate. any way... i
think you should care less about defending liberals and worry more
about getting the government back from big business and special
interest. or do you prefer fighting in a burning house ??? obama may
be well meaning, you may like his social agenda, but he nothing but a
limp dick in ice water and a lap dog considering that the governent is
run by corporation and special interst. have fun tilling the filed
for your lordship, little surf
Michael
> > with? Because they are hiding something is the logical answer.
>
> > The birth certificate has been shown...along with the birth announcement in
> > the freakin newspaper in Hawaii. You could show movies of him being born on
> > the beach with Diamond Head behind it and you guys would persist.
>
> in the spotlight. If it was truly something he wanted to go away he
> would have called a press conference & showed his birth certificate or
> freed up the state of Hawaii to release it to anyone who requested it.
> I believe he dragged his feet on this initially --I didn't follow it
> as I thought it was BS from the start--and now it just keeps the kooks
> in the spotlight.
kooks ??? how so ??? I am not a far right winger. I am not a far left
winger. I am moderate and for the most part, a social libertarian. I
have no left vs right political agenda to push here. his mother may
have given birth to him in kenya. she was without question under 19
when she gave birth to him. i am not pointing this out because I
don’t agree with his politics.
the single political agenda that i want to push is this...Put big
business and special interest in their place. Get their hands off of
capitol government. Who so ever does not understand what is going on
is content to parrot the usual household pro leftist BS or pr right
wing BS. Bush did nothing to stop the progression to neofeudalism.
Obama is doing nothing either. No black helecopter bull shit or
shadow governmet stuff. Just a matter of fact. Capitol government is
behoden to influences that are counter to the good of the American
people, the environment and democracy. Greed and self interest with
global appetites is the nature of the conspiracy. It is *a-
political*. Not a bunch of shadow figures at a secret meeting.
Obama's actual birth facts have nothing to do with it.
Michael
> largest corporations, General Electric, made $14.2 BILLION in profits in
> 2010 and paid $0.00 in federal income tax. I wonder what percentage of
> those profits is derived from US defense contracts, which of course are
> paid for with tax money taken from the rest of us suckers?
> --
> graybeard- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
and that is only one example.
Consider petrochemical companies, pharmaceutical companies,
agricultural companies, aerospace companies and their defense
contracts and so on. Add on lobby/pressure/attack groups that have
foreign policy agendas that are not in the best interest of the
American people. I may or may not agree with Chris Christie’s social
agenda, but if we don’t get a president that will go to work on
special interest and big business the way Christie went to work on
unions, double dipping and waste, IMHO, we are toast as far as being
a democracy with a relevant middle class. I’m astounded that more
people “don’t get it”. I shake my head when I hear people argue over
political window dressing these days.
Michael
>
> This is one of the best articles I've read on the distribution of
> wealth, and how it's maintained, in the US:
>
> http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
>
> That warm fuzzy feeling you will get while reading it is just the steam
> coming out of your ears.
> --
> graybeard
thanx for posting... what is hardest for me to understand is why this
is not at the forefront of public political awareness. what is also
very frustrating... i believe in a free market, private economy...
none the less... if i try to discuss what is covered in the article
above, the first words of protest I will hear is "you leftist
marxist". if i suggest that the federal government is no longer
calling the shots for the good of the people, i hear... "tea party
right wing nut case who wants to over throw the government".
the way i sum it up is this... what we have now is neo-feudalism. if
the government does divorce itself from the current lordship soon, it
never will. i'm not for over throwing the government or any far left
or far right kookology. i'm for the federal government becoming a
representative political body again. not a silent partner of the
lordship.
MZ
"Again"? When were they ever? The US government has always been
controlled by (and indeed catered to, even within clauses in the
constitution) "big business". When "big business" consisted of
certain manufacturing industries instead of service industries, it
still counted as "big business." Even when local governments were
essentially run by local shops and businessmen who would own
practically everything in a town, it still counted as "big business."
I think it's the nature of the beast. When you create a power grab,
expect those who stand to profit by it to be the first in line to
shape policy. And they'll be aided by keynesians and trickle-down
corporatists. I don't see any realistic way around it.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
many people in NJ saw little way around the 800 lb gorillas. also...
your example of local governments run by by mom and pop candy stores
and saw mills circa "little house on the prairie" does not equate
with what we have now. federal spending not representative of the
american people, foreign wars not representative of the American
people, taxation not representative of the American people. it is a
matter of extent, extremity and for lack of a better way to put it...
a good trust or a bad trust. t. Roosevelt busted up a few bad
trusts. it was done before, it can be done again. why hide your head
in the sand ???
MZ
You're right that it doesn't equate, but I don't think it's
necessarily more benign either. I'm not just talking about small
towns (although those were probably as fiefdom-like as you could
get...), but also rather large cities that were in some time periods
run by only a handful of wealthy elites. If we want to include
"church" under corporation, which in some cases might be valid, then
you have a whole other force that had much
stronger...um...representation than it does now. I'm not arguing that
there's not an elite class whose influence on the government is huge
and all-encompassing; rather, I'm arguing that this isn't exactly a
new development. I think you'd see it in even the earliest stages of
the US government, and some of these corporatist provisions were even
prompted (primarily by the federalists) to be included into the
constitution. This isn't a justification for either time period, btw.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
agree 100 % it is nothing new... it is a matter of course... where
there are people, there is self interest. the extent of it now is
what has to be considered. our next president needs to be an honest
to goodness trust buster.
Ritchie
Good luck on that one. Besides our next president is already in
office, whether we/ you / us/ they like it or not. No one is unseating
the guy from mad magazine.
John C TX
Yes kooks, read the Constitution, his Mom was American so he is
American.
John C TX
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:32:36 -0700 (PDT) John C TX
>
> <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> >> Just FYI, you do not have to be born in the US to run for President. You
> >> can be born abroad to US parent(s) and you will be a natural born
> >> citizen.
>
> >due to being born in a territory?
>
> I do recall something like that. In light of some of today's whack jobs,
> it's funny to recall that old Barry was considered an "extremist" back
> in the day.
>
> I have been intimately involved my whole life with the regulations
> regarding natural born citizenship, having been born in England during
> WWII to a US Army father who met my English mother while he was
> stationed over there preparatory to the Normandy Invasion. In fact, at
> the time of my birth, my father was fighting in France.
>
> Several years ago, when my brother (a Vietnam Vet) was applying for a
> job with the Department of Homeland Security, I received a letter saying
> that his application was being held up until I could prove that I was a
> US Citizen, since I was not born in the United States.
>
> Now I have never been known as someone who suffers fools gladly, so I'm
> afraid I shot back a response (with a copy to my lawyer) pointing out:
>
> 1. When I was born my birth was registered with the US Consulate in
> London as being the son of a US serviceman.
>
> 2. I have carried a US passport for over 60 years, a fact which surely
> must be fairly easy to verify.
>
> 3. England, far from being a spawning ground of terrorists, was in fact
> the staunchest ally of the US during the Gulf war.
>
> 4. I was amazed, but not particularly surprised, that a functionary of
> the Department of Homeland Security, apparently one responsible for
> vetting prospective employees, was not more familiar with the
> Immigration and Naturalization statutes of the United States,
> particularly as they pertain to the offspring of military personnel
> stationed abroad.
>
> I never heard back from anyone, but my brother got the job, although I
> am certain that my name appears on some bureaucratic watch list
> somewhere with the notation "Certified Smart Ass".
> --
> graybeard
CMA. Put it on your CV you pommie bastard!
:)
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
John... What dont you understand about the law ???
As I explained previously...
The laws on the books at the time of his
birth states that U.S. citizenship may ONLY pass to a child born
overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the US
citizen parent was19 YEARDS OF AGE OR OLDER. Obama's mother was only
18
at the time. So... U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed to
him if he was in fact born in Kenya. Dont take my word for it. Look
up the law. I think he was born in Kenya, despite the toilet paper
documents that have been produced.
Michael
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > As I explained previously...
>
> > The laws on the books at the time of his
> > birth states that U.S. citizenship may ONLY pass to a child born
> > overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the US
> > citizen parent was19 YEARDS OF AGE OR OLDER. Obama's mother was only
> > 18
> > at the time. So... U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed to
> > him if he was in fact born in Kenya. Dont take my word for it. Look
> > up the law. I think he was born in Kenya, despite the toilet paper
> > documents that have been produced.
>
> flying fart what the law at the time says as the Constitution trumps
> it. It says natural born it doesn't mention how you obtain that
> status which would appear to be a moot point since he has a birth
> certificate.
>
> Like I wrote Obama loves the fruitcakes chasing this as it discredits
> anything they are screaming about, that makes sense, & is counter to
> his mindset.
>
> Perhaps we should look into Washing, Jefferson, Adams etc. as they
> were not natural born citizens when they ran but citizens of the
> United Kingdom.
OK, Matlock... Check out the Constitution. Article II, Section 1.
If Obama was not a natural born citizen, he cant be the prez. The
laws on the books at the time of his birth have everything in the
world to do with him being or not being a natural born citizen. The
Constitution just states that you need to be a natural born
citizen.
To be honest, I dont think it is such a benificial law. So long as
you have lived in the USA for say 20 + years, that should be good
enough to hold the office of the prez regardless of where you came
from. Obviously that is not the law, but I dont see why a person
born as a citizen of another country cant become a real American. No
matter what Obama may or may not be as a technicality, he is every bit
an American. I have more strenuous objections to our "dual
citizens". At any rate... Obama's policies and political agendas wont
move us away from Neo Feudalism any more than McCain's would have.
Arguing contemporary Republican Party vs. contemporary Democratic
Party is just pissing up a rope.
Papa Carl
"John C TX" <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fa60dffa-e7a6-45c3...@s9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
X-No-Archive: Yes
> As I explained previously...
>
> The laws on the books at the time of his
> birth states that U.S. citizenship may ONLY pass to a child born
> overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the US
> citizen parent was19 YEARDS OF AGE OR OLDER. Obama's mother was only
> 18
> at the time. So... U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed to
> him if he was in fact born in Kenya. Dont take my word for it. Look
> up the law. I think he was born in Kenya, despite the toilet paper
> documents that have been produced.
Sorry Clarence Darrow I missed your lecture. I really don't give a
flying fart what the law at the time says as the Constitution trumps
it. It says natural born it doesn't mention how you obtain that
status which would appear to be a moot point since he has a birth
certificate.
Like I wrote Obama loves the fruitcakes chasing this as it discredits
anything they are screaming about, that makes sense, & is counter to
his mindset.
Perhaps we should look into Washing, Jefferson, Adams etc. as they
were not natural born citizens when they ran but citizens of the
United Kingdom.
Some of the biographies of Jackson are very interesting...he may have
actually been born off shore of alien partents. The reality is John, that
if The President were not black this crap would not have the life it has.
Even with the ton of readily available information debunking the birthers we
still have people calling the documents "toilet paper" with no real
justification except their own mindset and what they want to believe.
Besides, it is far more productive to clamor about this stuff than worry
about real problems.
Michael
> "John C TX" <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:fa60dffa-e7a6-45c3...@s9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
I don’t agree. His ethnic background has nothing to do with it. He
is taking heat from the right, not the left. It is motivated by
political bias, not racial. If Bush were in office during the Gulf
spill, he would have gotten nailed to a cross by the left where as
Obama got an easy pass by comparison to what would have happened to
Bush. Why ??? Because Bush's ancestors came from western Europe ???
No... Because of his connection to the oil industry and his politics.
What would have been the reaction to Katrina if Obama was in
office ??? Obama would not have been able to do anything any quicker
than Bush but Obama would not have been attacked as if he were a
Klansman. You really aught to take care before you start with this
sort of bull shit. You are recklessly quick to sick the dogs of
political correctness on the blameless. There is no such thing as
race. It is a bull shit notion. A political weapon. Perhaps any one
that is not a flaming leftist is libel to be attacked in this
manner ??? And no, I was not a Bush fan, nor am I a right wing
extremist.
Papa Carl
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4cc38314-7f14-4bce...@p16g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
And you are very quick to evaluate me. I do not like Obama...I believe he
sold out completely. He is playing the Conservative line quite nicely
without addressing any of the real issues. The fact is if we cut ALL
spending tomorrow, including defense we would still have a defecit and no
way to pay it off. You can not pay down a debt without income. Obama goes
along with the Republican myth that if we allow those with the money to keep
more of it we can create jobs and will have more revenue. When did that
ever work?
As for your argument and analogy it is totally lame...attacking a policy is
one thing...attacking the individual based on his religion or perception of
who he is as a man is a totally different issue. This is not about a policy
regarding the Gulf spill or Katrina...it is about who he is, where he is
from, his religion and the core of his being. I don't like him, but I like
the people who perpetuate this crap even less. Your logic is very narrow
and self serving. You can not justify the analogy you came up with. I
never heard of Bush being attacked as "un-American"....so get your oranges
and apples straight. It is about his being...and I believe largely about
his being black.
Michael
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeah.. there are people bashing obama because he's not part of the
wasp ascendency... i agree 100 %. sorry if i went off half cocked
again... im just saying that some people question his place of birth
based on a hand full of reported "facts" and not due to racial bs or
politics. some of those so called facts have been put down, and others
have not. given what i have read, i would not be surprised if he was
born in mombasa. i dont care where he was born beyond what the truth
is. i dont consider the matter with the same motive as one of the
birthers does. i dont think obama is a bad president. i dont think he
is a bad person. i dont wish to see him removed from office even if
he was really born in kenya. obama cant fix the larger problems even
if he has the desire to do it. im beginning to think nothing short of
a benevolent dictator can solve the larger issues but where can you
find a benevolent dictator ???
Papa Carl
I do not think the problems can be solved anymore. It went too far and the
general population does not want to face it...OMHO. I just do no think that
if Obama was white or had a "safer" name the issues of where he was born
would even come up. All the polls show a majority of self described
Republicans believe he is a Muslim and was born in Kenya. The Republican
party has harnassed the media and all of the new communication sources way
better than the left has. The left is seriously divided and has no base
anymore...again, my opinion. Fox News is powerful and they can claim stuff
they even may later admit was not true and multitudes will believe it. I
think the fact we have a Black President has allowed the crap Fox and it's
allies perpetrate to get the power it has. I'm not talking about the
obvious cross burning hooded bigots....but those who carry much the same
beliefs and lack the outward actions thrive on Fox and all of it's spin
offs. It simply is not just because a Democrat is in The White House..OMHO.
I agree with you that probably no President can fix the big issues
now....government does not belong to the people anymore.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
you see the same stuff going on that i do... the "republicrats" are
catspaws. it is prettty much the opposite of a pure fasciest
government. in our case, it is the corporations and big money that
dictate terms, not the head of state
Papa Carl
We have become locked into select views of what a "fascist" government
is....it is not that simple...corporate control, banks in control with a
puppet gov't. is a fascist system...a system that serves those special
interests I believe is what you are talking about...maybe olligarchy is a
better description.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
IMHO, fascism does not fit. With fascism, the state allows
privatization and a free market. The industrial and finical experts
are left to run their own affairs. The dictator reserves the right to
step in at any time in any way and impose controls if the dictator
sees fit. What underpins the dictators motives is the idea that he is
dong what is best for national interest as it applies to what ever
ideology the dictator has in mind. Fascism is not an *a-political*
system. We’ve got something else going on. The government is not
pulling the strings. It is being lead by the nose. The motive and
methods of the puppet masters is not political. It is most similar
that of Feudalistic lordships. Increase power and wealth by means of
subjugation and resource management. The government is becoming no
more than a inert vestige. A hollow tradition left for the surfs. Much
like a comforting religion for those on the bottom.
Michael
> His mother was an American citizen when he was born so he was an
> American citizen. I can't imagine that even if he was born outside US
> soil- & by the way where is the proof of that- that a court today
> would law on the books in 1960 was constitutional.
>
> Do your homework. The founding fathers didn't even agree on what
> natural born meant and we were still cleaning it up in the 14th
> amendment.
John... You need to do your homework in this case, not me. The
"founding fathers" ?!?!? Good grief, man. Look up the law that was
in play when Obama was born. The law was clear. If you are born over
seas to a to a non citizen and a legal citizen, the legal citizen
needs to be 19 or older in order to have citizenship legally pass to
the child. What is hard for you to understand ??? If nothing else,
the legal matter is cloudy and the issue is in doubt.
MZ
> IMHO, fascism does not fit. With fascism, the state allows
> privatization and a free market. The industrial and finical experts
> are left to run their own affairs. The dictator reserves the right to
> step in at any time in any way and impose controls if the dictator
> sees fit. What underpins the dictators motives is the idea that he is
> dong what is best for national interest as it applies to what ever
> ideology the dictator has in mind. Fascism is not an *a-political*
> system. We’ve got something else going on. The government is not
> pulling the strings. It is being lead by the nose. The motive and
> methods of the puppet masters is not political. It is most similar
> that of Feudalistic lordships. Increase power and wealth by means of
> subjugation and resource management. The government is becoming no
> more than a inert vestige. A hollow tradition left for the surfs. Much
> like a comforting religion for those on the bottom.
I don't think the politicians and government in general are as
powerless as you think, Michael. We constantly see these
recalibrations (think Microsoft anti-trust, govt pressure on fed
reserve, etc). I think the best description is that it's a symbiotic
relationship between government and business, which I think fits the
fascism description nicely (e.g. Richman's definition, here:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html). Undoubtedly, this
cooperation is partly to do with behind-the-scenes, corrupt, money,
etc, which I think is what you're implying. But I also think it's a
product of a general economic philosophy held by most politicos,
whether trickle-down as PapaCarl alluded to, or keynesianism
(remember, "we're all keynesians now"). There are plenty of people
outside the realm of influence who hold these values, and they often
don't have anything to gain by it. Bottom line: look to your left and
to your right. One of those people is a fascist. :)
Michael
> shows up in my office & propositions me, OK, maybe not, then he would
> be IMHO a natural born citizen through his mother. The definition of
> citizenship & how one can achieve it has changed. Again IMHO he would
> ultimately prevail & meet the constitutional requirement.
>
> If you don't think the Founding Fathers intent is considered on
> matters of Constitutional law then I thin it wise that we move on.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
John... This "founding fathers" business as you employ it here is off
the wall. You are too educated for me to have to detail the top ten
bastardized ideas of the founding fathers.
What matters in this case is what the law was at the time of Obama's
birth. Of course, that is only on the table if he was actually born
in Kenya. Let me say again... I'm not a "birther". I dont want the
limp dick removed from office over technicalities of the law. He is an
American.
Michael
Mark... The government is not that powerless now. IMHO, it is on the
way to becoming so. This is somthing new. And I dont agree on your
definition of fascism. In a true fascist state, the dictator calls
the shots and he is not marginalized as the coprorations aggrandize.
The "partnership" between the two is a "kleptocracy". As a matter of
course, the corporations will over take the political body. If we
dont get a real "trust buster" president next time around, we are
toast. The only electable person in American politics that I see even
approching that type is Christie.
Papa Carl
So you discount he was born in Honolulu completely? You assume he was born
elsewhere. Show me where I can read this law about being 19 years old. I
want a reference to check....Please.
Papa Carl
OH GOD...a Chirstieite....Heaven help us....give me Palin, Newt or even
Trump...but not bag od donuts with all his arrogance. You think he is a
good leader? He is a corporation.
Papa Carl
X-No-Archive: Yes
I agree that racism is partly at play here but I believe that he & his
handlers have played this card with great skill.
He/they played coy about it & still do. Why not release the state of
Hawaii to release it to anyone who requests it? Why did they drag
their feet? Why show it to the select media in Chocago at campaign
headquarters>
To me part of their logic is if anyone brought it up they are labeled
racist which helped mobilize a base both among African-Americans and
people on the fence who would view it as racist. Now it is even more
fun as he is sitting president and if you bring it p you are, as you
described, a tin foil type.
> Even with the ton of readily available information debunking the birthers
> we
> still have people calling the documents "toilet paper" with no real
> justification except their own mindset and what they want to believe.
> Besides, it is far more productive to clamor about this stuff than worry
> about real problems.
That is my point.
I frankly can't follow their "scheme"....they may think it will work, but it
isn't and I think the level of "Civil War" mentality is not as progressed as
some would think. I do believe that there are a lot of core racists out
there...people who would not for many reasons, fear being one, act on or
even declare their true beliefs but still hold those beliefs. We have a lot
of people with "attitudes" as opposed to "values" that they are willing to
take a real stand on...I wish I were wrong, I don't like what I see but I
still believe I see it. And...I do not think the folks advising The
President have done a very good job on many fronts.
JetsLife
>
> > > mr dude
>
> > Good one Dude.
>
> The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated, but I am not
> convinced that our current chief executive was born in the United
> States. I’d lay odds he was born in Kenya. No birth certificate and
> the testimony of his grandmother stating “Mombasa” when she was asked
> about Obama’s birth place. Language/translation issues exclude the
> tape as being a slam dunk, but it leaves questions that were never
> resolved. The president of the United States should be able to prove
> as a matter of course and without any strain that he was born in the
> United States.
I'd lay odds he was born on Planet Who-ston, not Jupiter or any other
outer laying planet in our solar system. That's good enough for me.
Alien presidents can't be trusted.
Michael
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
No... Im question it.
>You assume he was born
> elsewhere. Show me where I can read this law about being 19 years old. I
> want a reference to check....Please.- Hide quoted text -
refer to the language outlining the said U.S. definde principles of
jus sanguinus "right of blood", (statute by parantage) Meaning
citizenship conferred by being born to parents who are U.S. citizens
but not on US soil at the time of birth. The version that was on the
books at the time of Obama's birth states that the US citizen had to
be 19 y/o or older
Michael
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
OK... "I know what you want, you pablum puking liberal"
jk :-)
btw... he'd be great on a ticket with Rubio... *Christie-Rubio 2012*
Papa Carl
No... Im question it.
Where do I find this set of books...I'm looking all over the place and can
not find it...I do find laws referring to the individual in question,
meaning the baby, needing to declare the intent to be a US citizen by the
time THEY are 19 years old...but nothing like you are suggesting...I want to
see it...where is it...how can I find it?
Papa Carl
jk :-)
He'd eat Rubio...literally.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
papa... i never saw the actual text book itself or any legal
documnet... i saw it outlined in a few news article that were actually
debunking the people who are saying obama is not a natural born
citizen. all of the debunkers have agreed that was the actual
"statute by parantage" law on the books at the time Obama was born,
but that it does not apply because obama was born in hawaii any way.
i also would not mind holding on to a legal text book with the version
of statute by parantage that was on the books when obama was born but
i dont know where I can get it.
See below from wiki
"Statute, by birth within U.S. As of 2006. United States Federal law
() defines ten categories of person who are United States citizens
from birth. According to that law, the following acquire citizenship
at birth:
"a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof"
"a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo,
Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe" (see Indian Citizenship Act of
1924).
"a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under
the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of
twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States"
"a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of
parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been
physically present in the United States or one of its outlying
possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to
the birth of such person"
U.S. territoriesThere are special provisions governing children born
in current and former U.S. territories or possessions, including
Puerto Rico, the Panama Canal Zone, Panama, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
and the Northern Mariana Islands. There are also special
considerations for those born in Alaska and Hawaii before those
territories acquired statehood. For example, 8 U.S.C. § 1402 states
that "[a]ll persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941,
and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, are citizens of
the United States at birth".[4]
Outlying possessionsAccording to 8 U.S.C. § 1408 persons born (or
found, and of unknown parentage, under the age of 5) in an outlying
possession of the U.S. are U.S. nationals but not citizens, unless
otherwise provided in section 1401. The U.S. State Department has a
publication, Acquisition of U.S. Nationality in U.S. Territories and
Possessions which explains the complexities of this topic.
Statute, by parentage Under certain circumstances, U.S. citizenship
can be acquired from one's parents. The following conditions affect
children born outside the U.S. and its outlying possessions to married
parents (special conditions affect children born out of wedlock: see
below):[5]
If both parents are U.S. citizens, the child is a citizen if either of
the parents has ever lived in the U.S. prior to the child's birth
If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is a U.S.
national, the child is a citizen if the U.S. citizen parent has lived
in the U.S. for a continuous period of at least one year prior to the
child's birth
If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not, the child
is a citizen if
the U.S. citizen parent has been "physically present"[6] in the U.S.
before the child's birth for a total period of at least five years,
and
at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent's
fourteenth birthday."
MZ
1) The dictator IS calling the shots. If it appears that the
corporations are calling the shots, it's only because the dictator is
allowing them to. The government could (and has) shut down or
overtake any industry it wants in a nanosecond. The corporations know
where their bread is buttered, and they pay tithe annually. And like
I mentioned, as long as keynesianism is regarded as the prominent
economic philosophy, governmental bodies will have no problem giving
them free reign -- until they cross them.
2) None of this ^^^ is any different from how things were half a
century ago, probably longer. And much of it is the same as it was
two centuries ago.
Papa Carl
See below from wiki
Well....it doesn't say it here. I run a 501c3 charity. We were fortunate
enough to attract a good attorney who did the work for us pro-bono. He
specializes in that and in citizenship work. He never heard of the "19 year
old" requirement and suggested it was because The President's mother may
have been 18 when he was born....in Honolulu. This is part of a huge
problem we have in the country. Enough garbage gets passed around and made
to look like it has substance. You argued with John....he questioned it
too. If you have not seen this in an authentic formal document we need to
not say this crap...OMHO. The very core of that idea being suggested
seems to go against almost all of the existing law. The Tea Party has the
very best PR company ever devised...Fox News.
Papa Carl
"MZ" <for...@mdz.no-ip.org> wrote in message
news:f9d39e59-47f9-4adc...@22g2000prx.googlegroups.com...
Me thinks you are right.......and a dictator does not need to be one person
either.
Michael
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
no.. it does not say it there... you are correct. that is the 2006
version. i heard on NPR a legal expert that knew the law stipulated
that it used to include that the US citizen had to be 19 or older back
in obama's time. that only applied if ONE of the parents was not a us
citizen and one was and the kid was born abroad. i have read the same
thing in about ten other places on line. it is not crap because I
dont have a text book to mail you. it is not surprising that you can
not find that on line. i cant find any version of statue by parantage
on line that dates back to the 2006 revision. perhaps your legal
friend can tell us were we can find a copy of older versions.
Michael
> > the wall. You are too educated for me to have to detail the top ten
> > bastardized ideas of the founding fathers.
>
you mean my 81 mg asprin ???
> My reference to the Founding Fathers is related to the
> Constitutionality of a law that may or may not have been existence --
> I will trust you that you are right here. What I am telling you is
> that even if Obama was born overseas I could not see any court today
> not viewing him as a natural born citizen because his mother was am
> American.
If I am correct about the law at the time regarding statue of
parantage... And I believe I am... You could make a legal case. What
would the courts do with it ??? You are probably right. My original
remark stated that I thought there was a chance he was actually born
in Kenya... Not that he could or should be legally removed from
office.
Michael
Papa... That is in a true dictatorship...a real fascist state. That
is not what we have now. In our case, the corporations are bound to
outgrow the government... Rember... Our government is not a
dictatorship. People wont wind up on meat hooks or concentration
camps when the position, wealth and power of corporation/finance
reaches the point where they dont have to listen. At the beginning,
they have to play ball. Later on, they make up their own rules as
they can. We dont have a fascist system. We are not heading in that
difection either. For a fascist state, you need a totalitarian
GOVERNMENT dictator
>
> Me thinks you are right.......and a dictator does not need to be one person
> either.- Hide quoted text -
Papa Carl
You are responding to the wrong person...I just agreed and I still think
it's right. Totalitarian State does not mean ONE person....a central party
can run things as a group, be very totalitarian and very fascist
Papa Carl
X-No-Archive: Yes
> I frankly can't follow their "scheme"....they may think it will work, but
> it
> isn't and I think the level of "Civil War" mentality is not as progressed
> as
> some would think.
what it is, political manna from heaven.
>I do believe that there are a lot of core racists out
> there...people who would not for many reasons, fear being one, act on or
> even declare their true beliefs but still hold those beliefs. We have a
> lot
> of people with "attitudes" as opposed to "values" that they are willing to
> take a real stand on...I wish I were wrong, I don't like what I see but I
> still believe I see it. And...I do not think the folks advising The
> President have done a very good job on many fronts.
Racism or prejudice isn't gone but I think it is better. I think
overall people generally are less racist than they were 30 years ago.
The problem from top to bottom is that they are generally more selfish.
You can make what you want out of this metaphor....
Why is it members of PETA are more opposed to fur than they are leather?
Middle aged, wealthy women are an easier target than Hell's Angels.
That type of thing drives how a lot of people ACT outwardly....the overt
racism is tamed...Perhaps it is only my experience, but it is what I've
seen.
Michael
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
corporations and fincial institutions are "a-political". a democratic
government compramised by an economic market system that has come
uncorked is no more of a fascist state than Edward Teach's Queen
Anne's Revenge was. i'll go with kleptocracy or neo feudalism. not
fascism.
MZ
What does "economic market system" mean? And why do you consider
democratic elections and fascism to be mutually exclusive?
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mark… Why are you gumming up the works here ??? Look at the larger
point of what I am saying. I don’t agree with labeling a democracy
with a rouge economic system as a fascist political body. Of course,
the corporations and financial institutions can impose their will to
be detriment of the people, but that is not fascism. Such a system
inside of a foundering plitical system is *A-POLITICAL*. It has no
ideological gods what so ever beyond accumulation of power and
wealth. What that is can be called a feudalistic system that is over
taking a political body. In order to be called a fascist government,
you absolutely must have a central sociopolitical national ideology to
which the dictator or governing body bends the economy to comply with.
Just because the neo lordship can impose their will, does not qualify
it as fascist.
What don’t you get ???
Papa Carl
Michael...you compartmentalize things....you don't see how they
intertwine....of course a financial system can be the defacto government and
make the decisions.
MZ
What don't I get? What I don't get is what you're calling "democracy"
and "economic market system." I really have no idea what the latter
term means. I *think* you're referring to a capitalistic system, but
I'm not sure since you wouldn't clarify. If so, fascist governments
frequently operate under capitalist systems. If you mean something
else, you should say it because I have no clue what "economic market
system" means. You're not helping me out here.
"Democracy" is an irrelevant term in the discussion, IMO. You can
have socialist, capitalist, free market, communist, and fascist
systems all elected by popular vote. So I'm not sure where you're
going with that either.
Michael
> point of what I am saying. I don�t agree with labeling a democracy
> with a rouge economic system as a fascist political body. Of course,
> the corporations and financial institutions can impose their will to
> be detriment of the people, but that is not fascism. Such a system
> inside of a foundering plitical system is *A-POLITICAL*. It has no
> ideological gods what so ever beyond accumulation of power and
> wealth. What that is can be called a feudalistic system that is over
> taking a political body. In order to be called a fascist government,
> you absolutely must have a central sociopolitical national ideology to
> which the dictator or governing body bends the economy to comply with.
> Just because the neo lordship can impose their will, does not qualify
> it as fascist.
>
>
> Michael...you compartmentalize things....you don't see how they
> intertwine....of course a financial system can be the defacto government and
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes... Power brokers inside of a financial system can become a
*defecto government* ... That is not being questions. But it can not
be specifically a *fascist* government no matter how much control it
can exert. The word*fascism* should not be used as a rubber stamp for
every form of self serving government. As I explained above… To be
specifically *fascist*, you need to have a well defined sociopolitical
ideology to which the power broker(s) bends economic conditions. A
run away financial/economic system without a preceding sociopolitical
agenda that is based on ideology for the sake of collective national
good is NOT a fascist system. Call it something else.
MZ
The US economic system does not have a "sociopolitical idealogy to
which the power broker(s) bend economic conditions"? Economic
conditions are almost universally manipulated by the government, the
federal reserve, and those who stand to profit from both.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
A capitalist economic system as en entity beginning to supersede a
political system has as its base, no political or ideological gods
other than accumulation of wealth and power. The power brokers may
have individual agendas and ideologies, but the system itself has no
collective goals past accumulation.
MZ
Sure it does. any economists), is the proper way to produce a good
economy (however we want to define it). They believe that
manipulation of markets is essential, as do probably most regular
americans honestly. The marriage between government and corporation
is the natural consequence of that ideology. As I said earlier, it's
not just corporations and politicians benefiting personally from it
(although that's probably playing a pretty big part...). It's an
economic philosophy. It goes by many names, fascism being awfully
close (corporatism and state capitalism probably also fitting the
bill). Did you read that entry I posted yesterday?
Michael
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yes... i read your post from the other day...
none the less... i dont think fascism is a good fit for describing
what we have been talking about. unless accumulaton of wealth for its
own sake can be considered the primary sociopolictical ideal, then
this it is not fascism. the only example of that sort of culture that
i can think of is a fictional example... the ferengi from star trek.
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
>
> > > mr dude
>
> > Good one Dude.
>
> The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated,
Please explain what is "xenophobic".
I thought Xeno The Warrior Princess" what a GREAT TV series!!!
She is hot!!!
Ooops I looked it up:
Xenophobia is defined as the "hatred or fear of foreigners or
strangers or of their politics or culture".[1] It comes from the Greek
words ξένος (xenos), meaning "stranger," "foreigner" and φόβος
(phobos), meaning "fear."[2]
How is asking someone to show that they are legally allowed to live
someplace considered "hate" or fear?? I don't hate nor fear Mark
Sanchez yet you believe that I do hate and fear him.
If an intruder comes into my house and rapes my wife am I a
"xenophobe"???.
After all I do fear a stranger coming into my house and raping my
wife.
Actually, if a stranger comes into your home and rapes your wife and
you protest, you automatically become a "xenophobe".
Please refrain from throwing out obscure and random nonsensical words.
You are better than that. Strive to be an independent thinker and not
a drone.
mr dude (huge fan of Lucy Lawless)
HVAC
>>
>> The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated,
>
> Please explain what is "xenophobic".
>
> I thought Xeno The Warrior Princess" what a GREAT TV series!!!
>
> She is hot!!!
I liked her dykey little side-kick, Gabrielle.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
MZ
<foster...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 11:26 am, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 7, 11:23 am, John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > > > WTG Mark!! You have stones!!!!
>
> > > > mr dude
>
> > > Good one Dude.
>
> > The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated,
>
> Please explain what is "xenophobic".
>
> I thought Xeno The Warrior Princess" what a GREAT TV series!!!
>
> She is hot!!!
>
> Ooops I looked it up:
>
> Xenophobia is defined as the "hatred or fear of foreigners or
> strangers or of their politics or culture".[1] It comes from the Greek
> (phobos), meaning "fear."[2]
>
> How is asking someone to show that they are legally allowed to live
> someplace considered "hate" or fear?? I don't hate nor fear Mark
> Sanchez yet you believe that I do hate and fear him.
>
> If an intruder comes into my house and rapes my wife am I a
> "xenophobe"???.
>
> After all I do fear a stranger coming into my house and raping my
> wife.
>
> Actually, if a stranger comes into your home and rapes your wife and
> you protest, you automatically become a "xenophobe".
>
> Please refrain from throwing out obscure and random nonsensical words.
> You are better than that. Strive to be an independent thinker and not
> a drone.
>
> mr dude (huge fan of Lucy Lawless)
The motives of most anti-immigration folks, like yourself, are based
primarily on xenophobia. Or, perhaps more appropriately, cultural
disdain (which is a slightly nicer way of putting things, considering
I think you're getting hung up on the "fear" word). That's probably
what Michael was referring to, but I'm not sure. Invoking the law is
a circular argument. It would be like me refuting a conservative's
call for lower taxes by saying, "yeah, but high taxes are the law
right now, so shut up." If I were to do that, it would be either
circular or obtuse. Pick a shape.
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
My golden rule: When in doubt pick "rhombus".
mr dude
Michael
>
> > On Apr 7, 11:23 am, John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > > > WTG Mark!! You have stones!!!!
>
> > > > mr dude
>
> > > Good one Dude.
>
> > The xenophobic Sanchez comment is not appreciated,
>
> Please explain what is "xenophobic".
>
> I thought Xeno The Warrior Princess" what a GREAT TV series!!!
>
> She is hot!!!
>
> Ooops I looked it up:
>
> Xenophobia is defined as the "hatred or fear of foreigners or
> strangers or of their politics or culture".[1] It comes from the Greek
> (phobos), meaning "fear."[2]
>
> How is asking someone to show that they are legally allowed to live
> someplace considered "hate" or fear?? I don't hate nor fear Mark
> Sanchez yet you believe that I do hate and fear him.
dude... I also have considered that obama may have been born in kenya
even though the people who are pushing this have a political agenda.
when you linked him with sanchez, it smacked of xenophobia. why bring
up sanchez ??? just because he is a mexican american ??? sanchez does
not have to show his birth certificate. he needs to work on his
accuracy, not his paperwork.
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
> > Xenophobia is defined as the "hatred or fear of foreigners or
> > strangers or of their politics or culture".[1] It comes from the Greek
> > words îÝíïò (xenos), meaning "stranger," "foreigner" and öüâïò
> > (phobos), meaning "fear."[2]
.
> when you linked him with sanchez, it smacked of xenophobia.
Once again I am not a zenophobe. I have zero fear of the 20 million
illegals in our country.
Also, I am not racist! All of my servants are Black!!!
mr dude