new eligibility tampering...before Obama...

1. 68

   SparklingJewelposted 13 years ago

   copies of court cases concerning presidential eligibility tampered with before Obama...who and why?...
   
   http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.vi … eId=358645

   replyreport
2. 78

   Ms Deeposted 13 years ago

   Interesting, to say the least. I was reading this this morning, too.

   replyreport
3. 86

   lovemychrisposted 13 years ago

   Oh, OKAY....you just posted a comment on the Total Outrage thread to come together and stop the division, and you put a thread up using World Net Daily?
   
   About Obama's eligibility?
   
   Lolololol........not as nasty as uncorrect and repair guy, but the motive is the same.
   
   I would say to all of you right-leaning ones: Put your $$ where your mouth is. Stop telling us to "quit the divisiveness" when you go full speed ahead with your own version of it!!!
   
   Thank you.

   replyreport
4. 68

   SparklingJewelposted 13 years ago

   ...if you actually read the article you would have found that it was not specifically about Obama...it talked about what happened before him
   
   I think what you are not getting about me is that I am not taking sides, but showing aspects of sides.
   
   your vitriol keeps you from seeing common ground...all people that think and feel differently than you do are not bad, bad, bad...you read too much into any information you have already made your mind up about even though you haven't gotten other perspectives

   replyreport
   1. 86

      lovemychrisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well, you are pro-Paul, and you post from WND...where's the other side?
      
      See, I'm sposed to be "fair and balanced" while you all can be as anti-my side as you like!
      
      And I see a LOT of Obama is bad bad bad, and OWS is bad bad bad...then, when someone fights back, all of a sudden it's too vitriolic.
      
      Just like this: "It's only class war-fare when we fight back"
      While it's been going on, it's been just fine and dandy.

      replyreport
      1. 68

         SparklingJewelposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         yes, I think I see what you are saying, where are the posts from what are considered more liberal stances...well all the ones I have read are vitriolic and blaming and pointing fingers, they are all victims wanting equity and currently Obama is pushing that to his benefit, he  definetly is not pushing reforms just pandering. are the victims going to fall for it again?
         
         paul and WND are different sides, just as conservatives and liberals or some dems and liberals, or some christians and conservatives...Obama is not a democrat to some democrate and you know what he is to some conservatives and to some christians...on and on...there are many different perspectives, we all live in our own little unique worlds...
         
         the point being, one side doesn't fit all...where are all the common aspects within every perspective side? that is what needs to be brought together
         
         yes, the article talked about obama's situation, but the point to me was that there was planning going on before he even came on the scene...the planning was to undercut the vetting of the presidency for whatever reasons, whomever wanted

         replyreport
   2. 61

      couturepopcafeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      With respect, Jewel, the article talks about Obama before he became president.  He is the only person whose natural citizenship has been questioned and rightly so.  McCain, being born on a military base, is considered a natural citizen since all U.S. military bases are considered to be as American soil.
      
      Sorry, LMC, you're wrong, as usual.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         This also strikes me as odd, was Obama not a lawyer? I'm a UK citizen and our vetting procedure is obviously different from yours. However, I do remember a private client of mine, a US citizen, asking to me to write some "Career articles".(he was also a lawyer)  for him. After researching the "How to become a lawyer" briefs, it was apparent that any student, either before or just after studying for the Bar exam, I forget which, is subject to quite intense vetting, which includes amongst other things, citizenship, substance misuse, debts and criminal records. Despite the ho, ha, regarding Obama, he was vetted long before he entered politics. After all, in the land of the free, he would have been removed from office long before now, had there been any real doubts regarding his citizenship.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Sadly, I don't think that's true at all.  America has fast become way TOO "free" and fast becoming a "free-for-all".  Obama's election illustrated this very vividly.   Because, for one thing, "vetting" (of Officials, at the very least) should include National intents and purposes.  Obama made it clear that he wanted to change America at its foundation, from our society's moral stance to our military stance.  Yet he got elected anyway.  What can I say?  I can say the liberals have taken over and/or that a lot of people got manipulated through propoganda and bullying and/or that there was election fraud;  all are possibilities; some are even public fact.   His citizenship remains questionable; but his blatant political stance threw up a red flag immediately to those of us who weren't blinded by his charisma nor submitted to his followers' bullying.

            replyreport
5. 0

   Emile Rposted 13 years ago

   This disturbs me on several levels. I honestly believed that there was some type of governmental vet check of candidates; to ensure they met the qualification criteria. If there isn't, we need to insist it be implemented before our next election.

   replyreport
6. 68

   MikeNVposted 13 years ago

   Interesting Read.
   
   All candidates have skeletons in the closet, Obama has more than skeletons... so many things had to be covered up.  Going back to Chicago and the land deals, tbe special job for Michelle, the disassociation of "advisors".  It just goes on and on.
   
   Keeping this information from the Public was his only chance to get elected.
   
   Having said that the real people running the country are not always citizens either.  When you look at who holds the Federal Reserve stock... from what can be obtained, you'll find they are not always US Citizens.
   
   This years budget deficit is now $1.3 Trillion.  If you look only at this years numbers vs known income you would have to raise income taxes to 47% on every working person the "Rich" and the "Poor".  Think about that!  That doesn't include the State and Local tax burden either.
   
   So is there a solution to the debt problem?  YES.  The Fractional Reserve Banking System and the Federal Reserve Banking Cartel must be ABOLISHED.
   
   There is not enough labor in the Uhited States to pay off the debt EVER.  The math is in place that proves this.
   
   Ron Paul is the only candidate willing to address the Banking issue.  If it's not address we can watch the country implode. The Banking Elite will not be hurt because they are already diversified with property and company ownership around the world.
   
   So ultimately it doesn't matter from a "we are living with it" stand point what Obama's past was... corrupt or not.  It does matter who we chose for the future, our very existance as a country demands that we elect Paul.  If not we can kiss our quality of life goodbye forever.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If Paul was to be elected, it would be just like when Andrew Jackson was:
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jac … auguration
      
      Madison killed the first bank (but then created the second bank);
      Jackson killed the second bank;
      Paul will kill the third.
      
      
      
      

      replyreport