Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: One More Look At Articles I & II

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,668
    Thanks
    1,022
    Thanked 445 Times in 401 Posts
    Groans
    51
    Groaned 102 Times in 89 Posts

    Default One More Look At Articles I & II

    Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for holding the presidency. To serve as president, one must:

    ● be a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States;
    ● be at least 35 years old;
    ● be a resident in the United States for at least 14 years.

    A person who meets the above qualifications would, however, still be disqualified from holding the office of president under any of the following conditions:

    ● Under Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, upon conviction in impeachment cases, the Senate has the option to order, by a simple majority, that an individual be forever disqualified from holding federal office, which includes that of president.
    ● Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, no person who swore an oath to support the Constitution, and later rebelled against the United States, is eligible to become president. However, this disqualification can be lifted by a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress.
    ● Under the Twenty-second Amendment, no person can be elected president more than twice. The amendment also specifies that if any eligible person serves as president or acting president for more than two years of a term for which some other eligible person was elected president, the former can only be elected president once.


    Perhaps the question should be 'when was Obama born?'
    By Jack Cashill
    Published August 26, 2020 at 7:46p

    https://www.wnd.com/2020/08/perhaps-question-obama-born/


    Obama manufactured a computer-generated birth certificate years before computers were available. It was a scam from start to finish in order to detract from his presidential INELIGIBILITY. Wall-to-wall media coverage made the scam work.

    NOTE: The Chicago sewer rat was American on his mother’s side. His presidential eligibility is another matter.

    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...58#post2919758

    It matters not where or when he was born. Even if the lying sack of shit was born in Kenya in 1961 as his relatives swore they witnessed —— the issue was always the definition of “natural born citizen” the Supreme Court refused —— and still refuse —— to address. In short: Obama is ineligible forever. Even if the Constitution is changed in the future it cannot retroactively make the Chicago sewer rat eligible in 2008.

    Illegal aliens are criminals, but they cannot be impeached. Happily, Obama can still be impeached because he is an American citizen:

    Here is where it got tricky:

    “While three years ago my sister Auma introduced me before I gave a speech, today I’m really coming as a brother, as a citizen of the world, as someone with a connection to Africa to talk about the importance of what she’s doing but also to create a larger context for what’s possible,” Obama continued.


    XXXXX



    So, which is it – native-born son of Kenya, native-born son of Hawaii or native-born citizen of the world?

    Obama says he's from Kenya, again
    Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 07/22/2018 @ 9:31 pm

    https://www.wnd.com/2018/07/obama-sa...m-kenya-again/

    QUESTION: Can everyone claim American citizenship after declaring I am a citizen of the World?

    Parasites, illegal aliens, and Democrats will answer YES.

    Anyone with a lick of common sense will answer NO.

    Conversely, can Americans claim they are citizens of the world without renouncing their citizenship? Obama is outta here if the answer is NO.

    “Breathes there the man with soul so dead
    Who never to himself hath said,
    This is my own, my native land!
    ...If such there breathe, go, mark him well;

    ...The wretch, concentred all in self,
    ... doubly dying, shall go down
    To the vile dust from whence he sprung,
    Unwept, unhonored , and unsung.”

    —Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) excerpt from “The Lay of the Last Minstrel”

    To me, a citizen of the world is a man without country. Such men have no loyalty to their native land; so unless citizens of the world are environmental freakazoids why would anyone believe they will be loyal to the world?

    Quite some time ago Edward Everett Hale (1822‚Äì1909) wrote a story about an American (a “poor creature”) who disowned the United States. Hale wrote the story “by way of showing young Americans of to-day [sic] what it is to be A MAN WITHOUT A COUNTRY.” For many years Hale’s story “The Man Without a Country” was a staple in our nation’s schools. Today it would be considered retardataire and as quaint as…well, as the US Constitution. The Progressives of today are all men and women without a country—“poor creatures” indeed.

    “Sacred oaths” and words of honor to defend the Constitution notwithstanding, today’s politicians, judges, and top military brass largely ignore it. They have all taken the oath, so that makes them all dishonorable liars and/or cowards. Do these feckless frauds even care? Do the concepts of duty, integrity and honor mean anything to them? They probably consider such virtues to be foolishness, meaningful only to chumps and losers.

    A Man for all Treasons and the US Constitution
    By Jim ONeill
    March 19, 2012

    http://canadafreepress.com/article/a...s-constitution

    The question of dual citizen was also invoked:

    Was young Obama Indonesian citizen
    Published: 08/17/2008 at 8:18 PM
    By Aaron Klein

    https://www.wnd.com/2008/08/72656/

    There one thing that always troubled me about dual citizenship was the repeated references to Obama’s birth in Kenya in 1961. I never understood why no one asked about British East Africa? It was not until 1963 that Kenya, Uganda, Tanganyika, and Zanzibar got their independence from British East Africa. To this amateur Sherlock Holmes the difference between writing Kenya, and writing British East Africa, on legal documents was akin to the police misspelling a name on a search warrant. I am not a lawyer, but I was certain somebody was going to bounce Obama’s Honolulu birth certificate out of court on a technicality. I was wrong.

    Obama’s father was Kenyan. Kenya was controlled by the British as part of British East Africa; hence, Obama had dual citizenship long before he got it from Indonesia. His first duality was British and American not Indonesian and American.

    There is no telling what Obama senior might have done to register baby Obama as a British subject if Obama was, indeed, born in British East Africa. To Papa Obama it might have seemed the wise thing to do at the time. It was a longshot, but the British had no reason to help Obama hide anything before or after he moved into the White House.

    Other challenges questioned Obama senior, a Kenyan subject under the UK’s jurisdiction at the time of baby Obama’s birth, thus making junior a dual citizen.

    Since Obama was unquestionably American, my interest in his birthplace always focused on embassy records from 1961. Since Kenya was not an independent nation at the time, I assumed the American Embassy did not deal with the territory of Kenya. That means that the pertinent records should have been filed in America Embassy archives under British East Africa.

    The plot got thicker than a London fog:


    Responding to a Freedom of Information Act request, the State Department has released passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham, President Obama’s mother – but records for the years surrounding Obama’s 1961 birth are missing.

    The State Department claims a 1980s General Services Administration directive resulted in the destruction of many passport applications and other “nonvital” passport records, including Dunham’s 1965 passport application and any other passports she may have applied for or held prior to 1965.

    Oops! Obama mama passport 'destroyed'
    State Department claims records gone for Stanley Ann Dunham prior to 1968
    Published: 08/01/2010 at 6:28 PM

    https://www.wnd.com/2010/08/186677/

    Parenthetically, a little murder spiced up the Obama Saga:


    A key witness in a federal probe into passport information stolen from the State Department was fatally shot in front of a District church, the Metropolitan Police Department said yesterday.

    Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who had been cooperating with a federal investigators, was found late Thursday night slumped dead inside a car, in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in Northeast, said Cmdr. Michael Anzallo, head of the department’s Criminal

    XXXXX

    The Washington Times reported April 5 that contractors for the State Department had improperly accessed passport information for presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain, which resulted in a series of firings that reached into the agency’s top ranks.


    Key witness in passport fraud case fatally shot
    The Washington Times
    Saturday, April 19, 2008

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-fatally-shot/

    Was Harris’ murder related to Mama Obama traveling to Kenya on an American passport issued in her name only? I do not know the answer. I do know that Ann Dunham would have to go to the American Embassy for documentation in order to bring her newborn baby back to the U.S. —— as well as get written permission from British East Africa to leave the country with an infant British subject. It was as simple as that.

    I do not know how records are stored in State Department archives. Are the records involving Kenya after 1963 stored in a different building than the records from British East Africa prior before 1963? Regardless of where they are archived locating embassy records should have sent an army of investigative journalists looking for the truth. It did not. Why not?

    1. They were too busy engaging in the conspiracy that elected Obama.

    2. Heaven forbid that an ounce of truth would have prevented the first black president from winning the election in 2008. Nobody wanted the truth.

    3. Finding passport records was of paramount importance if the greatest presidential conspiracy ever executed was put to the smell test.

    NOTE: Media conspiracy to elect Senile Joe Biden is laughable when it is compared to the conspiracy that elected Obama.

    While the lying sack of shit’s stench was blowing across the land, it occurred to me that there might also be some proof of Obama’s birthplace in the British archives in London from 1961. Logically, mama and papa would of have registered their bouncing baby boy at the British Embassy in British East Africa. If so, there was a good chance a few staff personnel might still be still alive. I cannot believe that a white American woman showing up with a black baby was commonplace in 1961. They would remember it. The same is true of American Embassy personnel.

    Port of entry records —— international airports and seaports —— also offered an avenue to the truth. The time period in question made the search an easy task. Nobody ever looked as far as I know.

    Were it only a matter of records controlled by the government in Kenya, you can be sure that President Obama had those records destroyed. That is why nobody bothered to look for the hospital records where Obama’s paternal grandmother said she witnessed his birth. Granny Obama was told to button her lip.

    The dual citizenship thing probably would not standup in court, but if embassy records prove that Obama was born in British East Africa those records would also prove without a doubt that he was lying about being born in Hawaii.
    Last edited by Flanders; 08-27-2020 at 09:14 AM.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Below even the level of credibility we usually find in WND.

    I haven't seen Trump's birth certificate (or Bush, Clinton....)

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,668
    Thanks
    1,022
    Thanked 445 Times in 401 Posts
    Groans
    51
    Groaned 102 Times in 89 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    I haven't seen Trump's birth certificate
    To Flash: Did you look?

    Donald Trump released three certificates, his hospital souvenir, his standard certificate and his long form.

    Nobody cared because no other president lied about their constitutional eligibility. The only other birth certificate controversy surrounded:


    Chester Arthur was accused of being born in Canada. He ascended the presidency after President James Garfield was shot. After Garfield nominated him as his vice presidential running mate in 1880, their opponents claimed that if Garfield died, Arthur wouldn't be eligible to become president. While the claim didn't end up threatening his chances of becoming vice president, he never presented a birth certificate nor refuted the claims.

    Chester Alan Arthur always claimed that he was born in North Fairfield, Vermont, although no birth certificate has ever been found to confirm it. His political foes and some historians believed he was born across the border in Canada. Of course, if he had been born in Canada, he would have been ineligible to be vice president or president. Vice President Arthur succeeded James A. Garfield when Garfield died of an assassin's bullet in 1881.

    XXXXX

    According to historical accounts, Republican bosses wanted him to provide proof of his birthplace, but he never did.

    Democrats, meanwhile, hired a lawyer named Arthur Hinman who sought to discredit Arthur, alleging that he was born in Dunham, Quebec, about 47 miles north of Fairfield. Hinman traveled to Vermont and Canada to research Arthur’s past, eventually concluding that Arthur was born in Canada but appropriated the birth records of a baby brother who was born in Fairfield, but died as an infant.

    He later incorporated the findings into a book titled "How A British Subject Became President of the United States."

    Arthur, who served from 1881 to 1885, never publicly addressed the allegation.

    Vermont officials hold fast to their claim on Arthur’s birth, but have little to back it up.

    The state of Vermont didn’t begin receiving birth records until 1857, according to state archivist Gregory Sanford. The birth records at the Town of Fairfield go back no further, Town Clerk Amanda Forbes said.

    The book Hinman wrote was published near the end of Arthur's presidency (in 1884), meaning that Hinman/the Democrats were still researching his birthplace well into his presidency.

    Hinman’s book appeared near the end of Arthur’s presidency, and no official action was ever taken on the basic of his alleged evidence.

    https://www.quora.com/Which-American...th-certificate
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post

    Donald Trump released three certificates, his hospital souvenir, his standard certificate and his long form.
    OK. Now I have seen Trump and Obama's birth certificate. Both are qualified natural born citizens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    Of course, if he had been born in Canada, he would have been ineligible to be vice president or president. Vice President Arthur succeeded James A. Garfield when Garfield died of an assassin's bullet in 1881.
    Not if either of his parents were American citizens. He would be a natural born citizen for the same reason as Trump and Obama--an American parent(s).

    And now his questioning about the qualifications of Harris is stooping to that same low level as his birtherism appeals to the conspiracy nuts.

  5. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,668
    Thanks
    1,022
    Thanked 445 Times in 401 Posts
    Groans
    51
    Groaned 102 Times in 89 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    OK. Now I have seen Trump and Obama's birth certificate. Both are qualified natural born citizens.

    To Flash:
    Not so with Obama:


    CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT?

    It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for the following reason:

    Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between “December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986.” Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Barack Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama’s mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama’s birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn’t matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama’s birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama’s birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office.

    *** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President.

    *** Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S. citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia. Now you can see why Obama’s aides stopped his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence. Stay tuned to your TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through over the next several days.


    Is Barack Obama a natural-born citizen of the U.S.?
    David Mikkelson

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/native-son/

    You are selling the same misdirection that Obama and his media stooges have been selling since 2008:


    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    Obama manufactured a computer-generated birth certificate years before computers were available. It was a scam from start to finish in order to detract from his presidential INELIGIBILITY. Wall-to-wall media coverage made the scam work.

    NOTE: The Chicago sewer rat was American on his mother’s side. His presidential eligibility is another matter.
    This entire birth certificate flap only makes sense if Obama knew he was ineligible. If so, he had to know it most of his life. Obama is an American because his mother was American; so his foreign birth was unimportant until he ran for president and lied about it. Registering his birth after his mother returned to the U.S., and his ‘infamous’ birth certificate from a Honolulu hospital were proved a forgery time and time again.


    “Obama’s family did not take to Stanley Ann Dunham Obama very well, because she was white, according to Sarah Obama. Shortly after she arrived in Kenya Stanley Ann decided to return to Hawaii because she later said, she did not like how Muslim men treated their wives in Kenya. However, because she was near term the airline would not let her fly until after the birth of her baby. Obama’s grandmother said the baby—Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.—was born in Kenya and that shortly after he was born, Stanley Ann returned to Hawaii.”

    However, by the time she wanted to leave Kenya, it was during the late stages of her pregnancy. She was not able to board a plane because the airlines wouldn’t allow women so close to birth to fly. It is instead believed, that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya as his grandmother apparently stated. Then, after he was born, his mother returned with him to Hawaii where his birth was REGISTERED on or about August 8th, 1961, in the public records office in Hawaii.

    There is also a discrepancy in what hospital Barack Hussein Obama was born in
    , even if he was born in Hawaii. Reports by his own sister in two separate interviews state that he was born at two different hospitals– Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital–in Honolulu.

    The Times Herald even reports: “the senator’s grandmother, brother and sister, who live in Kenya, believe they were present during Obama’s birth in the African country.” Here, the Times Herald uses the word that his family ‘believe’ he was born in Kenya (perhaps to avoid possible law suits by Obama’s Truth Squad?).


    Obama Born In Kenya? His Grandmother Says Yes
    Tamar Yonah
    12/10/08 00:00

    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/B...sage.aspx/3074

    Bottom line: The lying sack of shit got away with it; so there is not a chance he will be held accountable. Because he is an American through his mother there is a slight chance he might be impeached for the treason he committed when he was ‘president.’ His mother’s gift biting on the ass after all of these years would be poetic justice.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  6. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,961
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Really, what, over a decade later some still can’t accept the fact a black man go elected President, twice, and by considerable majorities each time, it must really burn their ass as we’re seeing here

  7. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Barack Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama’s mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama’s birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn’t matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship. At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama’s birth when she was 18 in Hawaii.
    Wrong

    1. Obama was born in the U. S. making him a natural born citizen at birth.

    2. Your information is wrong about "the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between “December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986.” Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.”

    According to the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

    Until the Act of October 10, 1978, persons who had acquired U.S. citizenship through birth outside of the United States to one U.S. citizen parent had to meet certain physical presence requirements to retain their citizenship. This legislation eliminated retention requirements for persons who were born after October 10, 1952. There may be cases where a person who was born before that date, and therefore subject to the retention requirements, may have failed to retain citizenship.

    https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/...rt-h-chapter-3

  8. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,668
    Thanks
    1,022
    Thanked 445 Times in 401 Posts
    Groans
    51
    Groaned 102 Times in 89 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Really, what, over a decade later some still can’t accept the fact a black man go elected President, twice, and by considerable majorities each time, it must really burn their ass as we’re seeing here
    To archives: Are you serious? Skin color has has nothing to do with it. I despise WHITE JFK because he stole the presidency in 1960.

    Incidentally, would you love this guy if his skin was white?


    The fundamental transformation of America. That was the stated goal of an inspiring, silver-tongued, young, blank-slate presidential candidate in 2008 upon whom so many Americans projected their own vision of what a black president should look like. And transform America he did, but perhaps not in ways most Americans expected, nor would have approved, at the time. But here we are, and an important new book offers a brilliant retrospective look at the multifaceted ways in which Barack Obama achieved that fundamental transformation.

    "Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency" by journalist and bestselling author Jack Cashill adds an important new work to the Obama biographical collection. It explores the many advances the cultural left made on traditional American society during the Obama era, with Barack Obama as the figurehead, at least, leading the campaign, abetted by an equally determined leftist media that protected him as zealously as any Praetorian Guard.

    "Unmasking Obama" is a compelling dissection of the methods Obama and his handlers used, to great effect, in advancing so many aspects of the leftist agenda that would have been unthinkable just a decade earlier – from promoting the acceptance of men "identifying" as women, and vice versa, to destroying a half century of growing racial harmony in America through the malicious, cynical exploitation of tragic events like the death of Trayvon Martin, to national socialized medicine.

    One of the most important aspects of "Unmasking Obama" is Cashill's superb exposition of the malign force the mainstream media have become in American life. The Fourth Estate is truly an utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt institution in its corporate form, hell-bent on furthering the destruction of American culture, traditions and values.

    But Cashill does offer up a protagonist. He calls it the samizdat, which is an homage to the intrepid, honest, independent journalists in the old Soviet Union who risked life and limb to reveal the truths in that decrepit and oppressive evil empire. Cashill's American samizdat is that class of truth-seeking, typically conservative-leaning journalists who, unlike their peers in the mainstream media, are not leftist political activists seeking to hide the truth in furtherance of the progressive cause. America's samizdat have been indispensable in exposing the fakery of phony narratives the leftist media have sought to perpetuate, like the "Hands up, don't shoot!" mythology surrounding the death of strong-arm robber and would-be cop-killer Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, or the utterly bogus Trayvon Martin-as-innocent-victim hoax pulled off through the use of a judicial impostor named Rachel Jeantel.

    Cashill reveals truths about Obama that had largely remained hidden during his time in office, like his ruminations about homosexuality in his letter to his former girlfriend, Alex McNear, in which Obama said, "I make love to men daily, but in the imagination. My mind is androgynous to a great extent and I hope to make it more so." While McNear herself had redacted that passage of the letter, thinking it "too explosive" to reveal during his political life, Obama biographer David Garrow eventually accessed the original, unredacted letter "with some difficulty" in 2016 at Emory University.

    Cashill similarly gives attention to the explicit allegations made by Larry Sinclair in 2008 of a two-day sex-and-drug fueled homosexual romp that Sinclair alleged occurred between himself and then-state Sen. Barack Obama in 1999. (Sinclair even told his story at the National Press Club in 2008, available here.)

    The tale is told not for its prurient value. Cashill's larger point in relating Sinclair's story is that leftist media flacks ostensibly reporting on Obama deftly sought to knock down Sinclair's claims. They tried to discredit the man rather than investigate his explicit allegations through gumshoe reporting, despite being provided ample leads to pursue, such as the name of the hotel where the encounter took place, the dates it occurred and the name of the limo driver who brought them to the location of their tryst. Rather than acting as traditional reporters, Cashill tells us that the journalists assigned to cover Obama acted much like the "firemen" in the book Fahrenheit 451, whose job was to burn books that might reveal the dystopian truth, rather than putting out fires.

    Cashill's dissection of the "evolving" – one might say hypocritical – stances of the Democratic Party during the Obama years on a range of issues on which they'd previously stood largely with Republicans, is often humorous. One example he cites is the transformation of illegal aliens from, well, illegal aliens, into "undocumented immigrants." Despite the potential offense to American blacks, the Democratic Party had no qualms about equating the "rights" of illegal aliens with those of African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. They saw an opportunity to garner new voters, while assuming that blacks would always be a reliable Democratic voting bloc and never object to the appropriation of their legitimate historical grievances. Cashill writes: "No other rationale explains the Democratic Party's dramatic, comprehensive shift on an issue that benefitted almost no Americans other than the owners of packing houses and swimming pools."

    Cashill's wry wit reminds one of the famous anecdote in which Lincoln was asked how he could read and laugh at the humor of Petroleum Nash while there was a horrific civil war raging. Lincoln's response was, "With the fearful strain that is on me night and day, if I did not laugh I should die."

    We should all learn to laugh at the absurdities of America's political scene today. Humor helps keep us sane.

    "Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency" was released on Aug. 18. It is an indispensable addition to the growing body of Obama biographical literature.


    'Unmasking Obama' – unfiltered truth about the 44th president
    By William F. Marshall
    Published August 27, 2020 at 7:26

    https://www.wnd.com/2020/08/unmaskin...4th-president/


    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    1. Obama was born in the U. S. making him a natural born citizen at birth.
    To Flash: Give it up. Not a single piece of evidence showing he was born in British East Africa can be discredited. There is not one creditable piece of evidence that shows he was born in Hawaii. His fake birth certificate would not pass muster with the most liberal judges in any court.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  9. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,718
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,660 Times in 4,439 Posts
    Groans
    296
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    To archives: Are you serious? Skin color has has nothing to do with it. I despise WHITE JFK because he stole the presidency in 1960.

    Incidentally, would you love this guy if his skin was white?


    The fundamental transformation of America. That was the stated goal of an inspiring, silver-tongued, young, blank-slate presidential candidate in 2008 upon whom so many Americans projected their own vision of what a black president should look like. And transform America he did, but perhaps not in ways most Americans expected, nor would have approved, at the time. But here we are, and an important new book offers a brilliant retrospective look at the multifaceted ways in which Barack Obama achieved that fundamental transformation.

    "Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency" by journalist and bestselling author Jack Cashill adds an important new work to the Obama biographical collection. It explores the many advances the cultural left made on traditional American society during the Obama era, with Barack Obama as the figurehead, at least, leading the campaign, abetted by an equally determined leftist media that protected him as zealously as any Praetorian Guard.

    "Unmasking Obama" is a compelling dissection of the methods Obama and his handlers used, to great effect, in advancing so many aspects of the leftist agenda that would have been unthinkable just a decade earlier – from promoting the acceptance of men "identifying" as women, and vice versa, to destroying a half century of growing racial harmony in America through the malicious, cynical exploitation of tragic events like the death of Trayvon Martin, to national socialized medicine.

    One of the most important aspects of "Unmasking Obama" is Cashill's superb exposition of the malign force the mainstream media have become in American life. The Fourth Estate is truly an utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt institution in its corporate form, hell-bent on furthering the destruction of American culture, traditions and values.

    But Cashill does offer up a protagonist. He calls it the samizdat, which is an homage to the intrepid, honest, independent journalists in the old Soviet Union who risked life and limb to reveal the truths in that decrepit and oppressive evil empire. Cashill's American samizdat is that class of truth-seeking, typically conservative-leaning journalists who, unlike their peers in the mainstream media, are not leftist political activists seeking to hide the truth in furtherance of the progressive cause. America's samizdat have been indispensable in exposing the fakery of phony narratives the leftist media have sought to perpetuate, like the "Hands up, don't shoot!" mythology surrounding the death of strong-arm robber and would-be cop-killer Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, or the utterly bogus Trayvon Martin-as-innocent-victim hoax pulled off through the use of a judicial impostor named Rachel Jeantel.

    Cashill reveals truths about Obama that had largely remained hidden during his time in office, like his ruminations about homosexuality in his letter to his former girlfriend, Alex McNear, in which Obama said, "I make love to men daily, but in the imagination. My mind is androgynous to a great extent and I hope to make it more so." While McNear herself had redacted that passage of the letter, thinking it "too explosive" to reveal during his political life, Obama biographer David Garrow eventually accessed the original, unredacted letter "with some difficulty" in 2016 at Emory University.

    Cashill similarly gives attention to the explicit allegations made by Larry Sinclair in 2008 of a two-day sex-and-drug fueled homosexual romp that Sinclair alleged occurred between himself and then-state Sen. Barack Obama in 1999. (Sinclair even told his story at the National Press Club in 2008, available here.)

    The tale is told not for its prurient value. Cashill's larger point in relating Sinclair's story is that leftist media flacks ostensibly reporting on Obama deftly sought to knock down Sinclair's claims. They tried to discredit the man rather than investigate his explicit allegations through gumshoe reporting, despite being provided ample leads to pursue, such as the name of the hotel where the encounter took place, the dates it occurred and the name of the limo driver who brought them to the location of their tryst. Rather than acting as traditional reporters, Cashill tells us that the journalists assigned to cover Obama acted much like the "firemen" in the book Fahrenheit 451, whose job was to burn books that might reveal the dystopian truth, rather than putting out fires.

    Cashill's dissection of the "evolving" – one might say hypocritical – stances of the Democratic Party during the Obama years on a range of issues on which they'd previously stood largely with Republicans, is often humorous. One example he cites is the transformation of illegal aliens from, well, illegal aliens, into "undocumented immigrants." Despite the potential offense to American blacks, the Democratic Party had no qualms about equating the "rights" of illegal aliens with those of African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. They saw an opportunity to garner new voters, while assuming that blacks would always be a reliable Democratic voting bloc and never object to the appropriation of their legitimate historical grievances. Cashill writes: "No other rationale explains the Democratic Party's dramatic, comprehensive shift on an issue that benefitted almost no Americans other than the owners of packing houses and swimming pools."

    Cashill's wry wit reminds one of the famous anecdote in which Lincoln was asked how he could read and laugh at the humor of Petroleum Nash while there was a horrific civil war raging. Lincoln's response was, "With the fearful strain that is on me night and day, if I did not laugh I should die."

    We should all learn to laugh at the absurdities of America's political scene today. Humor helps keep us sane.

    "Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency" was released on Aug. 18. It is an indispensable addition to the growing body of Obama biographical literature.


    'Unmasking Obama' – unfiltered truth about the 44th president
    By William F. Marshall
    Published August 27, 2020 at 7:26

    https://www.wnd.com/2020/08/unmaskin...4th-president/




    To Flash: Give it up. Not a single piece of evidence showing he was born in British East Africa can be discredited. There is not one creditable piece of evidence that shows he was born in Hawaii. His fake birth certificate would not pass muster with the most liberal judges in any court.
    Then he becomes a natural born citizen who was born to an American mother. The law requiring retention requirements was changed.

    Until the Act of October 10, 1978, persons who had acquired U.S. citizenship through birth outside of the United States to one U.S. citizen parent had to meet certain physical presence requirements to retain their citizenship. This legislation eliminated retention requirements for persons who were born after October 10, 1952. There may be cases where a person who was born before that date, and therefore subject to the retention requirements, may have failed to retain citizenship.

    https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/...rt-h-chapter-3

Similar Threads

  1. Happy Impeachment Articles Day!
    By Micawber in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-10-2019, 10:31 AM
  2. Draft: Articles of Impeachment
    By katzgar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 281
    Last Post: 06-05-2019, 04:34 PM
  3. Linked Articles
    By Lightbringer in forum Introductions, User Announcements, Suggestions and General Board Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-18-2019, 07:42 PM
  4. Articles of Impeachment
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-30-2018, 12:21 PM
  5. ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST SOCRATES
    By FUCK THE POLICE in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-22-2012, 09:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •