FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
It says "not all" short versions of the birth certificate are acceptable for passport purposes. That clearly implies that some versions are.
Lt. Col. Lakin Court Martial
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
It says "not all" short versions of the birth certificate are acceptable for passport purposes. That clearly implies that some versions are.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Thus we can conclude that Obama supplied a copy of the original all those years ago when he got his first US passport, before his presidency was even a glimmer in anyone's eye.
Since you asked, Yurtsie.
Now, you can explain what exactly about Nigel's post there is a "such a lie."
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i already said that...stay current
and don't forget, i believe obama is eligible, that is original b/c is in hawaii and that the hawaii registrar employee who said she saw his original was telling the truth
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
see...this why you are dishonest hypocrite...i ask you to get my post and instead you get YOUR post with YOUR interpretation of what is said...if you get my post, my post explains exactly why i called him a liar...since i know you won't get it, because if you did, it would show you're wrong and dishonestly characterizing my post...so i'll get it, because we all know you never back your claims up:
and then i continued to explain it over and over
nigel is trying to make this about obama and solely his presidency as if obama was never asked about it while running for office. it doesn't matter if any other president has been asked this, the FACT is, both candidates were challenged on it and obama just happen to have won. his being president is NOT why the issue was brought up, his being a black president is NOT why the issue was brought up, it was brought up during the campaign, just like it was for mccain.
so to say that it must be because he is black as no other white president has had this asked of them is wholly dishonest, because the issue STARTED when he was a candidate, and is merely a contuation, if he had lost, no one would still care and some might still be bitching about mccain's eligibility instead.
i really hope you put your bs aside and think about this. i know if you try hard, you can figure out....
What embarassing spin.
Again, Yurt - you said "you're such a liar" in direct response to this statement:
""I think it's pretty extraordinary that you find nothing wrong with asking the first black president to produce something that no white president in modern history has been required to produce in order to prove that he belongs in the Oval Office. "
And again: what about that statement is "such a lie"? How was Nigel lying in making that statement?
I'm all ears.
Again, Yurt - you said "you're such a liar" in direct response to this statement:
""I think it's pretty extraordinary that you find nothing wrong with asking the first black president to produce something that no white president in modern history has been required to produce in order to prove that he belongs in the Oval Office. "
And again: what about that statement is "such a lie"? How was Nigel lying in making that statement?
I'm all ears.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
no spin at all, you just think the truth is the spin because you don't know truth because you're a truther
did the issue arise when obama was a candidate? yes or no
Yes, but the questions were not the same. I am sure you are familiar with the difference between questions of fact and questions of law.
The question raised regarding McCain's eligibility was question a question of law: is a person born in Panama to American citizens serving in the armed forces a "natural born citizen" as used in the Constitution? To answer that question you do not need to see McCain's birth certificate, you just need to determine what "natural born citizen" means.
The question raised regarding Obama's eligibility was a question of fact: was Obama really born in the United States? To answer that question you have to look at his birth certificate (and even that won't suffice for the birthers).
So, not only has no president been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve in the Oval Office, but no candidate except Obama has been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president, John McCain included.
Yes.
But what does that have to do w/ what Nigel said?
Classic Yurtsie goalpost shift. Absolutely classic.....
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i have not shifted any goals, my point has been the same the entire time, stop being your typical hack self and stick to the discussion.
what point is nigel making by making it about the only president to be asked it? given, the issue arose before he was president?
nigel - that it must be because obama is is the first black president, thus, no one would want to know if obama was white.
do you see how dishonest that is? because the issue arose with both candidates for presidency, it had nothing to do with obama being the first black president.
Last edited:
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
and yet the underlying issue for both is eligibility
you are desperately trying to make it about something else...you can't escape facts
sorry
this is truly amazing, i already debunked you on this pages ago and you're still clinging to falsehoods....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/01/AR2008050103224.html
are you ever going to admit you're wrong on that? do you see now why i believe you are being dishonest about this?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i figured you would wuss out and resort to your typical bs
amazing how you hacks ignore the point behind a statement....
nigel's statement is true, however, his point is a lie...that is my point because nigel ignores that the issue arose BEFORE he was a president
apparently comprehension and what people really mean are beyond your limited understanding....you only see simple things, but i deal with complex things everyday and saw right though nigel's bs....perhaps i should have taken more time and dumbed it down and said, yes, that part is true, however your over all point is false
i was wrong to not do that
and its hilarious how you don't call nigel out about his statement that no candidate was asked to produce a b/c....oh yea....because you never call out the left...hack
"because you never call out the left...hack"
Madcap hilarity. I have spent the better part of the past few months calling the left out about the tax cuts & social security. I think Watermark actually wished me dead at one point.
You only wish you could be as non-partisan as I am, since you're a birther apologist...
Madcap hilarity. I have spent the better part of the past few months calling the left out about the tax cuts & social security. I think Watermark actually wished me dead at one point.
You only wish you could be as non-partisan as I am, since you're a birther apologist...
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i'm talking about the left on this board you nitwit....nigel twice was wrong about mccain's b/c being requested, yet you don't call him out....
you're claim you're nonpartisan, but you're not....and its freakin hilarious that you would claim that status
the very fact you called me a birther and now i'm a mere apologist proves you're a liar....i wonder if you have the balls to admit it
tff, thanks for another day of proving your lies
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Like all liberal constructions; their cornerstones are usually made of sand and any close scrutiny runs the chance of the entire thing falling apart.
I was not wrong on anything. First, as Lorax has made abundantly clear to you, my original statement was about presidents. Second, no one disputed where or when McCain was born, just whether he is a natural born citizen. You don't need to see McCain's birth certificate to answer that question.
Well, they were wise enough to realize that if he got over 12 months he'd automatically have another trial.
He got 6 months, a discharge and forfeiture of pay.
He'll continue to keep his medical license as this wouldn't be cause to pull that. He'll come home, and just be a doctor.
When I have some time I'll post on what I believe about the merits of this trial, some of you may be surprised.
He got 6 months, a discharge and forfeiture of pay.
He'll continue to keep his medical license as this wouldn't be cause to pull that. He'll come home, and just be a doctor.
When I have some time I'll post on what I believe about the merits of this trial, some of you may be surprised.
Who are "they?" Why would "they give a fuck if he got a new trial? Why would he "automatically" have another trial (as opposed to an appeal)?
Ooooh, I can't wait!
The auto-appeal process gives him a second trial with a different jury if the sentence is longer than 12 months. "They" are the military. I'll explain more when I have time to make the post I promised about my thoughts on this which you are sardonically having trouble waiting for...