Karl Denninger Lowers The Birther Cone Of Silence!!! (Or, Squeeky Gets DQ’ed???)

The Birthers Decided It Would Be Cheaper To Mass Produce Echo Chambers

Well, what a sad day. I got “DQ’ed” at Karl Denninger’s Market Ticker Forum for laying a little truth on them. This is sad because that is one of the four or five websites I make it a point to visit daily. Anyway, Karl Denninger, who I respect very much for his common sense financial analysis, got to hanging around with liars and charlatans like Special Deputy Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, and ended up drinking the idiotic Birther two citizen parents kool-aid.

Here are a few excerpts from the Market Ticker Internet Article:

Here are the facts:

Deconstructing Marco Rubio: INELIGIBLE

Rubio was born to two parents who were not citizens at the time of his birth. They were here in the country and he was born here, but his parents were not citizens at the time of his birth.

At a later date his parents became citizens of the United States.

Marco Rubio is ineligible to be President of the United States under the natural born citizen requirement. He is a citizen but will never be a natural born citizen as he was not at birth due to the Cuban citizenship of his parents and you cannot retroactively acquire natural born citizenship status.

He therefore must not be nominated as VP, since the primary qualification for that office is the ability to stand as President if something happens to the President while he is in office.

I know there are people who think the Constitution shouldn’t read this way on natural born citizenship as a requirement for this office, but it does read this way AND IS WHAT IT IS.

Here is a link to the complete article:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=205117

Sooo,  to correct this blatant nonsense, I made the following comment, which is on page 3 of the comments:

The “two-citizen parent” requirement is Imaginary Law. The issue was decided in 1898 in the Wong Kim Ark case. This case was cited extensively in a 2009 Indiana case, Ankeny v. Governor, to wit:

The Birthers argued:

“[c]ontrary to the thinking of most People on the subject, there’s a very clear distinction between a “citizen of the United States” and a “natural born Citizen,” and the difference involves having [two] parents of U.S. citizenship, owing no foreign allegiance.”

To which the Indiana court said:

Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”15

That is The REAL Law, as opposed to the Birther’s IMAGINARY Law. As far as Mino[r] v. Happersett being “precedent” as to defining natural born citizenship, the very idea is laughable to anyone who can read and comprehend simple sentences written in English. Court after court rejects the notion, and if you want one recent example, then simply refer to the recent Tisdale case from Virginia:

The Federal Judge slapped the suit down holding:

The eligibility requirements to be President of the United States are such that the individual must be a “natural born citizen” of the United States and at least thirty-five years of age. U.S. Const. art. II, § 1. It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens. See, e.g., United States v. Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702 (1898) (“Every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States.”); Perkis v. Elg, 99 F.2d 408, 409 (1938). Moreover, “those born ‘in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’ … have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding … and thus eligible for the presidency.” Hollander v. McCain, 566 F. Supp. 2d 63, 66 (D.N.H 2008). Thus, Mr. Tisdale’s contention that President Obama, Governor Romney, and Congressman Paul are not eligible to be President due to their nationalities is without merit.

That is one of at least 4 or 5 cases this year alone which chunked the two citizen parent nonsense out the door.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Which, got me DQ’ed, whatever that is, which means I can’t post there anymore. I find this disturbing. Not only has Denninger drunk deeply and long from the Well of Two Citizen Parents Stupidity, but he has apparently picked up another nasty little Birther habit . . . banning people who tell him he is wrong. This is probably a smart, though not courageous, move on his part, because when the law isn’t on your side, then it is a little inconvenient to have somebody citing it to you. Which ought to tell him something.

And BTW (which means by the way) should Karl Denninger or any other Birther wish to make comments here, I don’t DQ or ban people who disagree with me. Which also ought to tell him something. Like I ain’t scairt to defend my position.

Another disturbing thing is how he is ruining his credibility on financial matters with this Birther fling.  He is one of the few people who has a really good grasp on the macro-economic situation and should he become more well known, there are people who are going to look at his Birtherism and dismiss him like he was a Moon Landing Denier. Not only does he have an Achille’s Heel, he has managed to insert it into his own mouth.

I will discuss his article in more depth at a later date.  Meanwhile,  I guess nobody is perfect, and this is probably God’s way of instilling a little humility in Denninger who I believe will one day pull his head out of his rear end on this. I sense at heart that he is a very honest person, and when he finally figures out how he has been completely hoodwinked on this stuff, first will come sad, and then will come mad. . .

And then I wouldn’t want to be Jerry Corsi taking scuba lessons from him.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Advertisements

About Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Hi!!! I am a Girl Reporter on the Internet. I am 31. Plus I am a INTP. I have a Major in Human Kinetics, and a Minor in English. I have 2 cats, and a new kitten! I write poetry, and plus I am trying to learn how to play guitar. I think that is all??? Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter View all posts by Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

41 responses to “Karl Denninger Lowers The Birther Cone Of Silence!!! (Or, Squeeky Gets DQ’ed???)

  • davidfarrar

    Of course, Squeeky;

    When Americans understand that in your view; we the People are merely subjects to an executive sovereign, rather than free Citizens in a Constitutional Republic; they too will see what Denninger now sees.

    ex animo
    davidfarrar

    • Monkey Boy

      Has Denninger seen you cross-dressing? Perhaps, the American people would want to be spared that.

    • Northland10

      We the people means everybody, including me, Squeeky and your President Obama. To say otherwise is selfish and unAmerican. We the people voted, our Congress certified, our courts ruled and you lost. Live with it.

      Only the Birthers want to remove the rights of We the people, the still free Citizens of a Constitutional Republic.

  • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

    David:

    What “executive sovereign”??? The interpretations of “natural born citizenship” are coming from judges and courts. If you had your way, and only kids of two citizen parents were eligible for the Presidency, would the power of the Presidency be any less??? Or any more???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    • davidfarrar

      The national government, the feds, anyone exercising executive power; including judges and courts.

      If I had my way, and the way I believe was directly articulated in the Senate debates on the 14th Amendment by Sens. Howard and Trumbull, plus Representative John Bingham’s contributions; the only way you can have an American birthright is by being a natural born Citizen, period, even if the mother was an American citizen and born within the boundaries.

      In those days, it was only the Father’s citizenship that mattered. Of course that has all changed now. And with those changes came an even more compelling reason to rely only on those who were born of citizen-parents. Since Congress gave women the legal right to bear allegiance for their “issues”; the only way now to insure one allegiance since birth to support and defend the Constitution of the United States is by both parents being US citizens prior to the blessed event.

      ex animo
      davidfarrar

      • Monkey Boy

        It’s ironic that someone that constantly advocates rebellion and sedition to pontificate on Americanism.

        How many citizen parents do you and Darren Huff have? Did that prevent you from inducing him to engage in insurrection?

      • Andy

        Ah, so it’s a matter of women being less able to bestow allegiance is it, David? Kind of like how they are less able to vote intelligently, so they shouldn’t have the right to vote?

        Or is it because you think men are superior to women in general?

      • Northland10

        David, you may believe it otherwise and not like it, but, you are wrong, and you continue to be wrong and you, the other GA petitioners and Apuzzo have lost, repeatedly. Nothing in Natural Born Citizenship has changed. You just did not realize what it really meant.

        That means, Obama was eligible then and he is eligible now.

        Maybe you would like to answer, how a father who was not involved in his sons life can be the controlling influence in his son’s life over his mother and grandparents who raised him? Is there a special gene that determines this? Does this gene mutate if the father naturalizes before the child is born?

  • davidfarrar

    The power of the Presidency would have a “stronger check” against foreign influences affecting the Commander in chief of all its armed forces; yes.

    ex animo
    davidfarrar

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      DavidF:

      Then you need to think President Jane Fonda. Why don’t you tune in to the Reality Check radio program that is on from 8:00 to 10:00 tonight on Blogtalk Radio. You can just listen and not have to get on the show or anything if you don’t want to.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

    • Monkey Boy

      Perhaps, what is direly needed in the U.S. at present, is not a “stronger check” against foreign influences; but, rather, a strong check against domestic treason and sedition by nominal NBCs that seek the destruction of the United States.

      What is needed is for the “do nothing” AG of the U.S. to vigorously prosecute treasonous conduct by native-born neo-confederates that preach insurrection and induce others to actively engage in it. The Smith Act provides the necessary tools to effect prosecution, so why won’t the Justice Department use it?

      I wouldn’t mind if the culprits are able to bring their favorite dildoes and butt-plugs with them to their cells, so long as they are of the street and can’t preach sedition.

  • Dave B.

    I’ll tell you one thing, if there’s anything Squeeky’s a-scairt of, I reckon I better be a-scairt of it, too.

  • drhugenmountain

    Breaking !

    In their new e-book THE VOODOOD PRINCE, coming out soon, Dr. Corsi and his co-author Sheriff Joe will reveal the shocking facts they have unearthed during a short travel to Africa:

    When The Usurper was born in Kenya the most powerful sorcerer of Africa performed several Voodoo-Rites ! The details are too horrorful to be described here, where children an good Christians may read.

    The sorcerer promised the mother of The Usurper – she made a horrible sacrifice in exchange – to make her son POTUS !

    Through mighty voodoo-sorcery the sorcerer forced the employees of the Hawaiian Department of Health to register the Kenyan birth as having happened in Hawaii and give notice to the local newspapers.

    After that he put a spell on every living and still to be born person not only in the USA but the whole world. He forced them to support The Usurper in every possible way:

    to finance his schools and his posh lifestyle;
    to forge his school-records;
    to put fake reports about studies in Harvard in the papers;
    to vote for him.

    Only True Christians are immune against this spell, True Christians like Joseph Farah, Dr. Corsi, David Farrar, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, Larry Kleyman and Sheriff Joe. They can see behind the voodoo smokescreen.

    Unfortunately all the Judges are spellbound and deny each and every plaint. Are there no Christian Judges any more ?

    That there are some people in the Birther movement who are no Christians like Dr. Orly Taitz is easy to explain: in reality they are OBOTS, sent out by The Usurper to destroy the Birther movement. Unfortunately Dr. Taitz seems to able to reach that purpose.

    What a horror.

    Rmoney

    • Monkey Boy

      Only True Christians are immune against this spell, True Christians like Joseph Farah, Dr. Corsi, David Farrar, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, Larry Kleyman and Sheriff Joe.
      ….

      Don’t forget Orly Taitz and Pam Gellar!!

  • jbjd

    I am leaving this comment here, although it really applies to your previous post. (No one commented on that post but, pointing out these facts merits attention.)

    As you indicated, World Net Daily = Western Center for Journalism. Thus, it is not surprising that anything printed by one is rehashed by the other.

    Know your sources.

    JERKING AROUND

  • drhugenmountain

    Breaking !

    In their new e-book THE VOODOOD PRINCE, coming out soon, Dr. Corsi and his co-author Sheriff Joe will reveal the shocking facts they have unearthed during a short travel to Africa:

    When The Usurper was born in Kenya the most powerful sorcerer of Africa performed several Voodoo-Rites ! The details are too horrorful to be described here, where children an good Christians may read.

    The sorcerer promised the mother of The Usurper – she made a horrible sacrifice in exchange – to make her son POTUS !

    Through mighty voodoo-sorcery the sorcerer forced the employees of the Hawaiian Department of Health to register the Kenyan birth as having happened in Hawaii and give notice to the local newspapers.

    After that he put a spell on every living and still to be born person not only in the USA but the whole world. He forced them to support The Usurper in every possible way:

    to finance his schools and his posh lifestyle;
    to forge his school-records;
    to put fake reports about studies in Harvard in the papers;
    to vote for him.

    Only True Christians are immune against this spell, True Christians like Joseph Farah, Dr. Corsi, David Farrar, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, Larry Kleyman and Sheriff Joe. They can see behind the voodoo smokescreen.

    Unfortunately all the Judges are spellbound and deny each and every plaint. Are there no Christian Judges any more ?

    That there are some people in the Birther movement who are no Christians like Dr. Orly Taitz is easy to explain: in reality they are OBOTS, sent out by The Usurper to destroy the Birther movement. Unfortunately Dr. Taitz seems to able to reach that purpose.

    What a horror.

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      Hi Dr.Hugenmountain!!!

      There was also part of the spell that clouded the minds of the Birthers so that they can’t read and comprehend simple sentences like, “not necessary to solve these doubts” from Minor v. Happersett.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  • ehancock

    There is an aspect of the two-US-parent theory that birthers ignore. It is that in order to believe that theory one must believe that the founders thought that the US-born children of foreigners were really not as good as the US-born children of US citizens.

    That the founders did not believe that the US-born children of foreigners were just as good is possible, of course. But there are two things that argue that they did not think that. First is that they never said that they thought that the US-born children of foreigners were not as good, and second, they had written: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

    To be sure, many of the writers held slaves, and hence they did not literally believe that all men were created equal. But that is still not proof that they held that the US-born children of foreigners were not as good as the US-born children of US citizens. It is obviously unfair to assume that they had more prejudices than there is actual evidence for. And there is NO evidence that they considered the US-born children of foreigners of lower status than the US-born childen of US citizens.

    Four score and twenty years after the Declaration of Independence Lincoln declared that this nation was conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. He then went on to say that the Civil War was a test whether a nation so conceived and so dedicated could long endure. In short, in his opinion, the war was in part a test of whether all men are equal.

    And yet there appear to be people who still believe that the US-born children of foreigners are not equal, and should not be treated as equal, to the US-born children of US citizens. And, not only do they not believe it, they think—without a shred of evidence–that James Madison, Ben Franklin and George Washington did not believe it either.

    To the millions of Americans who have had foreign parents or foreign grandparents that is a shocking thing to hold. Are you saying that my US-born parents, or my US-born grandparents were not as good as other people born in America at the same time? Well, Lincoln for sure did not think that they were unequal, and there is no evidence that Washington did either.

  • smorkingapple

    Ahhh you’ve been banished to Ticker hell as well I see. For doing nothing more than destroying one of his arguments, which really isn’t that hard. I went thru the same thing there a year ago once he latched on to the “forged” birth certificate thing. I warned him that by going there he was no different than the 9/11 truthers who also had “physical” and “technical” evidence of such and such but could never explain all the other circumstantial evidence which would make their proposed scenarios impossible. Instant ban.

    Did you see he’s now latching onto Michelle Obama’s “admission” videos where she says Obama is from Kenya as some further proof? He’s gone completely off the deep end now. I’d destroy him on this point as it involves his ignorance of how people of color talk about their ancestry and ethnicity but he’s blocked my emails and tweets as well.

    He’s not that smart on financial matters either. He continues to predict the US is going the Euro route when that is just physically impossible. He completely ignores the fundamental difference between the monetary systems. He’s been predicting the sky is falling for quite some time now but when you ask him for a date he’ll clam up.

    He’s not an honest guy. Honest people welcome debate and someone honest would have taken your post and tried to dissect it piece by piece. Once he realized he couldn’t, he knew banning you was the only way out since others might read it and start questioning his logic. I was willing to debate him and the rest of the lemmings on that forum and be outnumbered and he still banned me.

    That’s the mark of a false prophet who must keep up the charade of knowledge or else his new career is finished. I lost a ton of respect for that guy.

  • John Wayne

    PRAVDA THE COMMUNIST NEWSPAPER RIPS OBUMMER

    PRAVDA THE COMMUNIST NEWSPAPER RIPS OBUMMER

    n March 7th, 2012, Pravda called out the U.S. press for its deliberate neglect of the largest scandal in modern American history. Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio released credible forensic evidence that Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States, presented to the world a forged Birth Certificate on April 27th, 2011.
    Since then, the scandal has only expanded. Former United States Postal Service worker Allen Hulton has recently come forward with compelling testimony given under Oath, which leads to only one conclusion: Barack Obama attended College in the United States as a Foreign Student.

    DON’T TREAD ON ME !!!
    NBC *NATIONAL BABOON COMMISSION*******

  • John Wayne

    A federal court in Washington, DC, held last week that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.
    The ruling came as part of a motion by the conservative legal watch dog group Judicial Watch, who had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to the the New Black Panthers case. Judicial Watch had secured many previously unavailable documents through their suit against DOJ and were now suing for attorneys’ fees.
    Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records produced in this litigation evidenced any political interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the New Black Panther Party case. But United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed. Citing a “series of emails” between Obama political appointees and career Justice lawyers, Walton writes:
    The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case, which would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not involved in that decision. Surely the public has an interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy of government officials’ representations regarding the possible politicization of agency decision-making.

    In sum, the Court concludes that three of the four fee entitlement factors weigh in favor of awarding fees to Judicial Watch. Therefore, Judicial Watch is both eligible and entitled to fees and costs, and the Court must now consider the reasonableness of Judicial Watch’s requested award.

  • John Wayne

    A FEDERAL JUDGE RULED IT SO YOU OBUMMER TRAITOR LOVERS !!!!!!!!!!!

    A federal court in Washington, DC, held last week that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party

  • Reality Check

    Karl Denninger…now there is a name that has dropped off the Birther radar screen. I had an email exchange with Karl last year. He is very thin skinned. I told him his analysis of the PDF was useless because the AP JPG could not have been made from the LFBC PDF and until he explained that his stuff about “halos” was nonsense. He got mad and block my emails.

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      RC:

      Karl Denninger is a real disappointment to me. I wonder if he is still a “two citizen parents” birther or not. If he has changed his mind, after all the recent court cases have stomped on the theory, he ought to have the decency to come out and say it.

      I have been thinking about doing a follow-up article on him. I still read his blog every day, because he seems to have good sense about economic stuff, and a straightforward writing style. But I have to hold my nose and take whatever he says with a big grain of salt because of the silly ass birther stuff.

      What was really sad was the cowardly way that he DQ’ed me for getting right there in his face about his erroneous belief. Because while a person has a right to do that on their own blog, it is very very cowardly and poltroonish to do it just because somebody shows you clearly and distinctly where you are screwed up about something.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  • Reality Check

    Karl buys into all the Birther BS. He even tried to pull out the “Obama has sealed all his records” nonsense.

    • ramboike

      @Reality Check.

      Will you provide a list of the “original records” Obama has produced that the American people have asked for?

      It is my understanding that the single piece of evidence Obama has produced to base his right to hold the office of the presidency on IS NOT an authentic “original” piece of evidence, but instead a digital image made on a computer after he was in the White House.

      After a 20 month investigation by law enforcement it has been found to be a complete 100% forgery.

      “..I think what’s important if you are running for President is that the American people know who you are, what you’ve done, and you’re an open book..”
      ~~Obama, the Kenyan WonderBoy

      • Slartibartfast

        Ike,

        Can you provide a list of all of the “original records” which previous presidents and presidential candidates have released but President Obama has not? The fact is that President Obama has released more information about himself than any of his predecessors and the American people, based in part on that information, elected him POTUS. Twice. As for his Hawai’ian birth certificate, given statements by the ultimate authority on the matter (the Hawai’an DoH), a certified copy of either the COLB or the LFBC would be accepted as valid by any federal or state court in country (according to the US Constitution).

        The only thing your “20 month investigation” has proven is that some people are too stupid to understand what the term “forgery” means and how to prove it in a court of law.

        By the way, why weren’t you concerned with Mitt Romney’s failure to release his tax records — something which all previous presidential candidates have done since his father established the precedent? Do you think it is fair to hold President Obama to a higher standard than any of his predecessors while allowing Mitt Romney to ignore a standard met by all of his predecessors?

        • ramboike

          Slartibartfast,

          Excellent! You brought the Strawman so you could argue with yourself. What did any of that have to do with asking Reality Check for a list of the original records Obama has released?

          forgery [ˈfɔːdʒərɪ]
          n pl -geries
          1. the act of reproducing something for a deceitful or fraudulent purpose

          Mitt Romney in this instance is a Red Herring. This is about Obama’s records.

          Apparently there is a problem because neither you or Reality Check has provided a list.

        • Slartibartfast

          Ike,

          It’s not a straw man to point out that you are asking for records from President Obama which have never been required of any other president or presidential candidate in the history of our republic.

          Regarding forgery, you clearly fail to understand the definition you posted. Your problem is the term “fraudulent purpose”. There is absolutely no evidence that any image of any of the president’s birth certificates contained any incorrect information whatsoever, much less that it was falsified with the intent to deceive. The birthers have always and will always fail in court because they cannot meet this burden of proof.

          President Obama has released all of the records that are customarily released by presidential candidates (primarily tax records) and some records that have never been released by any other (birth certificates). Mitt Romney did not. If this were about what records people running for president should release, you would have been concerned about what Mitt was hiding. Instead you betray that your only interest is in holding President Obama to a higher standard than any other president in our history.

          Why is that?

  • ramboike

    Slartibartfast

    You continue to engage the StrawMan. It was such a simple question. Your statements would be totally relevant if this was a subject about making comparisons among people who have occupied the White House, legally or illegally.

    When I ask the Birthers for a list of Obama’s “original records” they have never failed to provide me with the ones he won’t release. When I ask the Obots for the “original records” Obama has released they develope ‘brain freeze’ and then come with the Strawman and/or Red Herrings. The Obots have turned it into a giant circle jerk over a simple question.

    • Slartibartfast

      Ike,

      Clearly you’re just trying to play birther word games, but I’ll play along for the nonce…

      First off, you need to specify what you mean by “original records”. As a group, birthers have an incredibly poor understanding of what constitutes an official record*, how a record may be reasonably released to the public**, and how records are authenticated***, so, in order to avoid making a straw man please tell me what you would consider your “original records” and how you would “release” them if you wanted to. Or you could let us know what you think President Obama should have released and how he should have released it—in other words, what could President Obama have done that would have completely allayed your fears. If you answer my questions, I’ll do my best to list all of President Obama’s original records along with my opinion on how or if they could be released and whether or not they should be released. Or you can go back to your petty name calling and I’ll go back to either ignoring you or laughing at you depending on my mood.

      * for instance, in the case of President Obama’s birth certificate the record is data in a computer, not the original document in the vault.

      ** posting an image on the internet and allowing reporters to examine the physical document is a completely reasonable way to release a birth certificate and it does not release the custodial authority from its obligation to abide by privacy laws.

      *** in the case of either of President Obama’s birth certificates, every US court is Constitutionally bound to accept the information on them as true so long as the Hawai’ian DoH continues to stand behind them.

      • ramboike

        Slartifartfast,

        1st lets clear up your: “..you can go back to your petty name calling and I’ll go back to either ignoring you..” As I told you last year here on Squeeky’s blog & at Woodman’s: “because people have a different belief than you that’s no justification for calling them racists.”

        According to Obot dogma, the starting point for the claim to Obama being an American citizen is he was born in an Hawaiian hospital on Aug. 4th 1961 where his mother would of signed an admission & release form[s] and also signed a birth certificate that was sent to the Hawaiian Dept. of Health to be put on file.

        The 1961 hospital form[s] and the 1961 birth certificate would be “original records”. Birthers say they have never been released, what say you?

        Then there’s the records from Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard schools. Those are “original records”. Birthers say those haven’t been released, what say you?

        I could add more but that’s enough for you to get the idea on what “original records” are. I’m not looking for any excuses or justifications as to why any “original records” haven’t been released. Birthers don’t do that. They just give me a list of “original records” that haven’t been released. So show me your list of “original records” that have been released.

        • Slartibartfast

          Ike said:

          1st lets clear up your: “..you can go back to your petty name calling and I’ll go back to either ignoring you..” As I told you last year here on Squeeky’s blog & at Woodman’s: “because people have a different belief than you that’s no justification for calling them racists.”

          Demonstrated racism is, however, justification for calling someone a racist. No one is calling you racist for having the (counterfactual) belief that President Obama is ineligible (although that does make you willfully ignorant and dishonest), but comments such as the ones that Pat linked to on the other hand…

          According to Obot dogma, the starting point for the claim to Obama being an American citizen is he was born in an Hawaiian hospital on Aug. 4th 1961

          This is not Obot dogma, but rather US law. In the words of President James Madison, Father of the Constituion:

          “It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”

          According to the guy who wrote the rules, if we know that President Obama was born in Hawai’i then we know everything we need to about his allegiance.

          where his mother would of signed an admission & release form[s] and also signed a birth certificate that was sent to the Hawaiian Dept. of Health to be put on file.
          The 1961 hospital form[s] and the 1961 birth certificate would be “original records”. Birthers say they have never been released, what say you?

          I say: so what? It is extremely unlikely that such records exist today and even if they do, their release is prevented by privacy laws. Furthermore, the whole point of registering birth with the HDoH is that they then maintain the official record of the birth. This is why the COLB is prima facie evidence of President Obama’s birth in Hawai’i and it’s confirmation by DoH officials makes any other birth records moot. The particulars of the president’s birth can be proven for all intents and purposes in any court in the land, why do you need more (after all, you’ve never even asked for a birth certificate from any other president or candidate… why is that?)

          Then there’s the records from Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard schools.

          Records protected by privacy laws and never released by any other presidential candidate. Next.

          Those are “original records”. Birthers say those haven’t been released, what say you?

          What about tax records? President Obama did as all presidential candidates since George Romney have done and released about a decade’s worth. Why don’t you care about Mitt Romney not releasing his tax returns? Your failure to do so makes it crystal clear that your intent is to smear President Obama rather than an honest attempt to verify the eligibility of presidential candidates.

          I could add more but that’s enough for you to get the idea on what “original records” are.

          What you don’t say is why these records are in any way important. The answer is that they aren’t, you just want to say that President Obama hasn’t done something that no one else has done either in such a way as to smear the president.

          I’m not looking for any excuses or justifications as to why any “original records” haven’t been released.

          Of course you aren’t. You’re just a dishonest person who is prejudiced against the president and looking for a way to smear him because you can’t make any substantive attacks against the man or his policies (the real ones, not your straw man versions).

          Birthers don’t do that. They just give me a list of “original records” that haven’t been released.

          Yes, other birthers are glad to play along with your baseless smear attempts…

          So show me your list of “original records” that have been released.

          There are sure to be many more “original records” which you haven’t mentioned (employer records, etc.), but as they have no probative value, are not commonly released, and you have no right to see them, who cares?

        • Northland10

          The constant demand from Birthers leave me with 2 questions.

          1. What state or federal law spells out what “original records” must be provided/released by a candidate?

          2. Which state or federal agency or court with jurisdiction has actually requested the President, or his campaign, submit “original records” or even an official or unofficial birth certificate?

          As for the general public, he provides enough information to convince enough voters to select him. He has done this, twice.

  • ramboike

    Slarifartfast,

    Wow!!! Whole lotta dancing. You even got the King of the Red Herrings to join ya. You 2 doing an audition for DWTS? You had 3 shots at it and your list is still blank. Gotta admit the Birthers took yas to the woodshed on this one.

    Oh my!!! Siding with the lying pervert McKinnion. Have you no respect for decency, or value you online reputation?

    • roadburner

      just one question twinky, what documentation is required by the constitution regarding presidential eligability?

      that is to say, documentation that has been shown by previous presidents and that the law says needs to be shown, not what you bunch of tards would like

      and when you get into the woodshed, close the door, we´d enjoy your screams too much.

    • Slartibartfast

      Ike,

      You’re missing the point of my comment: The whole concept of “original records” as being something that is in any way important is something that has been made up out of whole cloth by the birthers. Which, I might add, makes the whole issue a red herring with regard to President Obama’s eligibility. Thank you for providing such a clear example of a birther railing against a dishonest tactic that they are using and their opponent isn’t. Classic. And you throw in some ad hominem and declaring victory in the face of defeat to complete your worthless little whine. Pretty pathetic, really.

      You ask if I have respect for decency—yes I do, very much, in fact… and I think that the dishonesty, willful ignorance and bigotry shown by birthers is just about the most impolite, indecent and unpatriotic behavior imaginable. My behavior, on the other hand, is unlikely to sully my image in the view of anyone I care about—more likely the opposite. At least I know that I tend to view others who are the subject of birther smear attempts (like Pat) more favorably. What is your obsession with him and attacking him for things that wouldn’t be a big deal even if they were true. Seriously, dude, it’s 2013 and the gays have pretty much won everything… which is good news for you if your rampant homophobia is the result of projection like we all think.

      So my answer to you is that we’ve seen far more of President Obama’s “original records” than any other candidate and that there is nothing which has been withheld that is in any why unusual. It is your own myopic focus on President Obama which belies any concern you might evince about principles—if you had any principles they would apply equally to all candidates and you’ve made it clear that your standard only applies to President Obama.

      Here’s a question you could answer if you had any intellectual honesty whatsoever: What would it take to convince you that President Obama was the legitimate POTUS? If you can’t answer this question (or answer with a standard impossible to achieve or with moving goalposts), then you merely demonstrate that you have nothing but blind faith in your baseless hate against your president.

      What say you?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: