Posted by I am a partisan I admit it. It is my right as an American citizen to say what I feel and why. I believe the election of Obama is based on lies, fraud and a unified effort to stop the Republican Party from advancing politically. The Bush haters have won, and the American people have lost. They lost because they were duped into believing that Obama offers something much more than he does. That Obama will take his oath to follow the guidelines of the United States Constitution, but he won’t. That Obama is willing to put partisan politics aside and do what is right for America, but he won’t. That Obama will protect our Nation from harm’s way, but he won’t. That Obama will protect the freedom of speech of those who disagree with him, but he won’t. That Obama will “fix” the economy, but he won’t.
Whether my beliefs are right or wrong, it doesn’t matter, I have a right to express them because I was born in the United States of America where freedom of speech is my right. Similarly, the New York Times, when the day after the 2004 Presidential election, in the midst of a Bush victory, accused those who voted for President Bush of being backward, stupid and buffoons. The only difference between me and them is that they are a pissant and partisan news organization that is read all over the world, and I am a simple homemaker with a political blog on the World Wide Web, with just a handful of readers.
So, no matter how often, whether they be liberals, conservatives, or otherwise, tell me to accept fate and acknowledge that Obama won fair and square, I will not diffuse, deny or stifle my own rhetoric. I believe them to be true and no one can tell me otherwise.
I do not believe that Obama won fair and square. Yes, there are many that voted for Obama clearly and without reservation, and while those voters are in my opinion misguided, they are nonetheless valid votes, but what put Obama over the edge to win the election was voter fraud and intimidation.
Quite frankly, I am not sure that Obama is a proper U.S. citizen even qualified to be President, and although these points have been debated under the wire, I must add, because no major news organization, will even question the validity of these points, there is some evidence that Obama was born in Africa, and a simple authorization to release a certified and original birth certificate has yet to be resolved, mainly because Obama refuses to release it.
Am I being a pessimist? Maybe. Am I writing this because I am a racist? Absolutely not. I do not like Obama based upon his character and his political philosophy, NOT, I repeat NOT because of his race. I reject any and all accusations of same. I do not care if Obama was white, black, red or yellow. Politically, he is a pro-abortion, liberal who advocates socialist principles for America. The color of his skin means nothing. If he was a black pro-life, conservative who advocates limited government and capitalist solutions, I would absolutely support him, but he doesn’t.
Why do you hate America?
By Iron E on Nov 10, 2008
Very well put. I could not agree more. It is nice to see I am not the only one that feels this way.
Sincerely,
Dave
By Dave Dennis on Nov 10, 2008
I will love America until the day I die! I am a very proud American who loves freedom of speech, so much so, that I am not afraid to express my views. Feel free to express yours, but an American that hates America? You have the wrong person.
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
Sore looser.
By James on Nov 10, 2008
How do you know a single thing about what Barack Obama will do as President? Nobody does, unless you can tell the future? So shut your piehole and stop hating on this country.
By Jman_Army on Nov 10, 2008
Yea! You’re expressing your right to free speech too! But calling me an American hater is wrong, because I love America so much. Can I tell the future? No you’re right, but let’s revisit this question a year from now. Ha ha, you can’t “shut me up”, I am a free person living in a free country, lucky me!
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
The sad thing is, you will die never knowing you’re wrong. It must suck to live in a state of perpetual fear and anger. The only people that can fix this country are us citizens, not Obama, not McCain, and not the government. So man-up and help this country or STFU.
By JB on Nov 10, 2008
I am not living in perpetual fear and anger. I do not trust Obama and his team, sorry, I just don’t. Fearful of an Obama Presidency? YES, I am. Angry that he duped everyone? YES. But, I do not live my life in fear and anger. I cannot man-up I am a woman.
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
Then wo-man-up, or whatever. This has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with helping your country in need. You shouldn’t trust anyone in the government, not just Obama. We need to hold everyone in our government accountable, not just the poeple we don’t like.
But if you think Obama and his staff are plotting to purposefully harm us, then you are nuts. Like I said, do something good for your community- educate people, help children, volunteer your time. Or STFU and stop detracting from those of us who actually want to make the US a better place to live with your baseless accusations and feelings.
I don’t think Obama can fix this country – but I believe he can motivate us into fixing it. We’ve been living outside our means for quite some time now- it’s time to pay the bill or things are going to get real ugly.
By JB on Nov 10, 2008
“Like I said, do something good for your community- educate people, help children, volunteer your time.”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha LOL, LOL, people who know me know how much I do and will continue to do for my community. An Obama presidency or any other President will not stop me. Really, you have no idea!
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
That’s great to hear, then you’re all set. But a lot more people need to step up to the plate here. If Obama makes that easier and more likely to happen then he was worth electing IMO.
I wish you and this country the best. Your view is not irrational, and maybe our government would work better if more people were skeptical of their leaders at first instead of blindly supporting their team. Perhaps he will gain your trust during his term. I hope for the sake of this country he does.
By JB on Nov 10, 2008
“Perhaps he will gain your trust during his term. I hope for the sake of this country he does.”
More than anything, JB, I hope you are right!
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
Liberals are the true America-haters. Look how 0bama is going to set free all the gitmo terrorists who never deserved anything but to be killed. Look how he’s going to kill industry. look what will happen, by the scumbags own admission, to our energy rates.
All you jackass trash who voted for 0bama suck, and you are the anti-Americans who need to shut your dirtycrap-packled pieholes.
Liberals suck.
By Jeff on Nov 10, 2008
Look everyone, I am a sore loser!
By anonymous on Nov 10, 2008
Obama was dragged into office by a compliant press that was too busy ganging up on Governor Palin’s pregnant daughter to investigate: Obama’s ties to Bill Ayers; Rashid Khalidi; Tony Rezko; his threats against Stanley Kurtz; Michelle Obama’s bizarre statements in her thesis; Obama’s behaviour/grades at Columbia University; whether he was even born in the USA! He has already stated that he will “rule” the USA – not govern, but “rule”. Be afraid, be very afraid.
By Alice L. on Nov 10, 2008
So you are not sure that President-elect Obama is qualified by birth to be the President. Do you no think that say, the Attorney General’s office (that would be the Republican Attorney General) would have had the foresight to check this? Or perhaps in all their excitement, they forgot?
Your “evidence” of voter fraud seems to come principally from http://www.humanevents.com. Not exactly an impartial source.
And even if say 50% of their allegations are found to be true firstly there is a consistent error in any election – and secondly even if there weren’t, it would not account for the majority that Mr Obama achieved.
He won. Get over it. Plan your fight for 2012 when you can fight on his record – whatever that might be. But for now, accept his victory.
By Jas on Nov 10, 2008
Your assertion that my evidence of voter fraud comes from an impartial source, would nullify most news organizations for the same reason. Diffuse the points in the links not the source.
And, actually, I question the validity of Obama’s birth certificate due to Phillip Berg’s lawsuit pending in the Supreme Court.
Read more here: http://obamacrimes.com
The facts in the case have not been denied, the defendants have only asserted that Mr. Berg does not have standing to request a copy of Obama’s original birth certificate.
Mr. Berg is a registered Democrat and was involved with Democrat politics for many years.
By Raquel on Nov 10, 2008
I agree with Raquel – Obama would not have been elected if a fair/impartial and unbiased media existed to thoroughly investigate and “vet” every candidate.
The fact that the media covered up so much – meant many fairly lazy voters could be swayed into voting for “THE ONE.”
However – as one who lost, I definitely agree that we “losers” should give Barack Obama the same courtesy and deference that the Democrats showed President Bush over the past 8 years.
And if there is any successful terrorist attack, Obama, the Democrat Party, and every Democrat voter is responsible, and “reparations” should be made to every Republican voter. Every Democrat should have their tax rates DOUBLED until any and all damages are paid in full!!!
By Mike on Nov 10, 2008
“they are a major partisan news organization”
No, no, no. The Times is the “pissant media”. Don’t empower them. They are pissants. Nothing more. Please don’t call them “major”. They are as major as the biggest ant you can think of, a quarter inch or so.
By Mitchell Langbert on Nov 11, 2008
I agree 100%. Voter fraud, manipulation and lies? More like over 1/2 the American people were asleep through this election. My friend Vasos said it best, when he descbreibed the voters as “ordinary savants” (instead of idiot savants) who are ordinarily awake 2 hours a week. How else do you explain the cheering for Obama at a rally when he paused to blow his nose. Or the chills that went up Chris Matthews leg. The democrats branded a rock-star, not a statesman. The Daley machine built up the image and David Axelrod packaged a phantom for consumption and the pissant media sold it to the American people. Is it any wonder since 97% of Journalism schools faculty are Democrat?
By Phil O on Nov 11, 2008
Raquel–Obama needs to produce an original birth certificate, his health records, and his school records. He has refused, and the Democratic Party and media have not required them. Americans need to know who he is and more of the above essentials about him.
By Florence on Nov 11, 2008
I would use the words “knowingly concealed” (his true affiliations and friendships) rather than fraud. Remember: the MSM and the vicious blogs were too busy investigating Governor Palin’s teenaged daughter to vet this marxist Chicago politician.
By Alice L. on Nov 11, 2008
Why is it that sometimes when read some comments I feel like I just entered into the “Twilight Zone” or an alternate universe. come on…really,I mean… really. I’ll just address some of the comments here:
1. Obama not a true citizen: give me a break. why do we insist on continuing baseless arguments. Do you know anyone who works for the FBI or the goverment for that matter? They go through the most rigourous background check and rechecks much less someone running for public office and the POTUS. Actually perform this experiment. Ask 10 random people if you are born in Panama canal zone does that make you an american citizen? I bet you 9 out of the 10 will say NO. But do you know that if you are born in a US territory you are a US citizen and guess what that is where John McCain was born. Yet I don’t hear anyone talk about it because it is baseless. You should watch a movie called “The Contender” with Joan Allen. In the movie politicians and the public wanted her (she is a candidate for VP) to respond and defend herself against some smears. Although there was concrete evidence that the smears were false she decided not to respond or defend because it was BENEATH HER. Frankly I hope Obama does not release his birth certificate because these accusations are BENEATH HIM.
Also Obama was vetted by the media as well. The reason that towards the end it seemed they didn’t is because the primary was for 21 months and every issue that was to come out came out. So it was only when the McCain camp saw the polls towards the end of the campaign, they decided to beat a dead horse. Good thing the public saw it for what it was i.e. a campaign tactic.
Finally I realize everyone is allowed to state their opinions but doesn’t there come a time we draw a line in the sand and say we are not going to engage in baseless and unsubstantiated discussions? I mean it is the same with some “conspiracy theory”blogs after 9/11 that said the attacks were orchestrated by the Bush administration.Yes they were stating their opinions but do we have to engage in such discussions. I was going to tell JB off and ask him to not call Raquel an american hater but then I thought “hmmmm it’s his opinion”. If we are going to engage in these types of discussions can i recommend two new threads of discussions below:
1. Why I believe the earth is flat because when I walk I don’t walk in a circle (don’t listen to those historians and academics that say it is round. Your science books are biased)
2. Why I believe the moon is made of cheese because as a kid I watched a Tom and Jerry movie where Tom was chasing Jerry in a spaceship and stretched his hand out took a piece of the cheesy moon and ATE it.
These are my opinions
By Reggie on Nov 11, 2008
There you go again, Reggie confusing apples with oranges. Folks like myself who have legitimate concerns about the sealed records of our president-elect, are not conspiracy theorists. We are questioning and demanding proof of the qualifications and Constitutional requisites for the President of the US, which is a uniquely American thing to do. Why do you folks and the pissant media beleive that Obama is above the law?
By Phil O on Nov 12, 2008
Phil you are under the assumption that the issue has not been looked at by government officials or even the media. I mean what do you require? His original birth certificate in a glass in a musuem? I can bet you if the media showed a copy of the certificate you would scream “It’s a fake” or look for some other excuse to question is patrotism which is the root of all this ridiculous requests. I’d like to think that something like this would be on the radar for the FBI, CIA etc Just like I said to people on other blogs who said Palins son was actually the son of her daughter, don’t engage in baseless chatter
By Reggie on Nov 12, 2008
By the way here is factcheck.org that has dealt with the issue
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
But like I said above this will probably not satisfy you because you are one of those conspiracy theorist that just likes to run with whatever theory that catches their fancy
By Reggie on Nov 12, 2008
Hi Reggie,
I think where we disagree the most is the point that you feel Obama was fairly vetted, and I disagree. I do not see evidence of careful vetting. Let’s compare Obama with Bush in 2000. The press did not let up on Bush for anything, even a story from Dan Rather, that OMG, hold on to your seats, Bush missed a scheduled medical appt. while he was in the service!
As pointed out by one of my readers, Obama’s medical/college/birth records have not been released to the public. This is not a theory, this is truth. What if Bush decided to withhold his medical/college/birth records from the press, all hell would have broken lose.
Requesting these records is not unreasonable, nor comparable to 9/11 conspiracists. I am only in search of the truth. I’m not making things up as I go.
Your argument that Obama HAS been vetted, is laughable, and I say that with deepest respect for your opinion. Even the Washington Post has admitted that it didn’t do its job properly when it came to vetting Obama.
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
P.S. I don’t trust factcheck either sorry, I just don’t. The organization is run by partisan Democrats, and as pointed out by Phil Berg, the attorney suing Obama, et al., in a popular U-tube video, he asserts that the two copies of what may or may not be Obama’s birth certificate are different. The birth certificate supposedly being checked by factcheck, is NOT the same copy of the birth certificate initially posted at Obama’s website. I want real proof, not opinions. I want Obama to produce the real thing to a Judge, and let that Judge decide. Not factcheck, not the NYT, not Obama’s word. I want someone to impartially take a look at this issue.
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
This is for you Reggie:
http://www.americasright.com/2008/10/philip-berg-interview-hits-youtube.html
Conflict of interest between Obama and Factcheck.org
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
Hi, Raquel. I found your blog today, upon the recommendation of Mitchell Langbert. So far, I love it, but I don’t understand the motivation of people who write to tell you to “STFU”. They apparently feel perfectly within their rights to come to your blog to insult you, yet they somehow also believe that you don’t have a right to express your views. Can somebody say, “Nazi?” If you people don’t like what Raquel says, then the solution is simple: Go read something else. Nobody is forcing you to read her blog.
By M&M on Nov 12, 2008
Wait a sec didn’t Dan Rather’s career go down the drain after the Bush story? And of course you would say you do not agree with Factcheck. But what makes your source of information on Obama’s birth certificate non-biased? If you say factcheck is biased then the same can be said for any information source. I can put up more sources that dispute this claim and also pull up speeches,videos, quotes from lawyers etc to make my point. Why do you base your opinion on Philip Berg’s statements? Is he not human and can he not have his own personal agenda? I read the link you sent and I saw a reference to Jerome Corsi and thought here we go again. I can’t even begin to tell you about Corsi and how he’s been so discredited as an author (even though he has a best seller in Obama Nation) but believe me raquel if you read what this guy has said in the past eg on the pope,catholic, jews etc If fact anytime I see him on FoxNews he’s apologizing on his past statements. But like I said this goes to my original question where do we draw the line on discussion on factless information?
Lastly whether the media properly vetted Obama or not is as mentioned almost a matter of opinion. My thing is whatever analysis you make has to be a “well rounded” analysis. For example I can make the claim that the media did not properly vet mccain and palin as well because did you know that McCain made contributions to a foundation owned by Rasheed Khalidi a supposed spokesman for the PLO when they were listed as a terroist organization? Did you know Palin was part of a political party in Alaska that was looking to secede from the US? Now these are all the tangential stories that float around in the blogsphere but the media for the most part did not touch these stories. Believe me is there is a story worth following the truth always comes out. A great example of this is the John Edwards story.
As for me I chose to focus on other issues that affect me e.g. how are Obama’s policies going to affect me. If people want to drum this up you know fine that is your right as a citizen.
By Reggie on Nov 12, 2008
Reggie: The answer is simple. If Obama HAS been properly “vetted” by election authorities and the media, then why won’t he simply authorize the state of Hawaii to allow any interested person to LOOK AT his ACTUAL 1961 birth certificate, if it exists?
By M&M on Nov 12, 2008
Reggie, I have already admitted it, I am a partisan, my views, opinions are coming from a very conservative, pro-life, pro-libertarian, pro-free market economy standpoint. Whereas the pissant media are masquerading as a non-partisan news organization. I did not read Corsi’s recent book about Obama, but I did read his book about Kerry, and I thought it was excellent. First hand accounts of Veterans who served with Kerry, and how they felt he had ulterior motives. Corsi’s book in that instance was never questioned by the pissant media by its merits, but rather Corsi was attacked personally. Again, argue the merits not the messenger. Do you dispute that Obama has a conflict of interest with Factcheck.org?
Can you imagine if there wasn’t conservative talk radio or internet access? Liberal leaning Democrats would control all sources of information. Do you think that is fair?
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
1.Your obama picture in the banner is a fake.
2.There is no evidence of fraud. Not a single example of a fake acorn registrant showing up to vote. Not a single example of a republican ‘intimidated from voting’. Not a single example of someone having voted twice. Never mind that under HAVA acorn by law had to hand in the dubious registrations, even the Mr T ones.
Despite not having a single example of actual fraud, you would need thousands, nay millions, of such examples to have ‘stolen’ this election. Even the EC, not just popular vote.
3.Funny how Berg was a nut case lefty loon when he was spouting off his 9-11 inside job crap, but here you ruin your credibility by pushing his latest nonsense.
Not only is factcheck NOT Democrat affiliated, it is run by the REPUBLICAN annenburg group who’s namesake donated the max to McCain.
Citing Berg does one thing to your credibility but when you employ even more tenuous conspiracies to defend against the debunking you plunge your credibility to new depths.
But like free speech, everyone has a reputation and credibility. What one chooses to do with them is up to the individual.
Good luck in the wilderness, it’ cold out there.
By haai on Nov 12, 2008
Raquel, you will be glad to know that Jay youknowwho is back to bashing social conservativies. Without us, McCain would have lost by an even larger margin. The nerve – we are the ones who go out there and fight!
By Alice L. on Nov 12, 2008
1. No kidding.
2. Get real.
3. I am not alone.
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
1. So you like being fringe.
2. Gimmie some evidence. Let’s see some gop post election fec complaints, let’s see some mainstream right leaning sources. Even NRO or something.
3. I never said you were alone in the wilderness. But the company is rather poor.
By haai on Nov 12, 2008
1. I like to use the phrase counter culture.
2. Link to sources – see article. It’s not my fault the GOP are wimps.
3. Poor in your opinion.
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
I’ll make it easier for you.
http://devvy.net/pdf/nov08/obama_vote_fraud_list.html
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
So you are lazy.
You give me a link to a site the seems to advance your world view, yet clicking the actual links disproves every single headline.
The ones that don’t link to discredited acorn REGISTRATION fraud CLAIMS.
Jesus, even repub Governor Crist in Florida said the GOP claims were bogus.
Anyway, do what you will.
By haai on Nov 12, 2008
Yes, I’m lazy, and I just watch CNN – they are not biased at all, I believe every word they say!
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
In today’s Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html
By Raquel on Nov 12, 2008
lol. yes lazy.
And that is me taking the generous view.
From your link…
“For example, there was Friday night’s announcement by Minneapolis’s director of elections that she’d forgotten to count 32 absentee ballots in her car.”
That’s it.
The only ‘fishy’ thing listed in the whole article. And the article goes on to say Obama clearly won MN.
So why don’t you come back to reality instead of contributing to the bile and stench infesting the right side of the interwebs.
The republican party doesn’t need this crap going into 2010 and 12 elections.
By haai on Nov 13, 2008
M&M
Can you please point me to a piece of legislature, a law or Act that requires a presidential candidates birth certificate to be viewed by the public? Has any crime being committed to say Obama is above the law?
Raquel
I agree we should have multiple layers of checks and balances and yes you can be partisan but it also means you should be objective as well. When you say we should debate the merits of the message rather than the messenger, I actually think you should also question the messenger as he can mould his message to fit his ideology. This is especially true if the messenger has a reputation and history for distorting the facts. I believe you yourself question the messenger because you always question the information we receive from the media (who can be seen as a messenger). I believe you do that because certain sections of the media have provided false information in the past eg your example above about Bush’s record. I actually agree with that. So why shouldn’t we question Berg or especially Corsi when they provide information and consider what their motives are? So yes when I see information like that from questionable sources I look at the facts of the messenge, research it, double, triple check it and look at numerous sources of information before I reach a conclusion. we should be careful of accepting any information that seems to promote our ideology or philosophy. With regards to a conflict of interest with factcheck that is inconsequential at best.
Also I agree that the liberal media should not control majority of the sources of information.
By Reggie on Nov 13, 2008
In the first link provided, there are about 100 articles. Can you debunk each and every one, after you speed read them all??
We can go back and forth all night. Look conservatives have a different point of view, we’re not happy with the way this election has unfolded. And we have every right to submit our objections. You don’t have to agree, nor do you have to read my blog, although I appreciate the debate.
But, when you revert to calling conservative writers “bile and stench infesting” frankly, I give up!
By Raquel on Nov 13, 2008
Reggie, thanks again for coming back to my blog for comment, your point of view is very much appreciated.
At first, I was hesitant about jumping on the whole birth certificate bandwagon. I didn’t think it could go anywhere, and I felt that in all likelihood Obama was born in the U.S. as he stated.
I started to become curious, however, when there were so many of my trusted friends, who are intelligent and reasonable people, who were questioning the validity of the BC produced by Obama on his campaign site.
My curiosity led me to the Berg lawsuit, and after reading through the pleading, and I am not a lawyer, but have some familiarity in the field, I started wondering, why doesn’t Obama just release a true and accurate copy of same, and put an end to this?
I don’t know Berg, and I certainly can’t defend him, but he was involved in the Democrat Party for many years, so what’s his beef and why? Is there some truth to this allegation, or not? I don’t have the answers.
Do I think it is beneath Obama to answer the complaint? No I don’t. I think he should produce it to a Judge. How does that hurt him? It doesn’t, it would prove all us fools wrong.
By Raquel on Nov 13, 2008
I will support president-elect Barack Obama once he is sworn in to office. I also think this is an unprecedented historic occasion. The election of a black man to the highest office is certainly a great achievement which proves the viability of the American experiment. The people have proven the Wilsonian ideal of allegiance to a higher cause of democracy, overcoming the provincial ties to race, tribe, ethnic group etc. That said, the truth remains, that according to the Constitution of the United States, Barack Obama is ineligible for the presidency since he has not provided a certified birth certificate to prove he is a natural born citizen. You can shoot the messenger all you want, but let the courts decide the merits of the case. I do not speculate on whether Barack Obama is or is not a citizen. I will support US president Obama 100%, but so far he has not produced a certified BC in the lawsuit filed by Phillip Berg, attorney, former Deputy Attorney General of Pa., State Committeeman, and Chairman of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County. If the truth drives you crazy, I don’t know what else to say. And Mr. Haai, thanks but no thanks for your advice for the Republican party in 2010, and 2012.
By Phil O on Nov 13, 2008
Obama’s solultion to ALL these ‘crazy‘ allegations is so simple, you have to question his intellegence. Three Words (Biden Math), COME CLEAN.
Did Obama not run on a platform for TRANSPARENCY? Open Government? Government for the people? Any CLEAR thinking person, young and old, can tell Obama is hiding something. His strategy surrounding his personal information is troublesome, at best. Maybe it has nothing to do with his eligibility. He is as likely as eligible as Uncle Sam. But inquiring minds want to know, what could be on his COLB? What did he do during his years at Columbia? Harvard? Extra-curricular activities? Groups? Did he receive scholarship money, reserved for Muslims? reserved for national student exchange programs?
By JoeB on Nov 13, 2008
I will give O. the support his followers gave Pres. Bush – n o n e.
By Alice L. on Nov 13, 2008
Reggie: The Constitution of the United States of America. Read it. It spells out who is eligible and who is NOT eligible to be president.
There is another suit pending in the U.S. Supreme Court. Look it up. The lawyer’s name is Leo Donofrio. The case should go to Justice Thomas soon.
There are now also questions about a potentially forged Selective Service registration received through an FOIA request. See Debbie Schlussel’s blog for more information.
By M&M on Nov 14, 2008
A rundown of the run around Mr. Donofrio got from Supreme Court clerk:
http://devvy.net/pdf/nov08/unorthodox.pdf
By M&M on Nov 14, 2008
M&M: I know that the consitution says you must be a natural born citizen but my question to you is where does it say that the candidates state must open up the candidates birth certificate to the public or interested parties? I mean the state of Hawaii has officially certified the birth certificate as being true and authentic. But if Mr.Berg feels he has a case then by all means he should take it to the courts which is what he is doing. So lets see how it plays out. I believe the dept of defense issues all security clearances and all senators and congressmen go through a rigorous security and background check. But if Mr.Berg and you really think that President Bush and his cabinet would allow Obama to be briefed at a top level security meeting without clearance, well you and Berg know something they don’t.
By Reggie on Nov 15, 2008
When I say I would support President Obama, I mean that it’s the civic duty of American citizens and politicians of all stripes to support a duly elected public official, although we may disagree with his policies and capabilities for the job, and question his eligibility for office as well, until a court decision is rendered based on the merits of the case against him. We expected the same from those self-interested Democratic politicians and their followers who not only did not support, but actively tried to undermine our current Commander-in-Chief for political gain at a time of war. But I will take the moral high ground and not stoop to their vile level of fraud and deceit. And that goes for Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Franks, Murtha, Kerry, Conyers and their minions in the Democratic Congress that has the lowest approval rating in our history (9% per Rasmusen). Also it is ridiculous to expect Bush and his cabinet to vet elected officials and the president-elect, when that should have been the job of Howard Dean and the DNC before he was given the nomination. How do you expect Bush’s cabinet and Henry Paulson to do anything right when they urged the American people to grant $700 billion of their money to the big banks and securities firms to buy up their toxic loans when Paulson now says they’re not going to buy these bad mortgages in the first place and God only knows where they’ll spend our taxpayer money next. Ordinary patriotic Americans have the duty to speak up when our elected officials don’t know what they’re doing and that includes the state of Hawaii. Don’t ask Americans who want to know the truth to trust Gov Lingle who is hiding the alleged “document” under lock and seal. Our elected officials are asleep at the wheel, all of them, because they never requested proof of a certified birth certificate when legitimate questions came up whether Barack Obama is a natural born citizen.
By Phil O on Nov 16, 2008
I believe the DNC did vet the candidates but it is up to Mr.Berg to prove the vetting was flawed or there was a fake document presented. He should present his case to the courts. Believe me if there was any traction on this story the RNC would have had their lawyers all over this stuff. Also if the Bush administration is going to be sharing secrets or issues of national security they should vet the candidate. The DNC and the administration are two distinc entities. I don’t see why that is unreasonable.
I do agree it is our duty to speak up when our elected officials do not seem to know what they are doing but remember the argument could be made that is what most of the public does by criticizing the current administration for things they perceive as being wrong. Also I’m sure you agree that democrats have not only been critics of the administration but also republicans as well. I did not see Bush or Cheney on the campaign or even in senate races and the argument can be made it was for political gain as well.
I agree they did try to undermine the current administration and I appreciate the sentiment of not going the same route. I have the same feelings about the bailout and my mouth dropped when I heard Paulson say he no longer would be buying toxic assets. I mean that was the strategy that was sold to Congress.
By Reggie on Nov 16, 2008
Reggie: You said, “I mean the state of Hawaii has officially certified the birth certificate as being true and authentic.”
The state of Hawaii said ONLY that his “original birth certificate” (or a copy of it) exists in their archives.
They did NOT say that the certificate states or confirms that he was born in Hawaii.
You do know, don’t you, that it is possible to get a certification of live birth from Hawaii even if you were born in another country?
There is a specific box on a long-form birth certificate where a person is able to indicate the country of birth, if it is not the US.
The officials who claimed that there exists a birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii did NOT say that they even read it, only that they saw that it exists in their files.
His mother could have registered his birth in Hawaii and provided a Kenyan birth certificate as proof of his birth. She was a resident of Hawaii in 1961, as was his father (Obama senior).
Registration of a birth does not equal birth IN Hawaii OR natural born citizenship status. This is a peculiar feature of Hawaiian law–that someone born in another country can be registered in Hawaii and get a Hawaiian “certification of live birth,” which is the document he posted on his website and which, fyi, is NOT the same as a Hawaiian birth certificate.
The officials specifically did NOT say that Obama was born in Hawaii. Read their statements carefully. They are more important for what they did NOT say than for what they did say.
By M&M on Nov 17, 2008
M&M: Ok so I do not understand then what your argument is. Is it that the certificate of live birth is fake or you want to see the long form birth certificate to be satisfied?A Certificate of live birth is what Hawaii’s Department of Health now issues in place of actual photocopies of the original, long-form birth certificate. The certificate is a short form birth certificate, and when duly certified by them, can be used for all intents and purposes that a regular birth certificate would be used. The certificate says he was born in Honolulu , therefore meaning the long form birth certificate states he was born in Honolulu.
Also your point about anyone not born in Hawaii can get a certificate of birth , so if that is true are you telling me they can also amend it so as to falsely change their birthplace to Honolulu,Hawaii and that this is OK by Hawaii State dept? That doesn’t make any sense as legitimate certification of live Birth would not say he was born in Honolulu, if he wasn’t and that was properly reported.
This discussion is becoming futile.
By Reggie on Nov 18, 2008
Perhaps this is becoming futile. But to me it seems rather simple. Why not release the certified BC to satisfy one of the courts where lawsuits still stand? One can get a “Certification of Live Birth” with minimal documentation and no eyewitnesses according to Hawaii statutes. But the original sealed document would answer all questions and remove all doubt! What are you protecting? It certainly isn;t transparency and honest goverment, the promised hallmark’s of an Obama administration. I find the trust you place in higher elected officials to do their proper duties, in this case security clearances, a bit naive. Trust is good for a monarchy, but in a democracy, where we have checks and balances on the abuses of power, trust has no place in public affairs and politics. Rather critical thinking, doubt, questioning, debate and investigation are the operative principles. The trouble is that the pissant media has fallen down in it’s job to report objectively and to hold our leaders to account. Why I was reading that the NY Times even bastardized Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. And they’ve gone from bad to worse in terms of accuracy since then.
By Phil O on Nov 18, 2008
Reggie: The image posted at FactCheck.org and on Obama’s websites is a CERTIFICATION of live birth. It is neither a birth certificate NOR a certificate of live birth, both of which are the documents that MIGHT prove birth in Honolulu.
There remains the issue of whether the image of a certificatION of live birth on those websites has been digitally altered, which several forensic analysts have alleged.
I do not know whether or not the place of birth can be changed on an amended birth certificate but I do know that the names of the parents as well as the child CAN BE changed. This occurs in the case of adoption, which may have been the case for Obama if (as appears likely) his stepfather adopted him.
If a birth certificate has been amended, then under Hawaiian law it MUST clearly say so somewhere on the document as well as on any computer-generated document based upon the birth certificate.
The state of Hawaii WILL allow someone to register a birth and receive a certificatION of live birth for a child who was born (in Hawaii or elsewhere) to parents who resided in Hawaii for at least a year. Both of his purported parents resided in Hawaii in 1961; therefore, a certificatION of live birth for Obama MAY exist while at the same time his long-form birth certificate MAY or may not prove that he was born in Honolulu. The “original birth certificate” that exists in the Hawaiian files MAY be a Kenyan birth certificate.
If the IMAGE of the certification of live birth posted online has been altered in any way, then this is why he MUST present the original, 1961, hospital-issued birth certificate.
So far, he has NOT presented to the public ANY PROOF whatsoever that he was indeed born in the United States of America OR that he is a natural born citizen. In fact, because he admits to having dual citizenship AT BIRTH, it is likely that he is NOT a “natural born citizen” as required by the Constitution.
The onus is on the Obama to prove his eligibility. So far, the only thing provided is a digital image of something that some people CLAIM is a scan of his actual 2007 certificatION of live birth obtained from Hawaii.
If you examine closely the photos and the scan of same allegedly legitimate document, there is NO legitimate embossed seal of certification on either image. It cannot be easily seen on the scan and whatever exists on those photos does NOT match any known Hawaiian certification seal. For example, the embossed seal on the photographed image contains only a bunch of horizontal lines that do not look like words, but ought to be legible as words (such as, State of Hawaii, etc.).
Phil O: I agree totally. All he has to do is produce the long-form birth certificate to end this controversy. The fact that he would rather spend thousands if not millions to fight these lawsuits speaks louder than words.
By M&M on Nov 18, 2008
ok let me see if I can summarize. At birth you can have one of three documents
1.Birth cerficate
2.Certificate of live birth
3.Certification of birth
Both #2 and #3 are derived from #1 and you believe that #3 is a fake even though it states place of birth as Honolulu and has been certified with by the State of Hawaii. Also I believe the certificate seal you talked about is at the back of the form not the front which is what was scanned.Does anyone else feel this is an epoisold of the X-Files? I find it incredible that Obama would go through all of this to cover this up and no one not the DNC,RNC and its lawyers,the bush administration,FBI, Federal election commission,state of hawaii, left wing media,right wing media, newpapers, periodicals picked up on this except Berg and some blogs.oook maybe they’re all in on it. Aren’t all these entities mentioned act as check and balances? Isn’t that part of the vetting process?
And Phil what you may call being “naive” I call looking at “credible” evidence provided and making a judgement/conclusion and see if any laws have been broken. I am an auditor by profession and this is what I do everyday and from what you and M&M have said I have not seen any credible form of evidence that supports your assertion. So in my opinion I will take these allegations with a grain of salt. Also this is the sort of debate I have every year especially when a significant event occurs eg
2000- People saying that Bush did not legally win the election
2001- People saying 9/11 was instigated by the governemnt
2001-People saying McCains adopted daughter was his love child
2003- People saying there were WMD’s in Iraq
2003-People saying the government knew there were no WMD in Iraq but still went in.
2004-People saying the election was stolen from John Kerry
2008-People saying Palins son was actually the son of her daughter.
these are the conversations I have had in the past and disputed and I place this discussion of Obama’s birth in line with the “above” theories I have had to debate and each one have been widely debunked.But there are always a remenant of people who still cling onto these theories even though the evidence points otherwise. I hope you and M&M will not be part of these people if Berg takes this up to the courts and the courts rule against him. Like I said before if it is found that there was or is some sort of forgery going on, I’ll be the first to hold up my hands and say fine you were right. Like I said before let us see how this plays out and move on to other discussions (don’t worry Raquel I’m coming back to address your dream or was it a nightmare).But as of right now and my track record on these sorts of issues i think these allegations will be proven false.
By Reggie on Nov 18, 2008
Reggie: #3 was NOT certified by the state of Hawaii, either by word or by seal.
The way a document is “certified” is by being embossed with a seal. I am sure you know what I mean because nearly every “official” document MUST go through one of those embossers. I’m not talking about an inked stamp. An embossed certification appears on both sides of a document BECAUSE it is embossed–both sides of the document are bent/dented/whatever you want to call it. Look at the photos on FactCheck for the circular embossed seal. It is not a legitimate seal. It is an embossed artifact, but it is NOT the official seal of the State of Hawaii mainly because it consists of horizontal dents that cannot be turned into WORDS, such as “State of Hawaii”, etc.
The “state of Hawaii” has NEVER stated that the online image of a certification of live birth for Barack Hussein Obama is legitimate. One Health Dept. employee said that it “looks like” a certification of live birth, which indeed it does; but she did NOT vouch for the authenticity of ANY information on that image.
Nor did the Hawaiian state officials who told the media that BHO’s “original 1961 birth certificate” is on file in their office state in any way that whatever is WRITTEN on that birth certificate indicates that he was born in Hawaii or that he is a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution.
If the original 1961 birth certificate proves that he is eligible, then tell me why he would spend thousands if not millions of dollars trying to avoid showing the proof instead of just producing the original birth certificate?
btw, you are not correct on your track record of “debunked” stories. Here’s my rundown:
1.) Bush did not legally win the election–false.
2.) 9/11 was instigated by the governemnt–false.
3.) McCain’s adopted daughter was his love child–false.
4.) There were WMD’s in Iraq–true.
5.) The government knew there were no WMD in Iraq but still went in–false.
6.) The election was stolen from John Kerry–false.
7.) Palins son was actually the son of her daughter–false.
For what it’s worth, I work in a career that relies HEAVILY on detail and logic. That’s why I am a stickler for little things like proof.
By M&M on Nov 19, 2008
M&M: You misunderstood my track record of those stories. All those stories I listed are stories that I have argued that have been false (except WMD)while sections of the public have insisted are true even though contrary to the evidence. Like I said this Obama birth bruhaha is another one.
By Reggie on Nov 19, 2008
Well, Reggie, you did say that each one of those allegations has been debunked; but imho, the one about WMD in Iraq has not been “debunked”.
In any case, that I agree with you on all of the outcomes, can you at least consider that perhaps I’m not a tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorist with regard to this issue of Obama’s birth certificate?
Logic dictates that a person who is indeed qualified to be POTUS under the Constitution would not spend thousands or even millions of dollars to keep from showing the proof.
Then there’s the issue of those extremely questionable images posted on his website.
Do you know that his website USED TO CLAIM that he was “never” Muslim yet there is proof that he was Muslim? Do you know that the claim of “never” magically disappeared from his site once that proof reappeared on the Web?
Do you also know that suddenly his website admitted that he was indeed a British subject AT BIRTH and then later a Kenyan citizen, at least until age 18?
We’re supposed to, once again, take his word for it that he did not ever accept the Kenyan citizenship, so it expired. But who’s to say?
If that’s true, then tell me why, as reported, all documentation concerning him in Kenya and the UK has been “sealed”? If he’s no longer a citizen of either country and if he never used those citizenships after the age of 18, then why wouldn’t they just reveal all the documentation?
Then there’s the issue of him possibly becoming an Indonesian citizen and having to later become a naturalized US citizen.
For months, the admission of dual/triple citizenship did not exist on his website. Why did it suddenly appear, unannounced?
What else will suddenly appear, unannounced?
By M&M on Nov 19, 2008
M&M: You’ve been making the same argument now but not once have you posted a link to a credible website (no blogs please) to support your theory. It’s one thing to speculate about Obama’s birth certificate and all but no credible support for it.Come on
“proof he was a muslim..”? Based on what evidence?
Also your claim about his website is also misleading.I went to the website and the paragraph that indicates he may have had dual citizenship is a direct quote from factcheck.org (you can even see the factcheck logo). They put that there to help quell the rumors about his citizenship that was brewing in some blogs. Even if at somepoint in his youth he had dual citizenship why does that matter? I have a lot of friends who have dual citizenship but that does not make them less american.
Also with regards to some documents being “sealed” again why is that something new? There are some documents that the law allows to be “Sealed” due to security and privacy reasons.
“becoming an Indonesian citizen”- again based on what?
No one thing can be proved 100% beyond a reasonable doubt and I personally think your doubts are unreasonable. I believe all the evidence of Obama’s birth provide a reasonable basis for his citizenship and I believe majority of the population believe it as well.
If you in your mind really believe that he is not a US citizen believe me no proof will be able to convince you otherwise. That’s my opinion. let it go
By Reggie on Nov 20, 2008
Obama won the Presidential Election because McCain was the wrong candidate for the Republican Party. The Republican Party needed someone who was more Conservative. The Republican base did not believe McCain was Conservative so at the begining of the campaign did not give him a lot of money. The Democrats on the other hand believed Obama was Liberal so they donated midaly to him. This made it much either for Obama to define himself and McCain where as McCain had a difficult time defining Obama and himself because of the lack of money he had. When Palin was picked as McCain’s running mate and Republicans started donating more money it was too late because Obama had already defined himself and Mcain. A more Conservative candiate would have gotten more money in the begining of the campaign and had a much easier time of defining who he was and Obama was.
By Lev Brudnoy on Nov 20, 2008
Reggie: Why don’t you let it go?
As for checking his website NOW, it’s useless. What you need are screenshots of what it said before versus what it says now. He does change his website, you know; and many people have saved screenshots.
It matters not one whit whether or not dual citizenship makes someone “less American.” Arnold Schwarzenegger is assuredly very “American” and no “less” than any other American citizen. Yet Arnold can NEVER become POTUS, short of an amendment to the Constitution. You are conflating citizenship with natural born citizenship. There is a difference under the Constitution.
That’s why dual citizenship at birth matters. And it’s also why potentially assuming Indonesian citizenship matters.
I don’t need to provide proof. The onus is upon the applicant for a job to provide PROOF of eligibility and qualifications. I’m not going to do your research for you, but here’s one link to a discussion of the Indonesian issue:
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/breaking-photo-documents-barry-soetoro-indonesian/
It includes a photo of his school registration. The photo came from the mainstream media, which went to Indonesia to disprove his education in a madrassa. Ironically, they ended up proving that he was an Indonesian citizen as well as Muslim. There is also video (or was) of the school teacher flipping through the book, showing the reporter the page for Obama. All very legitimate-looking. Something more likely to be suppressed than to be forged, don’t you think? This all happened back in the beginning of his candidacy, before the issue of natural born citizenship arose.
You can locate the “credible website” (not a blog) via Google. Again, I’m not doing your research for you.
Since you want “credible” websites, how about asking Obama to have the state of Hawaii post and vouch for his COLB on THEIR website?
I don’t think either Obama’s website or FactCheck’s website is “credible.” Why do you accept their “evidence?”
And I NEVER said that I don’t believe he’s a US citizen. I said that he has not proven that he is qualified to be POTUS UNDER the U.S. Constitution. Big difference.
btw, if you believe that his website and the FactCheck website are both “credible,” then can you explain why there is a different form/document number at the bottom of the various “genuine” certificate of live birth images?
By M&M on Nov 20, 2008
I actually don’t agree that McCain was the wrong candidate. McCain actually was the only viable candidate to beat Obama because of his ability to cross party lines. Conservatives were not going to vote for Obama anyway. This election was never going to be won by people voting for their affiliated party. It was going to be won by how the “independents” voted. The population is roughly 43% democrates, 35% republicans and 22% independents so the only way to win was to try and get the independents to break for you.I also believe the reason he lost was due to a bad campaign strategy (message, handling of Palin etc) and because he was not able to communicate the policies of the republican party. I believe conservatives have a better message than liberals in general but that got lost in the whole strategy of trying to define Obama. People’s general opinion were “Ok so what do you stand for?”
Also lets not forget the generally biased media coverage as well and the very interesting and long democratic primary that ensured a lot of the infrastructure obama created during the primary were up and running during the general election.
By Reggie on Nov 20, 2008
“what you may call being “naive” I call looking at “credible” evidence provided and making a judgement/conclusion and see if any laws have been broken.” If you are an auditor by profession then here is something that should make you sit up and take notice. Mike Clark on WRIF radio had a chat on the air with Kenyan Ambassador His Excellency Peter Ogego about the public celebrations in Kenya for Obama’s election. Ambassador Ogego said there would be a public holiday for Obama’s election on Thurs and affirmed that there would be a monument placed at Barack Obama’s birthplace in Kenya saying it’s “already well known” that Obama was born in Kenya. http://my.wrif.com/mim/?p=916
Also audit this: A case before the Supreme Court brought by Leo C. Donofrio against Nina Wells, the secretary of state in New Jersey, if Obama as well as McCain is qualified to be president under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen.” The filing was scheduled for conference on Dec 5th by Justice Thomas. Also former presidential candidate Alan Keyes filed a court petition asking the Ca.secretary of state to deny the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast until Obama’s eligibilty to be president is verified.
Many people wish this would go away as is one’s natural inclination to avoid the potential disorder that would ensue should the merits of the case prove worthy. But as we can see, this case won’t go away and as you are well aware the decision to be rendered on or after Dec. 5th should be quite telling.
By Phil O on Nov 22, 2008
Phil: what you’ve just posted does not mean anything in a court of law. What the ambassador said can be argued to be a matter of opinion not a matter of fact. Can the ambassador verify his claim by providing a document to support his claim that Obama was born in Kenya? Is the ambassador an expert witness in such matters.Believe me no lawyer would base his case on that sound bite.
Also your second assertion that the filings to the court as “evidence” is incorrect. I can file whatever I want to file in the courts but does that make it “evidence”. Again no “credible” evidence. My God in the US you can file a motion against a HAM SANDWICH if you wanted. Does not mean a thing NADA. What is the purpose of showing me different people have filed motions? Let’s see what evidence is provided if this goes to a court of law. Then we can have a better debate.
By Reggie on Nov 22, 2008
I am not arguing for the merits of the case or for any evidence in the case. I am not stupid enough to believe that Ambassador Ogego’s remarks on a radio interview would stand up in a court of Law. But you’ve got to have pea soup coming out of your ears if you expect me to believe that there is no fraud going on here. All I’m trying to show you is that some good-intentioned worthy people think it is important enough to defend the Constitution from the obvious fraud, lies and deception being foisted on the American people. As an auditor don’t you ever wonder what is on the certified vault original BC, if it exists at all?
By Phil O on Nov 24, 2008
The question of whether Obama is a natural born citizen and therefore qualified to be POTUS is one that has not been sufficiently answered.
Read this link, which identifies the various groups and lawsuits raising this question, and commentary regarding why there is a media blackout.
http://www.tulsatoday.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1799&Itemid=2
By Raquel on Nov 30, 2008