Jump to content

Usa Thread


Recommended Posts

Flash, there is certainly a double standard. The Dems get a pass on some things that a Republican wouldn't. However...(and you know there will be), the Republicans have to blame themselves. All too often they run issues based on the very same fears. They demonize groups such as latinos, blacks, gays and even some women with the issues they use to get people fired up. Dems are preaching the opposite so its no wonder to me when you get a conservative who has a racist friend and a liberal who has a racist friend that conservative will get more hot water.


HH, as for Obama..lol...wow you really get worked up over him. He's not nearly as bad as you make him out to be.


Liberals have far, far more reason to dislike him than conservatives do. Obama is mainstream, connected now. He and his people are part of the establishment.


He's been a decent President actually. My criteria are 1. judging him against the presidents of the last 20 years or so and 2. the enormity of the mess he inherited. I know its an old horse that we should stop beating but we really were on the brink of a meltdown and although things are far from perfect these days, there are firm signs, visible signs to most Americans that the bleeding has stopped and we have seen the bottom of things. None of his predecessors of the last 20 years or so had to work with the difficulties he inherited.


Don't get me wrong, he made mistakes. Big ones. For me, pushing healthcare when he should have worked on the economy via infrastructure. A few other things as well. His cozying up to the big money guys and such.


That makes him typical not terrible if that makes any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Arizona the legislatures passed a law that basically bans Ethnic Studies.


So today I went to the school district where the controversy began and told them

I guess the children can not be taught about the Alamo anymore.


Their remark was the legislative idiots probably would be clueless what I was talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<< With the perception growing that he will be the GOP nominee, Romney leads President Obama by five points in a hypothetical 2012 matchup. Today's numbers show Romney at 48%, Obama at 43%. That’s Romney’s largest lead since December.


If Santorum is the Republican nominee, he is up by one point over the president, 46% to 45%. This is the second time since polling began in 2011 that Santorum has had a slight lead over Obama. Romney is the only other candidate to lead the president more than one time in the polls. >>



My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PRAVDA speaks:


Arizona sheriff finds Obama presidential qualifications forged



A singularly remarkable event has taken place in the United States of America. This event occurred in Arizona on March 1st and was an earth shattering revelation.


A long awaited press conference was given by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a five time elected Sheriff, which should have made national and international headlines. Arpaio's credentials include serving in the United States Army from 1950 to 1953, service as a federal narcotics agent serving in countries all over the world with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and served as the head of the Arizona DEA. Without doubt, this is a serious Law Enforcement Officer, not one to be taken in by tin-foil-hat wearing loons.


Yet, in the five days since his revelations there has been little in the way of serious reporting on the findings he presented in his presser. With 6 short videos, the Sheriff and his team presented a devastating case, one the tame US press is apparently unable to report.


On April 27, 2011, President Barack walked into the White House Press room with a Cheshire cat like grin and a "Long Form Birth Certificate" from the State of Hawaii in hand. From the podium in the press room, Mr. Obama said, "We're not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,". Quite the barb from a man holding a forged document.


That's right, forged.


The president himself created the scene; one filled laughter from an adoring press corps, a scene of unprecedented fanfare while holding a forged document which was later posted on the White House website. This was the news Sheriff Arpaio revealed on March 1, 2012 in Arizona.


Arpaio asserts that his investigators discovered, during a 6 month long investigation which is ongoing, not only was the "Long Form" likely a digitally created forgery, but the presidents Selective Service Card (Draft Card), allegedly filed in 1980, was also a forgery. These documents are what Barack Hussein Obama relies upon to prove his constitutional eligibility to the office of President of the United States.


Forged documents are being used to qualify a President of the United States for the office he holds. Or is usurped the more accurate term?


The silence from the main stream media in the US is deafening. It almost seems as if the press is terrified to even think the question, let alone ask it: Is the President a criminal? The press in Arpaio's audience were certainly asking him to state precisely that, yet nowhere has the question been asked of the White House by the press. Instead the American Press is aggressively protecting the presumed President of the United States, pushing the fraud upon both America and the world, supporting a man who may well have usurped the office.


For months before Mr. Obama released the April 2011 forgery, American businessman Donald Trump had been demanding that the president show the country definitive proof that he was born in the state of Hawaii, and eligible for the Office of President. The birth certificate forgery which was presented by Mr. Obama was in response to the repeated public requests from the billionaire businessman.


One can easily imagine the reaction of the press had this scenario been about George W. Bush in 2004.


On the contrary, the press itself forged documents regarding the 43rd President: Long term CBS newsman Dan Rather lost his credibility along with his job when he presented forged Air National Guard documents allegedly denigrating the president's service in the 1970's. One can imagine the glee evidence presented by law enforcement officials of a real forgery made by President Bush would have generated. The press feeding frenzy would have eclipsed that of Watergate, the most controversial political event in modern America history which led to the resignation of President Nixon in August of 1974.


The questions in the White House Press room would have been merciless to say the very least.


What has been the response from the Obama era press?




Silence so loud it can be felt.


What has been the response from the 44th president so far?


A tweet from Obama Campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt, containing a link to the conspiracy theory television show "The X-files" theme song: a mocking, Saul Alinsky like, retort.


High Crimes and Misdemeanors appear to have been committed by the President of the United States or his personal representatives in presenting a forged document to the press and the Nation as a legitimate document, and this information has been delivered from Law Enforcement Officials.


Arpaio refused to take the bait offered by a clearly hostile press in the conference room. He refused to accuse the president directly, instead informing the world that they had a "person of interest" in the forgery, and were continuing with the investigation.


Where is the outrage from the press??


As surreal as this is, it isn't the main event. It's only a part of a larger story.


Years before the 2008 election, Barack Obama was involved in efforts to amend the US Constitution to allow those who were born to parents who were not citizens to become President along with those born overseas. Those efforts have occurred several times in recent history, and all have failed. It must be intelligently asked why this was a concern at all for the then Senator.


There are two reasons for Obama's concern. The first lay in Article 2 section 1 of the constitution which states: "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,".


Except for Barack Obama.


The second reason for Obama's concern lies in the Supreme Court of the United States case Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162) 1875 which defines Natural Born Citizen:


"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners." Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.


This U.S. Supreme Court case decided that Virginia Minor, the plaintiff, could not use the 14th Amendment to claim citizenship and the right to vote because she was a Natural Born Citizen, and therefor unable to lay claim to the statutory citizenship the 14th Amendment gave to former slaves, which included their right to vote. This is the only U.S. Supreme Court case in the history of the United States to clearly define what a Natural Born Citizen is. It has been cited in dozens of cases since.


This is an issue which cannot be brushed aside by Mr. Obama. His father, Barack Obama Sr. was a student from the British Commonwealth of Kenya, a British Citizen who never sought to become a US Citizen, and indeed was eventually forced to leave the country. Mr. Obama has only one parent who was an American Citizen. Obama clearly does not meet the requirements of Natural Born Citizen as defined by the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett.


The Founding Fathers, the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, discussed these very reasons why no person of divided loyalties, divided nationalities, should ever have command of America's armed forces. Dozens of letters and many debates in the constitutional conventions recorded these concerns, always returning the "Law of Nations", Emerich De Vattel's encyclopedic record of the laws civilized nations had developed over two thousand years of which the founders were clearly aware of in their debates:


"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."





More :stirthepo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

National polls are complete BS and their only purpose is to sway the bandwagoners. Ask any of the candidates would they rather be ahead in a national poll but behind in the 6 biggest swing states or behind nationally and ahead in the 6 biggest swing states and its a no brainer.


As is well known, 40 of the 50 states are spoken for. Its done. California will go Democrat, Texas will go Republican no matter what national polls say. The 10 swing states are all that matters and the most important ones are Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Virginia probably in that order. Romney can lead by 20 points but if loses Florida and Ohio its game, set, match.


As for the birther thingy. Again, I think it plays perfectly into Obama's hands. First of all, despite more controversy in '08 over this issue, Obama won handily. He's already President and its going to seem more like sour grapes and desperation than anything else. For me, I can't get past that the state of Hawaii accepts him as born there so they would have to be in on the lie. It ends it there for me if someone is suggesting that the state itself is lying or just as ludicrous is 'fooled'. I don't know the law well enough but I am pretty certain that if a state says someone is born there the rest of the states have to honor it unless the Surpreme court gets involved. I would assume by default the federal government has accepted Obama as a natural born citizen since he is President, legally he has met the requirement. I would assume a state can't arbitrarily say different. If a state supreme court upholds it, I would assume the federal district court or supreme court wouldn't even hear the matter but dismiss it outright. I can't imagine they'd even hear evidence or reasons why it should have standing.


Without the support of someone important, a Congressman or even a Governor, I can't see this thing being anything but seen as vindictive, mean spirited and prejudicial by a lot of folks and turn off the center.


As for as the nomination process, its over. Its Romney, the press will make a meal out of any Santorum or Gingrich win but the only question is what Romney has to do make peace. He will be the nominee. Any suggestion otherwise is not worth entertaining. The press should say so but won't because it needs people to stay interested for money reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...