Records of Obama settling Indonesian citizenship

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Normally what you said is true, however, in this case, in that it is a constitutional requirement to be a US born leagal citizen, the proof falls on the person seeking the position.
It is kind of like needing a degree for a certain job and if I say I have one but don't produce one for my prospective employer to study for its valitiy, I cannot fall back and not produce one and say, "prove I don't have one" Same concept here.

Except that your employer will accept what you give him and not make you go to the courthouse in the county in which you were born and ask for the original with the physician's signature and such. Might be pretty hard to do if the courthouse in the county in which you were born burned down, huh?

Wouldn't you expect your employer to accept what you give him as factual, especially when you have the county seal on your document?

Obama proved it. The Dems and Reps both accepted it. Us here on this forum are nobodys in comparison, so what we think really doesn't matter in the great scheme of things, right?

Those in power who asked for proof accepted what he brought forth. Would you like it if you did the same with your employer, only to have a bunch of nobodys claiming what you showed was false and wanting your employer to 'do more' and make you prove it to everyone, even those not involved with your job? Should you be made to prove it to everyone who is employed by that same employer?

That's the big difference here. If someone has proof that what he showed isn't valid, present the proof. Obama already has, and it's been accepted by those who requested it.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Except that your employer will accept what you give him and not make you go to the courthouse in the county in which you were born and ask for the original with the physician's signature and such. Might be pretty hard to do if the courthouse in the county in which you were born burned down, huh?

Wouldn't you expect your employer to accept what you give him as factual, especially when you have the county seal on your document?

Obama proved it. The Dems and Reps both accepted it. Us here on this forum are nobodys in comparison, so what we think really doesn't matter in the great scheme of things, right?

Those in power who asked for proof accepted what he brought forth. Would you like it if you did the same with your employer, only to have a bunch of nobodys claiming what you showed was false and wanting your employer to 'do more' and make you prove it to everyone, even those not involved with your job? Should you be made to prove it to everyone who is employed by that same employer?

That's the big difference here. If someone has proof that what he showed isn't valid, present the proof. Obama already has, and it's been accepted by those who requested it.

Can you name the people that requested to see it?

by name and when?

What were they shown?

The forgery from daily Kos?

I can tell the Chicago syndrome is spreading.
Shovel ready he says

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by coadie

Can you name the people that requested to see it?

by name and when?

What were they shown?

The forgery from daily Kos?

I can tell the Chicago syndrome is spreading.
Shovel ready he says

The longer you post about this issue, the more looking like an idiot you become.

Those people in charge of ensuring that he met the requirements are those who requested to see it and were satisfied by what they saw. I don't care if he showed it to them on his cell phone. If they were satisfied, well, nothing you can do about it. I'm sure you are miffed because they didn't think you were important enough to be invited for the personal viewing.

Too bad, so sad.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Wouldn't you expect your employer to accept what you give him as factual, especially when you have the county seal on your document?

Obama proved it. The Dems and Reps both accepted it. Us here on this forum are nobodys in comparison, so what we think really doesn't matter in the great scheme of things, right?

Those in power who asked for proof accepted what he brought forth. Would you like
it.

That is you telling us we shouldn't beleive Obama, or you.

Here is a video of Waxman admittion that the energy bill he was shoving down our throats with his name on it was Never read by him. he didn't want to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRcq0Lxffwc

Obama was pitching the 1018 page health care fiasco and doesn't know what is in it.

Now I see you approve of people making claims sight unseen

You are so easy to read.

It was a forgery/fake.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Normally what you said is true, however, in this case, in that it is a constitutional requirement to be a US born leagal citizen, the proof falls on the person seeking the position.
It is kind of like needing a degree for a certain job and if I say I have one but don't produce one for my prospective employer to study for its valitiy, I cannot fall back and not produce one and say, "prove I don't have one" Same concept here.

The proof that fell on the person seeking the position has already been met. You may have your own set of personal requirements but the requirements that matter, those of the Federal Election Commission, were met months ago.

Why should anyone else's requirements other than the body who lawfully oversee's America's elections be applied?

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

The proof that fell on the person seeking the position has already been met. You may have your own set of personal requirements but the requirements that matter, those of the Federal Election Commission, were met months ago.

Why should anyone else's requirements other than the body who lawfully oversee's America's elections be applied?

The electors were the ones that should have vetted him, but none of them did. They all just accepted that he was.
No persnal requirements, but am really curious why, if they did prove it at one time, why not make sure everyone (Americans) can see it too due to all the bruhaha.
It is a simple thing getting really out of hand...by both sides.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

The proof that fell on the person seeking the position has already been met. You may have your own set of personal requirements but the requirements that matter, those of the Federal Election Commission, were met months ago.

Why should anyone else's requirements other than the body who lawfully oversee's America's elections be applied?

Because this is America,.

America gives you the freedom to live in delusion and fantasize the the election commision has any authority over and beyound counting votes.

You are so much like Bawney Frank on this deal.

Corupt people are very strongly commited to their corrupt circle.

ACThe Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 29% of the nation’s voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10. The President’s Approval Index rating is down four points over the past week and 11 points over the past month.

ACORN
is the vote stealing cheating outfit oOama worked for.


[SIZE="4"][COLOR="DarkRed"]ACORN /SIZE]



Fraudulent voter registrations, embezzlements, voter fraud.

Idiots and crooks won't allow ACORN to be investigated

Low moral standards Mike.
AcORN

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Bowas

The electors were the ones that should have vetted him, but none of them did. They all just accepted that he was.
No persnal requirements, but am really curious why, if they did prove it at one time, why not make sure everyone (Americans) can see it too due to all the bruhaha.
It is a simple thing getting really out of hand...by both sides.

Electors vetted him and decided by a 53% majority that he was better than John McCain. As far as his birth requirements, why will you not accept the Federal Election Commissions results? Do you not thinkt that they vetted him to make sure he was a legal candidate for President? Do you think that they just nodded and winked and let him pass on through?

The legal requirements were met. Are you advocating for adding on extra obligations to make a person a legal candidate? How about we accept the legal means of approving candidates like we've always done.

So in addition to the health director in Hawaii, the Republican Gov. of Hawaii you're now going to call into question the decision of the FEC based on silly internet rumors? If you'd question all of those people Barack Obama could hand deliver the orginal birth certificate to your door and let you hold it and verify it and you wouldn't believe he was legal.

That's why all of this begins to border on absurdity.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

Electors vetted him and decided by a 53% majority that he was better than John McCain. As far as his birth requirements, why will you not accept the Federal Election Commissions results? Do you not thinkt that they vetted him to make sure he was a legal candidate for President? Do you think that they just nodded and winked and let him pass on through?

The legal requirements were met. Are you advocating for adding on extra obligations to make a person a legal candidate? How about we accept the legal means of approving candidates like we've always done.

So in addition to the health director in Hawaii, the Republican Gov. of Hawaii you're now going to call into question the decision of the FEC based on silly internet rumors? If you'd question all of those people Barack Obama could hand deliver the orginal birth certificate to your door and let you hold it and verify it and you wouldn't believe he was legal.

That's why all of this begins to border on absurdity.

You have shown your absurdity. The Democrats failed to provide a representative that was demonstrated a natural born legal citizen authorized for presidency.

You are showing ignorance. You refer to vetted. No vetting laws. Either you don't know what vetting means or i caught you in another bluff. Vetting was never a law but what dems did to start gossip and rumors on opponents.

Just for lurkers, FEC has no laws regarding vetting. Mike bought the koolaid.
Too much teevee.

Vetting is also so that advocated sheisters don't get surprised by the exposure of some dark deeds in the candidates past.

The village idiots pushed forward a long list of democrats for czar, cabinet and key positions with tax cheat backgrounds. That is what your non vetters look like.

The FEC does it without help.

Why didn't you tell us Arkansas ramped up this ACORN deal? Are you a member?

Good ol' Arkie ACORN Honest53%??? Honest people know ACORN was caught with a lot of fraud and cheating. In fact it was so significant, the Dems don't want to investigate.

[coadie]

It's a figurative contraction of veterinarian. The fancy word for animal doctor originated in the mid-17th century. The colloquial abbreviation dates to the 1860s; the verb form of the word, meaning "to treat an animal," came a few decades later—according to the Oxford English Dictionary the earliest known usage is 1891—and was applied primarily in a horse-racing context. ("He vetted the stallion before the race," "you should vet that horse before he races," etc.) By the early 1900s, vet had begun to be used as a synonym for evaluate, especially in the context of searching for flaws. A character in Rudyard Kipling's Traffics and Discoveries, published in 1904, says of a guard battalion: "These are our crowd. … They've been vetted, an' we're putting 'em through their paces."

Mike it is hard to put a bluff or even a non legal concept over on me. Vetting for Dems is important. Edwards adultery show Dems don' vet candidates.

Obama's girlfriend Eva Barker? Michelle Obama vetted King Hussein and Eva was shipped to the Islands.
Just a reminder, there are no vetting laws and we won't let you make claims that there are. Obama not qualified for top security clearance by DOD.
We call that getting it by going in the front door. Have to have it to get in the backdoor of the whitehouse.