When you think about it, this is what its all about…… what we will pass on to the next generation:
The Glenn Beck rally through the eyes of a father and sonDavid Meister, and his son, Adam, 12, took a red-eye bus from New Richmond, Ohio, to attend Fox News personality Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. Sarah Palin also spoke at the event that drew crowds that stretched to the Washington Monument. (Anna Uhls/The Washington Post)
Watch their story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/08/28/VI2010082803627.html?hpid=artslot
Advertisement
42 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 29, 2010 at 5:53 pm
gumply
That was a great video, thanks for posting it James. What a great Dad taking his son on probably the greatest adventure of his lifetime……….seeing what it means to be an American.
August 30, 2010 at 7:23 am
JAMES
I thought it exemplified the needed message….. our children deserve a future as bright as the one that our parents gave us.
August 31, 2010 at 11:54 am
gumply
I received this email this morning and was asked to get it out to as many people as possible.
The Flag Campaign
We have a little less than one month and counting to get the word out all across this great land and into every community in the United States of America.
If you forward this email to least 11 people and each of those people do the same … you get the idea.
THE PROGRAM:
On Friday, September 11th, 2009, an American flag should be displayed outside every home, apartment, office, and store in the United States. Every individual should make it their duty to display an American flag on this eighth anniversary of one of our country’s worst tragedies. We do this to honor those who lost their lives on 9/11, their families, friends and loved ones who continue to endure the pain, and those who today are fighting at home and abroad to preserve our cherished freedoms.
In the days, weeks and months following 9/11, our country was bathed in American flags as citizens mourned the incredible losses and stood shoulder-to-shoulder against terrorism. Sadly, those flags have all but disappeared. Our patriotism pulled us through some tough times and it shouldn’t take another attack to galvanize us in solidarity. Our American flag is the fabric of our country and together we can prevail over terrorism of all kinds
So, here’s what we need you to do .
(1) Forward this email to everyone you know (at least 11 people). Please don’t be the one to break this chain. Take a moment to think back to how you felt on 9/11 and let those sentiments guide you.
(2) Fly an American flag of any size on 9/11. Honestly, Americans should fly the flag year-round, but if you don’t, then at least make it a priority on this day.
Thank you for your participation. God Bless You and God Bless America!
August 31, 2010 at 12:36 pm
gumply
I didn’t realize that the dates were wrong, but oh well 9/11 will always be 9/11.
Sorry about that. I was having a time trying to get it copied.
September 1, 2010 at 6:05 am
Interested Bystander
Hey All,
I guess this is a good place to make this comment.
How about “restoring honor” by starting at the top.
I see LTC Lakin has a hearing on Sept 2nd.
On Aug 31st a Three Star General released this affidavit:
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/images/stories/documents/affidavit-lt-general-mcinerney-as-filed.pdf
Obama is the one who is using every means at his disposal to keep this issue “alive”.
The longer he waits to release the documents, the more people will become aware of what the circumstances are surrounding his Certification of Live Birth that is posted on the internet and is waved in our face every time the issue is brought up.
One of these days they’ll wave that piece of paper at someone who will actuall tell the TRUTH about how one of those could have been produced no matter where Obama was born, so long as the birth was registered with the Hawaiian Health Service, and when they bring up the newspaper announcements, the answer is that the newspapers got that information from HHS.
Anyway a Three Star General “stepping up” and admitting that it is the PRESIDENT who is utimately responsible for every soldier, and when someone receives an order for movement, the order STARTS with the President.
Good luck to Lakin, the deck is stacked against him, but IF it is found out Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President, I believe Lakin ought to be the one who gets to slap the cuffs on Obama and read him his RIGHTS.
I’m not holding my breath though. They’ll rescend his orders or something so that this case goes away, or they won’t allow him to put on a defense, which could find it’s way to the Supreme Court and maybe, just maybe we can get a clear definition of who is a “natural born citizen”.
September 2, 2010 at 9:03 am
HistorianDude
There are 668 active duty general/flag officers. There are roughly twice as many retired general/flag officers. To this point, three of them (all retired) have come out in support of Lakin and his bizarre theories regarding lawful orders and presidential eligibility.
This means 100% of active general/flag officers continue to obey their orders. And further, Lakin is currently actively supported by roughly fifteen hundredths of one percent.
You are right. The deck is stacked against Lakin. But it is Lakin that did the stacking.
September 2, 2010 at 12:20 pm
HistorianDude
This just in:
http://wjz.com/wireapnewsmd/Md.judge.denies.2.1892398.html
September 2, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD,
You seem to celebrate when an American isn’t given the RIGHT to defend themselves.
Your elitist attitude and joy in an American lossing his ability to put on a defense, says volumes about your principles and character.
Obama is allowing a good man to lose his career because he refuses to release his documents that could prove he is eligible, end of story.
You lawyers never cease to amaze me at how you manipulate the system.
You HRD are a sorry excuse for a human being.
The reason Lakin refused to follow orders is because he believes the CIC hasn’t proven his eligiblity. We all know the circumstances surrounding how the COLB could have been obtained even if Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii. IF his long form BC had a hospital named and doctor’s signature on it, I believe Obama would have released it already and the case would be over.
The longer he waits to release these documents, the more people will become aware of the issue. It is not going away.
A transparent, moral, dignified man of character would have released the long form document long ago.
All your side is doing is “playing” the system.
It’s pitiful.
September 2, 2010 at 3:28 pm
HistorianDude
Celebrate? “This just in” is a celebration where you come from? Well no wonder you;re always so miserable.
Is it brain damage that accounts for you still thinking I’m a lawyer in spite of the more than a dozen times I have corrected you that I am not?
September 2, 2010 at 4:29 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD replies:
“Celebrate? “This just in” is a celebration where you come from? Well no wonder you;re always so miserable.”
No, just your constant “I’m right 100% of the time” type comments. This is another instance where your side is playing the system.
You relish it. You “get off” on the system being “played”.
You are disgusting to put it bluntly.
By the way, you do realize that the President AUTHORIZED (in other words ordered) 30,000 more troops for Afghanistan last year (remember, he spent some three or four months deciding on how many to send, allowing those in harms way to be the target without the extra troops that McChrystal asked for?). Oh I’m sure he didn’t sign each and every movement order, but he authorized it, just like he authorized (ordered) the movement of Lakin’s unit to Afghanistan.
You see, EVERY movement order (especially those that send troops in to harms way) is ORDERED by the President. IF he is proven ineligible, those authorizations (orders) would be ILLEGAL.
Lakin is not being given the opportunity to make this case.
And then this:
“Is it brain damage that accounts for you still thinking I’m a lawyer in spite of the more than a dozen times I have corrected you that I am not?”
You sure are a lawyer (at least you play one on the internet). Why do you keep denying it?
Who else but a lawyer would take the time, or put the effort in to reading some 71 cases? Most of those aren’t even about Obama’s eligibility, and you admit that, but yet you consistantly lump them all together.
Asking Obama to prove his eligibility, and asking a SoS to verify a candidates eligibility are two different subjects, even if the people asking for verification are doing so because this President hasn’t provided it.
September 3, 2010 at 9:20 am
HistorianDude
Thank you for acknowledging that my record of predicting the outcomes of Birther cases remains 100%. I do take justifiable pride in that record.
It appears that the military judge, who is herself an officer in the military and an expert on the issue of what constitutes a lawful order, disagrees with you.
You really need to learn when to shut up and accept the simple truth from people who know more than you do.
September 3, 2010 at 11:38 am
HistorianDude
From the account of a Military Lawyer who attended the Lakin hearing:
The military judge DENIED all of the discovery requests and witness requests related to the birth controversy. This was not unexpected. But what was unexpected was the breadth and detail of the rulings, because of the obvious impact on the lawfulness motion. Clearly the findings and rulings anticipated the next motions session. At the end of the military judge’s reading of her findings, Jensen appeared beaten down. He seemed so affected that for some time he failed to stand when talking with the military judge on the record. LTC Lakin remained impassive as always. The military judge’s findings and rulings seemed also to put a stake through the heart of LtGen McInerney’s affidavit and its relevance to the trial (by inference this would include MG Vallely and MG Curry).
Basically the documents and witnesses are neither (at times she interspersed logically) relevant nor material. She cited to New, Huet-Vaughn, and Rockwood. The military judge found that Congress through its power to regulate the armed forces appointed the service secretaries and their service leaders to carry out functions such as order people to deploy, etc. She found there was substantial independent authority in law, regulation, and custom to support the issuance of orders in this situation. She gave passing reference to the de facto officer doctrine and focussed more on the political question doctrine as a justification for denial of discovery and witnesses on the strawman that the presidents status might be relevant in some fashion.
The military judge twice said that a court-martial is not “a vehicle to challenge political decisions.”
The defense conceded that with the military judge’s rulings, the orders were otherwise lawful. With that this case is back to the standard case one sees where a Soldier has missed movement and disobeyed orders. There was discussion of whether an additional session was necessary based on the lack of “wiggle room” given to the defense as it affected the discovery, witnesses, and lawfulness issues. I did not hear mention of a writ. But if there were one I’d imagine ACCA would deny based on the, “we’ll deal with it if he’s convicted and gets a jurisdictional sentence,” theory.
At this point it seems LTC Lakin will be left to wriggle while his fate is decided in the normal course of business. No doubt there will be some who will try to continue the political aspects of the case but for all intents and purposes LTC Lakin is dead meat. The real question will be sentencing.
http://court-martial-ucmj.com/lakin-2/ltc-lakins-defense-crushed-in-detail/
September 3, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Interested Bystander
Hey All,
HRD comments:
“Thank you for acknowledging that my record of predicting the outcomes of Birther cases remains 100%. I do take justifiable pride in that record.”
Just read the words HRD, I “acknowledged” NOTHING except that you constantly make that statement. I NEVER wrote that YOU WERE 100% accurate, only that you make that statement.
Typical lawyer tactic trying to twist words around.
HRD then responds with this:
“It appears that the military judge, who is herself an officer in the military and an expert on the issue of what constitutes a lawful order, disagrees with you.
You really need to learn when to shut up and accept the simple truth from people who know more than you do.”
Again, typical blather from someone who believes there are the “haves” and the “have nots”.
You see HRD, that Judge puts on her pants one leg at a time just like I do. You claim that she’s an expert, but how do you even know? I suspect that because she is ruling in the favor of someone not being able to defend themselves, and your comment on the other thread believing that is a “good” thing, you place this Judge in the “expert” catagory.
You trying to tell me to “shut up” is another typical elitist comment.
Your replies “speak” volumes HRD, keep them coming.
Then HRD makes this comment:
“Who else? Somebody who wants to know what they’re talking about before (like you) they open their mouths and make a fool of themselves. For example… all 71 of those cases were about Obama’s eligibility.”
Look, if Obama isn’t a defendent in a case, just by simple logic, the case and NOT be about Obama’s eligibility. It CAN be about HOW someone went about VERIFYING Obama was eligible, but that would be it.
Learn to know the difference HRD.
HRD comments this next:
“How is it that I know that and you don’t? Because I’m not a puffed up blowhard who only pretends to know what he’s talking about. You should try it. You will be amazed at how your horizons broaden when you actually know things.”
What I KNOW is that you believe that if someone asks a SoS about how they went about verifying Obama was and is eligible to be President, you lump that in with the actual cases asking Obama to verify he is eligible.
HRD concludes with this:
“Now we get to watch Lakin react as he realizes the depth of the sh*t storm he has called down on his own head. I’m making popcorn.
How about you?”
Again, HRD is making a “joke” out of a serious issue.
You’d better make lots of popcorn HRD, I see this case going for YEARS, and maybe a decade to resolve.
All of this could be resolved if our President would simply release the documents, and HRD “celebrates” that this man can’t put on a defense.
Boy our Country has some really messed up people in it.
September 4, 2010 at 8:09 am
HistorianDude
And yet you know from personal experience that the statement is absolutely true!
Typical lawyer tactic trying to twist words around.
Excuse me? Are you actually trying to assert here that there are not “haves” and “have nots?” Have you actually become completely delusional? Open your eyes, IB. Leave your computer keyboard and step out into the light of a real day.
Exactly the sort of elitist comment anticipated by the founders of our great nation when they created it; As Thomas Jefferson called it, “An aristocracy of achievement arising out of a democracy of opportunity.”
Your explicit anti-intellectualism is what condemns you to be on the losing side of most arguments and ultimately human history. You actually believe that your ignorant opinion is just as valid or valuable as those op peopl who are smarter, better educated, more accomplished and ultimately more important than you are.
Let me reassure you IB. The falling piano will crush you even if you are the opinion that it will not.
And once again we see that IB’s “simple logic” is blithering idiocy. The case is about Obama’s eligibility when that is the subject matter of the case. It does not matter who the defendants are, it only matters what the case is about.
Once again IB takes a pointless stand that serves only to make it even more clear that he is a “have not” in yet another area… this time “simple logic.”
Learn to know the difference HRD.
I live in the real world. There are stores. I can always buy more.
September 4, 2010 at 4:57 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD replies:
“And yet you know from personal experience that the statement is absolutely true!”
I KNOW nothing of the sort. If you are suggesting that I have “witnessed” your predictions on 100% of the cases, you are nuts.
I know you BOAST about that being the case, but having verified proof, no siree bob, I have no idea what you actually predicted on each and every case (and to be honest, I could care less). What I DO know, is if Obama would simply release the documents that he sealed with his first EO, this issue would be settled and done with, and SHOULD have been over 2 years ago now, but Obama spends millions of dollars of his and OUR money defending these cases.
And why did you add this to your reply?:
“Typical lawyer tactic trying to twist words around.”
Did you mess up HRD?
And then HRD comments this:
“Excuse me? Are you actually trying to assert here that there are not “haves” and “have nots?” Have you actually become completely delusional? Open your eyes, IB. Leave your computer keyboard and step out into the light of a real day.”
No HRD, I don’t believe in “haves” and “have nots”. You see, I believe that everyone is created equal, and it is obvious in this comment that you do not.
Typical elitist BS, trying to keep the “little guy” down.
And then he replies this about trying to make me “shut up”:
“Exactly the sort of elitist comment anticipated by the founders of our great nation when they created it; As Thomas Jefferson called it, “An aristocracy of achievement arising out of a democracy of opportunity.”
Huh? What does this quote from Jefferson have to do about trying to get me to “shut up”?
This makes no sense what so ever.
And more blather about trying to get me to “shut up”:
“Your explicit anti-intellectualism is what condemns you to be on the losing side of most arguments and ultimately human history. You actually believe that your ignorant opinion is just as valid or valuable as those op peopl who are smarter, better educated, more accomplished and ultimately more important than you are.”
Again, this makes no sense. In this comment you write this: “op peopl”, and then go on about how you are “smarter, better educated, more accomplished and ultimately more important”.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
What the heck is “op peopl” HRD?
And he concludes his “shut up” crap with this:
“Let me reassure you IB. The falling piano will crush you even if you are the opinion that it will not.”
Again, this should have been one sentence with a comma between the IB and the “the”, not two sentences.
Beyond that, let me assure you there are no pianos falling on me HRD, except in your warped mind.
On the cases involving how Secretary of States verified Obama’s eligibility HRD responds with this:
“And once again we see that IB’s “simple logic” is blithering idiocy. The case is about Obama’s eligibility when that is the subject matter of the case. It does not matter who the defendants are, it only matters what the case is about.”
Ok, so let me see if I have this right;
Just because Obama isn’t a defendent in a case, and the case isn’t about Obama’s eligibility, but about how the SoS went about verifying Obama’s eligibility, then the case is still about Obama’s eligibility?
Again, I would have to comment that NO a case about how someone went about verifiying someone, isn’t about that person actually being eligible, only that the person filing the suit wants to know how they verified someone. This case could still be going ahead even IF Obama would release the documents proving he is eligible, but the cases about whether or not Obama IS eligible would then be withdrawn or dismissed.
HRD continues with this:
“Once again IB takes a pointless stand that serves only to make it even more clear that he is a “have not” in yet another area… this time “simple logic.”
More blather from HRD which makes no sense what so ever.
What gets me about this comment is two things:
1. HRD makes all of these “conclusions” about Obama being eligible with no proof what so ever to back it up, and I have proven time and again that he is wrong, but yet he continues to spout his crap. (The EO issue comes to mind)
2. HRD makes all of these claims about how better educated that I am, but yet he can’t figure out how to write a comment correctly (that’s three times in this one thread isn’t it HRD? or is it four? I let the other ones go).
You HRD are a joke to believe that the people reading these comments between the two of us, and actually research and find out who is REALLY writing the truth, would think the things you write about how “better” you are than anyone, let alone little ole me.
I am secure in my comments. You are all over the place.
HRD concludes this part of his comment with this:
“Learn to know the difference HRD.”
Is this another mistake HRD? Showing your “intellectual” side again?
HRD concludes with this:
“I live in the real world. There are stores. I can always buy more.”
And while you are doing that, I’ll be working and living my life. You see HRD, I don’t “live” for this issue like you do, I have more important things to do with my time then read all about this issue, especially when it is very apparent that the President could resolve this issue with a few phone calls. I would also suspect that the people at HHS, Occidental, Harvard, Columbia and a whole slew of other people would appreciate it.
But he won’t, he’s an elitist like yourself who believes “playing” the system is better than actually having character, or a moral fiber in his body.
Keep posting your “attempts” at being “better” than me HRD. Comments like yours here only show folks who are reading this just the kind of person you are.
September 1, 2010 at 5:23 pm
gumply
Hi IB,
Welcome back, I hope your family is doing well during this time and our prayers our still going your way.
Don’t hold your breath on the SCOTUS because they have been given several Presentments on the eligibility of the usurper in the last two years and in all cases elena kagan the new SCJ just got her payback for blocking all the cases they were presented to them. That was her job. Isn’t that convenient.
Putting that aside I am thrilled with Retired General Mc Inerney’s brave stand he is taking in defense of Lt Col Lakin and also every military man and woman presently serving their country. I suppose the libitards will call him a coward and a traitor too. You did know that Retired General Paul Vallely is presently getting signatures for the liar in chief’s impeachment for treason. That is about the tenth group collecting signatures to impeach him. My he is popular isn’t he.
September 2, 2010 at 9:07 am
HistorianDude
You actually have no idea what the Solicitor General does, do you? kagan cannot have “blocked” any cases before the Supreme Court. She has no contact with the court at all until after they have decided to hear cases.
It seems that every time you put your fingers to the keyboard you actually manage to subtract from the sun total of all human knowledge.
September 2, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD,
Kagan blocked the SC from seeing the cases.
Deal with it.
September 2, 2010 at 3:30 pm
HistorianDude
IB…. wrong.
The Solicitor General has no such power.
They cannot even touch a Supreme Court case until after the Supreme Court has decided to actually hear it.
The complete ignorance of you guys is breathtaking sometimes.
September 2, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD,
Care to be proven wrong yet again?
http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=Obama++Kagan&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets
Here’s five instances.
You don’t have to appologize, they mean nothing.
September 3, 2010 at 9:29 am
HistorianDude
Thanks for proving me right again, IB. Not just that Elena Kagan has never blocked a single case from getting to the Supreme Court, but that you also don’t know how to read a docket.
Ignoring that none of these cases were leigibility cases, Kagan is listed on those cases automatically because, as Solicitor General, it would have been her responsibility to respond if the case ever was selected by the court for hearing. But not only were these cases not granted meritorious… the Justice Department in each and every one of them told the court they wouldn’t respond at all.
That’s what “Waiver of right of respondents Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al. to respond filed.” means.
You really have to stop reading WND. It only makes you more stupid.
September 4, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD responds with this:
“Thanks for proving me right again, IB. Not just that Elena Kagan has never blocked a single case from getting to the Supreme Court, but that you also don’t know how to read a docket.”
No what it does is show that Kagan was in on the cases that were blocked from the SC seeing them.
Nice try though.
September 4, 2010 at 5:04 pm
Interested Bystander
I have to respond to this comment from HRD:
“You really have to stop reading WND. It only makes you more stupid.”
From what I have read, WND actually lays out the FACTS and allows people to come to their own conclusions, unlike the “article” that you linked which is OPINION and actually “reports” nothing but OPINION.
Pure sign of you being indoctrinated HRD. You can’t think rationally when all through your life, you have been TOLD how to think.
Try using that brain to THINK HRD, and not to believe people who post OPINION all of the time (like the person you linked too, or me for that matter).
September 2, 2010 at 4:31 am
Interested Bystander
gumply,
Thanks for the “welcome back”. I check JAMES every day, but haven’t been in the mood to comment.
Anyway, the family is doing good, thanks for asking, just a trying time for us this year, (we have lost a close cousin, an Uncle and a couple Friday’s ago my father in law) and now today we get to go find out about how my dad is doing. He was diagnosed with lung cancer in both lungs in May of 09 and they treated and “killed” it, but now it has moved to his liver, and we get to find out today what the treatment plan is. Naturally he’s not in very good spirits. Who can blame him after believing that they had stopped it, along with his blood tests coming back clean, and now they find it somewhere else.
Lakin is a brave man, and IF he is convicted I can’t see how the Supreme Court could NOT “look at” this case when and if it comes to them.
It’s just unfathomable that Obama could answer this issue with a few bucks and a dozen or so documents, and yet he CHOOSES to keep these things sealed, sending private and PUBLIC lawyers all around the Country defending him keeping them sealed.
Ya think maybe he is hiding something?
I watched some of the Beck rally, and listened to the rest on the way to our family reunion this past Saturday. I thought it was well put together, and delivered a message that this Country needs to hear. With the size of the crowd (Beck told the crowd that according to the Park Police there were over 1000 people there, no typo either OVER 1000) and knowing that each of them probably represented another 100 or so that would have liked to have been there, the movement to get this Country back to it’s core principles is growing.
Maybe people are beginning to realize that we can not continue to spend more than we bring in, and we have got to pay down this enormous debt that we have. Anyone who thinks our debt is a mere 14 trillion is nuts. It’s more like 110 TRILLION with all of the bailouts and the Government propping up of Wall Street.
Am I the only one who can see that what was going on to bring about the collapse of Wall Street is continuing still? How can the DOW be rising when all of the economic indicators are modest at best, and bleak in reality? Someone is running a ponzi scheme, and Obama and Geithner are smack dab in the middle of it.
When the truth about this Administration is known, people are going to cringe at the thought that this man was ever President.
“Cap and Trade” is another money making scheme Obama is trying to push through.
Although November won’t stop everything, IF Conservatives get control of the House, they can elect NOT to finance these awful reglations, taxes, and take overs.
And while we are at it, how about auditing the Fed to see how much we REALLY owe?
I think the Country deserves to know, just like Lakin deserves to know that his Commander in Chief is eligible to be head of the military.
September 2, 2010 at 9:10 am
HistorianDude
What is unfathomable is that you keep repeating these long disproved lies.
1. Obama has never sealed anything.
2. Obama is not sending lawyers “all around the Country defending him keeping them sealed.” In most of the cases he has not even been a defendant.
3. Obama paid his ten bucks and released his birth certificate more than two years ago. We all know how well that worked.
September 2, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD:
You commented:
“1. Obama has never sealed anything.”
Yes he did. Just look at his first executive order he signed after taking office. That spells it out for you.
We’ve been through that before, and just because you keep repeating this mistruth, it doesn’t make it so. All people have to do is read the EO.
And number 2:
“2. Obama is not sending lawyers “all around the Country defending him keeping them sealed.” In most of the cases he has not even been a defendant.”
I don’t understand how you continually lump the eligibility cases in with other cases. Obama is a defendent in the eligiblity cases, and he has sent his own private lawyers and DoJ lawyers wherever they were filed to defend them, at the cost of millions of dollars.
It’s the truth.
And finally number 3:
“3. Obama paid his ten bucks and released his birth certificate more than two years ago. We all know how well that worked.”
Yeah, it was found out that Obama could have gotten a COLB from Hawaii no matter where he was born, so long as the birth was registered with HHS.
The long form would name the hospital and have an attending physician’s signature on it, and would be indisputable proof that he was born at said hospital, and that a doctor oversaw his birth. That is his story, right? Obama opened the door when he sent that letter to Kapialoni (whatever), and now that he is being called out on it, he chooses to play the system.
This WILL be an issue in 2012. I’d love to hear how Obama will spin his keeping these documents sealed.
On another subject, you sure seem to have been out of the loop the last few days. Were you in Maine with Obama talking about how to continue spinning this issue?
Your ilk make me sick to my stomach.
September 2, 2010 at 3:37 pm
HistorianDude
1) Obama’s first executive order sealed exactly nothing. It in fact does the exact opposite. It actually unseals records that Bush had sealed, returning the standard to the one first put in place by Ronald Reagan.
I thought you like Reagan.
2) It is a bald, unadulterated lie that Obama has spent “millions of dollars” defending these cases. I have “lumped” nothing with eligibility cases, I simply continue to point out that most of the eligibility cases did not include Obama as a defendant at all. Most were actually filed against State Secretaries of State.
3) It is another bald face, unadulterated lie that Obama could have gotten a Hawaii COLB saying he was born in Hawaii if he was actually born someplace else.
It is amazing that to defend yourself from your lies you end up making even others.
Pathetic.
September 2, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD comments:
“1) Obama’s first executive order sealed exactly nothing. It in fact does the exact opposite. It actually unseals records that Bush had sealed, returning the standard to the one first put in place by Ronald Reagan.”
Like I commented before, all people have to do is read the EO, and they can make up their own mind:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2304500/posts
You see, unlike you, I back up my comments with FACTS.
Read it and weep HRD.
HRD then replies with this:
“2) It is a bald, unadulterated lie that Obama has spent “millions of dollars” defending these cases. I have “lumped” nothing with eligibility cases, I simply continue to point out that most of the eligibility cases did not include Obama as a defendant at all. Most were actually filed against State Secretaries of State.”
Prove it. Link somewhere that proves he hasn’t. There are many places to see what Obama has spent defending these ELIGIBILITY cases. The cases brought against the SoS’s are attempting to get SoS to VERIFY eligibility, and are asking how they VERIFIED Obama’s eligibility, not to prove Obama is eligible. There’s a big difference in the two, except in warped minds like yours.
And then HRD comments this:
“3) It is another bald face, unadulterated lie that Obama could have gotten a Hawaii COLB saying he was born in Hawaii if he was actually born someplace else.”
No it is not, and I have linked the statutes many times. Again, all people have to do is read the statutes that were in place when Obama was born to see that the HHS only needed a birth registration form that was signed by a WITNESS stating that the person was born in Hawaii to produce a birth certificate.
The statutes don’t even state the registration had to be made in person, which means a registration could be done by mail.
Just because you keep posting this LIE that you couldn’t get a birth certificate from Hawaii without being born there, when you know it is the truth, doesn’t make it right. Your earlier argument was that it was the same way in most States, and now your argument is that it couldn’t happen.
Again folks, read the statutes and come to your own conclusions. It’s rather obvious if you read them that what I have commented is the TRUTH.
Next HRD comments this:
“It is amazing that to defend yourself from your lies you end up making even others.”
But you have YET to show one instance where I have lied, and I have PROVEN that what you comment is wrong.
Slimey folks like yourself HRD are what is wrong with this Country.
HRD concludes with this:
“Pathetic.”
That’s exactly how I feel about your arguments.
September 3, 2010 at 9:42 am
HistorianDude
Actually… you have to actually understand what you read. And as to making up your own mind, you are allowed your own opinions, but not your own facts.
It is a fact that the EO seals nothing. In fact… it has nothing to do with any of Obama’s birth, school, passport or other personal records at all. It deals only with “presidential records” generated while he is President.
It is clear that, again, you have never read what you pretend to be talking about. And as such, you again look like a fool.
September 4, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD responds with this:
“Actually… you have to actually understand what you read. And as to making up your own mind, you are allowed your own opinions, but not your own facts.
It is a fact that the EO seals nothing. In fact… it has nothing to do with any of Obama’s birth, school, passport or other personal records at all. It deals only with “presidential records” generated while he is President.
It is clear that, again, you have never read what you pretend to be talking about. And as such, you again look like a fool.”
What I will comment about this is to simply read the EO.
It’s pretty clear that Obama has final word on ANYTHING released.
I guess this is HRD’s next comment:
“Obama has been required to defend himself in three cases, total. One of them was pro bono (i.e. free). In the other two his lawyers filed a single motion in each, totally less than 50 pages in all.
That’s about $5,000 worth of legal work.
Unless where you come people pay $40,000 a page for legal work.”
You REALLY need to learn how to structure your comments. It shows how “intellectual” you are when you continually post comments that are messed up.
But to go to your point, there have been more than three cases where Obama is a defendent. The cost is more than 5 grand, and you know it. It’s more to the tune of 2.4 or 2.5 million so far, and counting.
HRD next comments this:
“You are actually claiming here not that Hawaii law allows foreign born people to get birth certificates that say they were born in Hawaii (something repeatedly and publicly denied by the Hawaii DoH itself), but that Obama got his birth certificate by fraud.”
Again, I have NOT claimed that Obama got his BC by fraud. What I have commented is that he COULD HAVE with the statues on the books at the time Obama was born.
The long form BC would put that issue to rest, unless of course it isn’t from a hospital like he claims.
You see how HRD works folks? He twists words to become FACT, when the FACT is I am simply asking a question.
HRD continues:
“So okay… where’s your evidence of a fraud?”
Again, I have claimed no such thing as a fraud being conducted by Obama. What I DO claim is that Obama COULD HAVE gotten his birth registered with the State of Hawaii even if he wasn’t born there. I have NEVER commented that he wasn’t born in Hawaii.
Twisting words proves how desperate you are HRD. You can’t make an argument for why Obama hasn’t resolved this issue, so you twist my words.
It’s ok though, those reading these comments can make their own conclusions.
HRD goes on with this:
“We all know you have none, because if there was any such evidence it would be a criminal issue not a civil one and Birther lawyers would not have kept beating their heads against the wall of “standing.”
Again, all this comment shows is that your side knows how to “play” the system, and you’d rather do that then actually show character and morals by releasing the documents.
In my opinion that is ridiculous.
HRD concludes with this:
“It is, ultimately, just another Birther lie.”
Again, asking a question is a “lie”.
Ever heard the expression;
“The only stupid question is the one you don’t ask.”?
It’s not a “lie” to ask a question HRD, and that’s all we are doing.
On another subject, has Gibbs ever got back with the media about Obama’s Social Security Card being issued from Conn?
Again, a legitimate question that a person of character and morals would answer.
Obama chooses to “skirt” the issue instead of answering it.
Ya think maybe he’s hiding something?
September 7, 2010 at 9:19 am
HistorianDude
Actually, no. It’s not.
Another Birther lie that never dies.
Obama has had to spend next to nothing to defend these cases. In exactly three of them (no more) did he have to hire a lawyer to defend him, and in one of those the lawyer was free.
Total cost… around $5K.
This is true even today and in every state of the union. Birth certificates can be fraudulently obtained.
Where is the tiniest shred of evidence that Obama’s was fraudulently obtained?
Put what to rest? You still haven’t shown any evidence thet there is something that needs to be put to rest.
Where is your evidence of fraud?
And of course, no smart person believes that to be true either.
September 7, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD responds with this about the President having final word about what is released:
“Actually, no. It’s not.”
You may want to read the first line of section 4 paragraph “b”.
The President has final say, it’s right there in black and white.
Next HRD replies with this:
“Another Birther lie that never dies.
Obama has had to spend next to nothing to defend these cases. In exactly three of them (no more) did he have to hire a lawyer to defend him, and in one of those the lawyer was free.
Total cost… around $5K.”
It is simply unbelievable that you can write this. You know as well as I do that Obama is named in more than three cases. Heck there were three cases in just the military that Obama was named in.
Where is YOUR proof Obama has spent only 5 grand? Besides, we are commenting about Obama’s money AND our money, you know the taxpayer’s money.
HRD then responds with this:
“This is true even today and in every state of the union. Birth certificates can be fraudulently obtained.
Where is the tiniest shred of evidence that Obama’s was fraudulently obtained?”
Obama not releasing the documents is evidence that he is hiding something.
Obama is the one who wrote in that letter he was born in Kapiolani. The proof of burden is on him now. His COLB only states that he was born in Hawaii.
Sealing his long form BC is pretty “damning” evidence that he is hiding something.
Then HRD goes on:
“Put what to rest? You still haven’t shown any evidence thet there is something that needs to be put to rest.
Where is your evidence of fraud?”
This is a pretty stupid comment.
All we are doing is asking Obama to release the documents. We haven’t written there is any “fraud” only that we don’t know for sure, and these documents would clear things up.
Just like the Social Security Card issue. No one is claiming that the card isn’t legit, only that it was obtained using a Conn address, when Obama has never even lived in Conn (at least that we know of).
It’s pretty obvious HRD, that your “motivation” for this is to simply play the “merry go round” game.
Obama could shut us up if he’d simply release the documents, not to mention the money he would save.
And HRD concludes with this about the saying “The only stupid question is the one you don’t ask”:
“And of course, no smart person believes that to be true either.”
Another “elitist” reply. You HRD are so “smart” that you can’t even figure out how to post a comment without it looking very confusing.
Shows how “smart” you are.
September 8, 2010 at 7:08 am
HistorianDude
You may want to read the entire EO and then look up what a “presidential record” is. Hint: Birth certificates, school transcripts and all the other documents on the Birther wish list are not “presidential records.”
This EO seal nothing. It does not even have anything to do the documents you keep asking for.
I have already corrected you on this several times. Your claim that more than $2 million has been spent is an absolute lie, and you know it is an absolute lie.
As to “our money,” Justice department lawyers are salaried. They draw the same paycheck whether they’re defending the President from Birther nut-jobs or sitting at their desks making paper-clip chains. Birther cases against the sitting President cost nothing extra to the government.
You really need to stop proving that you are a credulous sheep by repeating Birther lies that never die.
No… it is evidence that Birther cases are so frivolous no court will take them seriously enough to even ask to see such a document.
So I will ask again the question you cannot apparently answer:
Where is the tiniest shred of evidence that Obama’s COLB is forged?
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence he has met his burden of proof.
Now it’s your job to show evidence that contradicts it or shut up.
Not in the real world among rational people who are not brain damaged by their tin foil hats.
Again… real evidence, IB. Not your wild speculation. Real evidence.
I ask again: clear what up? Since as you appear to admit there is no evidence of fraud in the first place, there is nothing to clear up.
Nobody, not you, not me, not Obama has any obligation to bend over every time some RWNJ says cough.
This is a lie, and you know it. We’ve covered it more than a score times.
So… you hate smart people too?
September 8, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD comments:
“This EO seal nothing. It does not even have anything to do the documents you keep asking for.”
The EO gives Obama final say on what is and isn’t released. End of story.
HRD then comments:
“I have already corrected you on this several times. Your claim that more than $2 million has been spent is an absolute lie, and you know it is an absolute lie.”
It’s closer to 2 million than it is your figure of 5 grand.
Just because you believe you have “corrected” me, doesn’t mean squat to me. You also “believe” that you know how to make a post look “smart”, but fail many times.
Then HRD comments this:
“As to “our money,” Justice department lawyers are salaried. They draw the same paycheck whether they’re defending the President from Birther nut-jobs or sitting at their desks making paper-clip chains. Birther cases against the sitting President cost nothing extra to the government.”
What about travel, per diem, office expenses (paper, staples etc.) and any other cost above and beyond the pay of the DoJ lawyer? That’s OUR money HRD.
HRD next comments this:
“No… it is evidence that Birther cases are so frivolous no court will take them seriously enough to even ask to see such a document.”
No it means our Justice Department is so corrupt that these DoJ lawyers and Obama’s personal lawyers know how to “play” the system.
It’s a pretty sad commentary on our Justice System. Money gets you off almost every time (just ask OJ).
HRD continues:
“Where is the tiniest shred of evidence that Obama’s COLB is forged?”
He won’t release the documents now will he?
Pretty damning evidence right there.
Then HRD replies:
“Under the Federal Rules of Evidence he has met his burden of proof.”
Showing your lawyer side again.
Under the “rules of morals”, Obama FAILS.
HRD next replies with this:
“Not in the real world among rational people who are not brain damaged by their tin foil hats.”
That “tin foil hats” segment is growing daily too. When people find out the circumstances of how Obama could have gotten his birth registered in Hawaii WITHOUT being born there.
Then HRD asks this:
“I ask again: clear what up? Since as you appear to admit there is no evidence of fraud in the first place, there is nothing to clear up.”
Just the little issue of whether he is eligible to be President, that’s all.
HRD then replies:
“This is a lie, and you know it. We’ve covered it more than a score times.”
And “score times” I have proven you wrong.
HRD concludes with this:
“So… you hate smart people too?”
No only people who “believe” they are smart.
Those who “know” they are smart don’t have to keep reminding themselves of it in every comment.
September 9, 2010 at 10:31 am
HistorianDude
And still seals exactly nothing.
1. It gives Obama less say than Bush’s equivalent EO.
2. It restores the same say as Ronal Reagan’s equivalent EO.
3. It has nothing to do with birth records, school transcripts, etc. Those are not “Presidential Records” and are not covered under this or any equivalent EO.
The actual end of story is that you either have no idea what you are talking about or (again) you are deliberately lying.
Repeating that lie doesn’t make it less of a lie.
What about them? Please, I beg you, do the math that would make that add up to $2 million. I’d love to see you try.
You can find a list of every eligibility case here.
http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%20CASE%20LIST.pdf
Go through them and try to come up with $2 million in per diem, staples and paper.
He released the only relevant document more than two years ago. And he did it completely voluntarily.
September 9, 2010 at 3:24 pm
Interested Bystander
HRD replies:
“And still seals exactly nothing.”
The EO gives Obama final say on what is and isn’t released. End of story.
HRD next replies with this:
“Repeating that lie doesn’t make it less of a lie.”
Then why has Obama paid this law firm over 2 million since he announced that he is a candidate for President?
You wanted PROOF, well here’s PROOF that Obama has paid 1.4 million since the election.
Now what?
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106138
Then HRD comments this:
“He released the only relevant document more than two years ago. And he did it completely voluntarily.”
“Voluntarily”?
What a stupid comment this is. The campaign released the COLB AFTER questions were raised. That is NOT “voluntarily”, that’s in response to questions.
Why won’t Obama “voluntarily” release the long form?
(after this comment, HRD again shows just how “smart” he is by posting a comment that you can’t make “heads nor tails” of. I’ll do my best to decipher)
HRD I believe responds with this next:
“Says the poster who depends for his every argument on willfully embracing long debunked Birther lies. You wouldn’t recognize the moral high ground if it fell on you.”
I have more morals in my little toe than you AND Obama have in your entire body. You see HRD, I was raised correctly, I wasn’t raised to “play” the system, like you and Obama were.
IF Obama had nothing to hide, he would have released the documents long ago.
Since I believe he IS hiding something, he released the bare minimum which leaves more questions than it actually answers.
His and your approach to this issue is backfiring on you, because instead of people actually believing that Obama has fulfilled his obligation of proving he is eligible, the more people become aware of the circumstances that Obama could have gotten his birth registered in Hawaii, the more people will be asking the questions.
And then HRD comments this:
“Another Birther lie that never dies.
Obama cannot have gotten a birth certificate that says he was born there unless he was actually born there.”
Oh yes he could have, just read the statutes on the books at the time Obama was born.
You know it, and I know it. It is NOT a lie, it is FACT, and you KNOW it.
By the way, who are you trying to convince that it is a lie?
HRD continues with this:
“We’ve been at this for a long time, IB. Every Birther case has been lost, Obama is still President of the United States, and you’re still here whining like a beaten stepchild.”
I’m not “whining”. I am simply asking the President to release the documents.
As an American citizen it is my RIGHT to do so (or at least it used to be).
Why won’t Obama stop his “whining”, and simply release the documents that answer the questions.
I suspect that since your attempt at indoctrinating me has FAILED miserably, you are now attempting to use this “whining” tactic to get me to stop asking the questions.
It won’t work.
HRD concludes with this:
“Don’t you ever get tired of being wrong?”
You have not ONCE proven me wrong HRD.
Even if Obama would release the documents, and it proves he is eligible, I won’t be “wrong”.
You see HRD, it’s not “wrong” to ask questions.
What is “wrong” is when someone “plays” the system to avoid answering those questions.
Why won’t Obama answer the question about his Social Securtiy card being issued in Conn?
A legit question, seeings how in two books Obama doesn’t even mention visiting Conn, and when Gibbs was asked about this, he tried to lump this in with the eligibility questions.
These are two seperate issues, but yet your ilk “plays” it so that they are lumped together.
Typical elitist BS.
September 12, 2010 at 10:01 pm
HistorianDude
It seals not a single personal record from Obama’s past.
Not a single one.
Because you need a lot of legal work when you run for President. Obama has spent no more or less than any other candidate in his position.
And nowhere in any of that “proof” is there any evidence that a single penny of it was spent on eligibility issues.
That assertion (your assertion) is a bald faced lie.
You need to look up the word “voluntarily” in the dictionary. You do not appear to understand what it means.
You have the moral backbone of a planarian.
I have. Many times. They prove you to be liar. Every time.
It is absolutely your right to whine like a beaten stepchild. It simply does you no actual credit.
September 13, 2010 at 8:25 am
Interested Bystander
HRD responds:
“It seals not a single personal record from Obama’s past.
Not a single one.”
The EO gives Obama final say on what is and isn’t released. End of story.
On the money Obama has given to lawyers HRD replies:
“Because you need a lot of legal work when you run for President. Obama has spent no more or less than any other candidate in his position.”
Come on now HRD, you expect us to believe that Obama paid Perkins this money for things he did during the election in 2008? His campaign brought in record amounts of money, but yet Obama couldn’t pay him until 2009? Except for ONE entry which was made between Oct and Nov of 2008, all of these payments were made AFTER the election.
Of course the entries do NOT state what the money was paid for.
Besides, why is it necessary to pay lawyers so much money just to run for President?
You seem to contradict yourself when you state that you have to pay an enormous amount of money to a lawyer simply to run for President, but you state it only cost Obama 5 grand to defend himself against the (supposed) three lawsuits that he is identified as a defendent.
Also, in the link you provided, I count 19 cases that have Obama as the “v”, not the three you claim.
Then you make this claim:
“And nowhere in any of that “proof” is there any evidence that a single penny of it was spent on eligibility issues.
That assertion (your assertion) is a bald faced lie.”
I “asserted” nothing except that Obama paid Perkins an enormous amount of money, and that Perkins was/is one of Obama’s personal lawyers (or are you denying that also?).
It’s not a big jump to assume that Perkins received some or all of the amount to defend the eligibility cases.
I’m not stating he did, only that I’m not aware of ANY other issues Obama would have had to pay a PERSONAL lawyer for other than the eligibility issue.
Can you?
Then on why the campaign released the COLB, you comment this:
“You need to look up the word “voluntarily” in the dictionary. You do not appear to understand what it means.”
They only released the document because they were asked about it. Did someone hold a gun to their head until it was released? NO, but if no one would have brought up the issue, I believe the document would not have been released.
Whether they did it “voluntarily”, or if they did it to “answer” the question matters not.
On having morals HRD responds with this:
“You have the moral backbone of a planarian.”
Oh no HRD, you and Obama have proven time and again that you have the “moral backbone of a planarian”. IF I were President and someone questioned my eligibility, no matter what some lawyer told me, I would release the long form BC.
You, on the other hand, seem to be content “playing” the system for all you can.
See the difference? (probably not)
On Obama getting a BC from Hawaii no matter where Obama was born HRD responds with this:
“I have. Many times. They prove you to be liar. Every time.”
Here is the Statute for registering a birth with DoH:
Ҥ338-5 Compulsory registration of births. Within the time prescribed by the department of health, a certificate of every birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth; or if not so attended, by one of the parents.
The birth facility shall make available to the department appropriate medical records for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this chapter. [L 1949, c 327, §9; RL 1955, §57-8; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-5; am L 1988, c 149, §1]”
There is NOTHING in this statute that refutes ANYTHING I have commented. How does this prove me a “liar”? The statute doesn’t state that the registration has to be made in person, so it IS possible that the form could have been mailed in.
Show me in the statutes where I’m wrong, and quit commenting that I am a liar. Which statute proves me wrong?
The next statute even goes further stating:
Ҥ338-6 Local agent to prepare birth certificate. (a) If neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as provided in section 338-5 is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local agent
(b) The department shall prescribe the time within which a supplementary report furnishing information omitted on the original certificate may be returned for the purpose of completing the certificate. Certificates of birth completed by a supplementary report shall not be considered as “delayed” or “altered.” [L 1949, c 327, §10; RL 1955, §57-9; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-6]”
Come on now HRD, you know as well as I do, given the statutes on the books at the time Obama was born, the registration could have been submitted no matter where Obama was born.
In the statute referenced above it states that an agent “of the department of health shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.”
Given this language, it seems reasonable that someone could have CALLED DoH and submitted the registration form without ANY signatures, by simply stating they had knowledge of a birth and that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as provided in section 338-5 is able to prepare a birth certificate”.
HRD concludes with this gem:
“It is absolutely your right to whine like a beaten stepchild. It simply does you no actual credit.”
I love it how you conclude that I am whining, when all I am doing is asking simple questions.
Your side is the one who appears to be “whining”.
I will comment this again:
IF Obama had nothing to hide, I believe the BC would have been released long ago. There is simply no reason not to release the BC IF it backed up the COLB.
Name one REASONABLE position you could take that would defend Obama NOT releasing the document IF it backed up his COLB?
I would also comment this:
HRD continually states I am a “liar” but is yet to give actual proof that ANYTHING I have commented is a “lie”.
As PROVEN in the above copied and pasted statutes, there is NOTHING in the statutes that refutes ANYTHING I have questioned.
Simply commenting that I am a “liar” proves nothing HRD. Show me PROOF that I am a “liar”, and quit commenting it.
HRD suggests that Obama has spent only 5 grand on the eligibility case, and given that this is the ONLY case I am aware of that he would need a personal lawyer for, and the evidence of the payments to Perkins. HRD suggests that when running for President, you have to spend a lot of money on lawyers. I’m just not understanding why you would need a lawyer to run for President?
HRD suggests that Obama couldn’t have gotten a COLB no matter where he was born, when the statutes state exactly what I have suggested all along.
I have NOT ONCE stated as fact Obama isn’t eligible, but simply asking questions makes me a “liar”.
Does anyone but me find this strange? Like HRD is grasping at straws, and in a last ditch effort to “save face”, he suggests that I am a “liar”?
Give me ONE solid piece of evidence that what I have posted is a “lie” HRD.
Put up or shut up.
I would also like to point out that HRD will NOT comment on Obama’s Social Security card being issued in Conn. I understand that this is a seperate issue, but it is interesting that Obama’s SS card was issued from Conn when there is NO evidence that Obama was ever in Conn at the time of the card being issued.
I know HRD, just because Obama doesn’t mention in either of his books visiting Conn does not mean that he didn’t.
I think this is a legitimate question. Why can we not get an answer to the question? The question was brought up in the daily press briefing, so you can’t state that the ssue hasn’t been brought up.
A simple explaination would suffice.
September 3, 2010 at 7:24 pm
gumply
Ib,
Don’t waste your time with obot’s they lie just like their muslim leader. The ends always justifies the means with them.
He can’t even come up with an original thought. Half of what he says I have read before so he must be commenting by other names on other sites.
September 4, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Interested Bystander
gumply,
I kind of like “arguing” with HRD.
It shows how the people on the “other side” think (or follow orders).
September 4, 2010 at 2:23 pm
gumply
IB,
Here is more proof of the idiot in the White House!
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/smartest_president_in_history.html
September 4, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Interested Bystander
gumply,
LOL.
Good stuff there.