The Haunting Design of ObamaCare — on The Glazov Gang

obama2This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by an All-Star Cast: Ann-Marie Murrell, National Director of PolitiChicks.tv, Basil Hoffman, a Hollywood Actor (“The Artist”) and Monty Morton, a Conservative Entrepreneur.

The Gang gathered to discuss The Haunting Design of ObamaCare, shedding light on the president’s true morbid objectives in implementing his health care plan.

The Gang also focused on When Presidents Lie, Obama’s peculiar “apology,” the myriad ingredients and consequences of the ObamaCare nightmare, and much, much more:

Part I:

Part II:

To watch previous Glazov Gang episodes, Click here.

To sign up for The Glazov Gang: Click here.

  • Diane

    I’m wondering why you guys don’t get someone like Rosa Koire on your program to discuss United Nations Agenda 21, which was signed onto at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 by Bush I and enacted by Bill Clinton with Executive Order 12852 in 1993. It would shine the spotlight on a lot of what’s really going on in the world behind the scenes, the United Nations’ plan to destroy the west, the middle class, and redistribute our wealth around the world. Believe it or not, “anti-bullying” is part of Agenda 21 too. George Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning, not a lesson plan.

    • Steve Tanton

      Amen to that.

      • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

        Amen to what? Amen to the crappers who think it is okay for this Fraud in Chief to get away with these crimes. Shame on you. We now have folks willing to call the POTUS a LIAR for crying out loud, you don’t think he was capable of committing the biggest fraud ever committed against this nation. He did exactly that and he will not survive this second term, remember “clunker” told you so.

        • smrstrauss

          “clunker” is not exactly fair and impartial.

          The Xerox WorkCentre research is still conclusive:

          http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Are you kidding me, “fair” and “impartial”. LMAO!! How about judges using the lame excuse of “lack of standing” to the very people who pay this Fraud in Chief’s salary. What a joke. How about the media not giving Arpaio via Lt. Mike Zullo an opportunity to show the criminal evidence they have collected in their two year investigation of Obama? With one stroke of a brush (one 30 to 40 minute presentation) and the American people would have an opportunity to decide if the document is a forgery or not. It would be a total and wholesale crush for all “birthers” if the media could prove the evidence to be fictional. Not only that, there would be a great case for prosecuting these so-called “birther idiots.” The Arpaio/Zullo team is more than willing to take that chance, so all this ranting by “smrstrauss” is meaningless until those great patriots have their day. Who is afraid of “the big bad wolf” pal?

          • smrstrauss

            When about 200 different judges have ALL rule that the birther side does not have standing, it is time to read the precedents on standing and to learn that the judges are right and you are wrong. Your side really does NOT have standing.

            Re Sheriff Joe, Zullio and the Cold Case Posse:

            http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

            And:

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indicting-the-sheriff-joe-and-the-cold-case-posse/

            And:

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/?s=xerox&submit=

            (And Sheriff Joe has not even attempted to refute the Xerox WorkCentre research shown in the link above.

            And not only does the National Review not believe the “the birth certificate was forged” mythology, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan don’t either, and neither does a single member of the 535 members of Congress, all of whom (INCLUDING Rand Paul and Michelle Bachmann) voted to confirm Obama’s election twice.

            Sheriff Joe and you and a few birther sites can keep on spouting the “it was forged, it must have been forged” LIES all that you want, but sensible people will not believe that baloney.

            And, BTW, Obama was born IN HAWAII, and it is nutty to think that he was born anywhere else.

            The officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly stated in writing and in court papers that the FACTS on Obama’s birth certificate are identical to those on the short form and long form BCs that they sent to him. And they both say that Obama was born in HAWAII.

            THAT is in addition to the Index Data file that shows that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate issued in 1961 and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers that were from the Department of Health of Hawaii back in 1961 (and only the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the paper, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.) And that is in addition to the Hawaii teacher whose father’s name was Stanley (it really was, I’ve checked) and who said that she was told of the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley and that she wrote up that little tidbit and sent the letter to her father. (Are you claiming that Obama was able to find a teacher in Hawaii who had a father named Stanley and got her to lie about hearing about the birth of a child to a woman named Stanley?)

            And, guess what, we do not even know that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very few 18-year-olds did. And even fewer women traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the high risk of stillbirths. Yet birther sites hope that GULLIBLE people will assume that Obama’s mother was one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and also one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy—and that the birth certificate is forged and the officials of BOTH parties lying about it (and the Index Data and the birth notices and the teacher who wrote home).

            Here, by the way, are links to some (by no means all) of the confirmation documents from the officials in Hawaii. Notice that several of them say that the facts “MATCH.”

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/01/heres-the-birth-certificate/

    • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

      Amen to that and I would like to add a request for the Glazov Gang to interview Lt. Mike Zullo and Paul Irey and Doug Vogt and Reed Hayes so that they can use their expertise to explain all the fraud committed by Barry Soetore (aka Barack Hussein Obama). Up to this point in time most of the main stream conservative blogs and web pages have slandered these amazing patriots and their efforts to expose the scandal of the century.

      • smrstrauss
        • smrstrauss

          Oh, and here is the opinion of the National Review about Sheriff Joe, Zullo and the Cold Case Posse:

          http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Much has happened since National Review Online weighed in on the fraud issues. At that time the criminal investigation being carried out by Lt. Mike Zullo had just begun. Zullo and his amazing investigators were able to get Reed Hayes, an expert in document fraud used by the law firm Obama has given 2 million bucks to in order to protect him from the fraud charges, has provided an affidavit proving the April 27th, 2011 computer generated birth document is indeed a forgery. When the time comes it will be nearly impossible for Perkins/Coie to refute a man they have used as an expert witness before.

            Shame on the National Review Online for writing the above article without investigating. They never corresponded with Sheriff Joe Arpaio nor any of the many document and software experts nor the lead investigator Lt. Mike Zullo. It will be a pleasure watching the editors at National Review Online attempting to explain themselves as they wipe the cakes of mud off their pathetic faces as the Fraud in Chief is brought to justice.

          • smrstrauss

            Don’t like the National Revew? Too bad. Its opinion about birthers in general are shared by Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck—both of whom have called birthers “crazy.” And John McCain and Mitt Romney all think that the notion that Obama was born in a foreign country crazy.

            Re the two million bucks claim. That was for the total expense of legal services for the entire presidential campaign. Law firms do have to do such things as check on the contracts for the rental of stores for local campaign headquarters, you know (or you should know).

            Reed Hayes is, btw, an expert in physical document signatures, not an expert on digitial documents, and his complete 40-page report has never been published (I wonder why not?????)

            The Xerox WorkCenter research is still conclusive, and birthers have not even attempted to refute it:

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Doug Vogt (40 years of experience in the field), Paul Irey (50 years experience), Mara Zebest (over a hundred manuals and books on Adobe), Reed Hayes (used by the same law firm employed by Obama as an expert).

            The 2 MILLION was used to protect the Fraud in Chief (now known as the Liar in Chief) from being exposed for who he is, a fraud.

          • smrstrauss

            Here is Doug Vogt’s Web site. Notice that he claims to have found the original Altar of Abraham?

            http://www.vectorpub.com/Reality_Revealed.html

            (In other words, he is a nut.)

            And Paul Irey continued to claim that Obama did not attend Columbia College even after Columbia University said twice that Obama did indeed attend Columbia College and did indeed graduate. (In other words, Irey is not exactly an impartial person.)

            Reed Hayes is a specialist in HANDWRITING analysis, not digital documents—-and his complete report has never been shown by the Cold Case Posse (I wonder why not? Answer: Probably because he admits that he his not an expert in determining whether digital documents are forged or not.)

            And birther sites did not show their readers all of these experts:

            Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

            Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

            John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

            Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

            Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

            Nor have birther sites even discussed the Xerox WorkCentre research:

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

            Regarding the $2 million claim. That also was made up by birther sites. Obama showed his birth certificate twice, and there were no lawsuits against him, repeat, NO lawsuits against him for any information at all. There were only lawsuits against Obama to have him thrown off of ballots—-all of which cases Obama won. Since there was no lawsuit for information, duh, Obama did not spend a cent defending such a lawsuit (And the $2 million figure was the total cost of legal fees for the entire presidential campaign—and lawyers do a lot of things, like checking the contracts on rental space for local election offices.)

            It is nuts like you that give the conservative movement a bad name.

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            If Eric Holder could prove that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his lead investigator were using fraudulent documents in their attempt to unseat this Fraud in Chief he would be all over it like flies on schit and most Americans would agree with me on this one. He doesn’t dare bring any case against these men knowing full well that it would mean the end of his boss and many in the radical progressive thugs from Chicago. Hold onto your panties, the Fraud in Chief is going down and the fall will be horrendous.

          • smrstrauss

            Re: “If Eric Holder could prove that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his lead investigator were using fraudulent documents…”

            Answer: Sure he would. First, what makes you think that LYING about documents is a federal crime? Second, Holder has bigger fish to fry—such as J.P. Morgan.

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Fraudulent use of documents is a Federal crime if they are being used to obtain a political office. Yea, Holder has “bigger fish to fry” do you mean like the militant Black Panthers or lying about Fast and Furious or lying about the spying on news reporters or going after a meaningless punk like George Zimmerman, REALLY!!

          • smrstrauss

            First, they would have to be federal documents. Second, only a federal office (Sheriff Joe is a local elected official). Third, to lie about a document is not a crime unless you can prove that it was done to make money, which would be fraud (and that would be a state crime).

            What about the Black Panthers? Are you referring to the case where a few alleged Black Panthers stood in front of a polling station in a mainly BLACK neighborhood in the 2008 election. What were they alleged to have done, stopped black people from voting? (There are, btw, more than 100,000 different polling places in a presidential election.)

            I notice you do not mention J. P. Morgan.

        • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

          Doug Vogt, Paul Irey, Mara Zebestand Reed Hayes (all experts in any software you can think of) have all filed affidavits with the FBI and the Alabama Supreme Court putting their reputations on the line and setting themselves up for sedition for attempting to unseat the POTUS with falsified evidence. I am willing to bet that the person who produced this worthless information would NEVER file an affidavit to refute the affidavits by Vogt, Irey, Zebest and Hayes for fear of being prosecuted for lying and misleading. None of them have walked into Congressional offices to present crap and worthless evidence like this presented in the above comment. Perkins and Coie will not be using this guy to defend this Fraud in Chief. Any bets?

          • smrstrauss

            All of those are birther “experts.” With the exception of Reed Hayes (whose complete 40-page has never been published. I wonder why not), not one of them has proven to a court that he or she is an expert. Reed Hayes has proven it, but he is an expert in physical document signatures, NOT in digital document analysis.

            Re Your bet. Dream on. What gave you that nutty idea. (Oh, and birthers will LOSE the case in Alabama, which isn’t even about the birth certificate. It is about whether the Alabama secretary of state has to check the eligibility of presidential candidates)

            Only birther “experts” have called Obama’s birth certificate forged, and they have not shown that they are even experts, much less fair and impartial. Those are two reasons why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review (or by Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Gingrich or Santorum or Huckabee).

            One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.

            Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.

            And birther sites have not shown you these real experts.

            Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

            Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

            John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

            Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

            Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

            Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.

            And it is irrational (to say the least) to think that Obama’s relatives had enough money (Obama’s grandfather was just a furniture salesman and his grandmother a low-level employee in a bank at the time; and his father came to Hawaii on a free flight) or crazy enough to spend LOTS of money on a long and expensive and risky (incidents of stillbirths were high at the time) overseas trip for their pregnant daughter—–when there were perfectly good hospitals in Honolulu, Hawaii.

            Also, the government of Kenya has said that it investigated the “born in Kenya” claim, and that it did not happen.

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Thank God Reed Hayes did not publish the affidavit proving the computer generated birth certificate to be a forgery. When the time comes the affidavit will be made known. When you speak of court cases there has not been one example where the evidence proving the computer generated birth certificate is a forgery never reached the point where the evidence was given a chance to be presented. The corrupt judges always used “lack of standing” as their fall back for not allowing the evidence to be shown.

            There is more evidence available to suggest that Obama was born in Kenya than there is for him being born in Hawaii. I personally don’t care where he was born, I just want him to answer for the fraudulent crimes. Fraud is a crime and even the POTUS should be held accountable for the crimes.

          • smrstrauss

            There is NO evidence that Obama was born in Kenya. Birther sites made up the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya. The transcript of the long-distance telephone call shows that the grandmother said repeatedly that Obama was born IN HAWAII “where his father was studying at the time.” Birther sites simply did not quote her and cut off the telephone call just BEFORE she was asked: “Where was he born?” (I wonder why they did that?)

            And guess what, the government of Kenya said that it had investigated, and that OBAMA WAS NOT BORN IN KENYA. And, guess what, the US INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) report for 1961 shows that a grand total of 63 people went from the USA to Kenya in 1961 and by far most of them went by sea, and a grand total of 21 people came from Kenya to the USA in 1961, and all but one of them came by sea—and there were no regularly scheduled ships from Hawaii to Kenya or vice versa.

            The “born in Kenya” story is the height of the loony side of the birther movement. It is based on forgeries like that of Lucas D. Smith, and falsifications–such as the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when she actually said right on the same tape that he was born IN HAWAII, and she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.

            Lucas D. Smith, a convicted felon, claimed that he went to Kenya and got Obama’s birth certificate at a hospital in Mombasa. But Lucas D. Smith has constantly refused to show proof that he, Smith, had ever gone to Kenya. All that he would have to do would be to show a Kenya stamp on a page of a passport, but Lucas D. Smith has refused to do that, constantly, and he has also constantly refused to say why he will not show that proof. (Moreover, his alleged “birth certificate” uses US date formats [month/day/year] and not the day/month/year format used in Kenya.)

            Laying aside for a moment the overwhelming proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, the evidence that Obama was NOT born in Kenya is also very strong. There
            were a grand total of 21 people who came to the USA from Kenya in 1961. Of these only seven were US citizens. And the birther myth has always been that Obama’s parents went there and returned by plane, but only one person came to the USA from Kenya in 1961 by plane and that person was, wait for it, NOT a US citizen.

            And Obama’s father did not go to Kenya in 1961 either (making it unlikely that his mother did, since travel late in pregnancy was rare, and even more rare without the husband going along). WND has proved with a FOI Act request that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961.

            And the Kenyan government investigated the “born in Kenya” story, and found that it was not true.

            “Jon Chessoni, a first secretary at the Kenyan Embassy in Washington, can’t understand why his office gets so many baseless questions about whether Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

            “It’s madness,” said Chessoni on Monday.“His father, in 1961, would not even have been in Kenya. When this matter first came up, the Kenyan government
            did its research and confirmed that these are all baseless claims.””

            http://washingtonindependent.com/53654/forged

            Obama has a Hawaii birth certificate that says that he was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, and the officials of both parties in Hawaii have confirmed that fact. It is also confirmed by the birth announcement in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961, which were sent to the papers only by the DOH of Hawaii.

            Obama’s birth announcement appeared in a section of the newspapers called Health Bureau Statistics. As the name indicates, and as the papers and the DOH
            also say, ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to the Health Bureau Statistics section of the paper. And the DOH only sent out those notices for
            children that it had issued birth certificates for, and in 1961 the DOH was not allowed to register the births of children who were not born in Hawaii.

            Oh, and there is this:

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiol

            (Which birther sites have not shown you—I wonder why not?)

            Oh, and there isn’t even any evidence that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very very few 18-year-olds did in those days. So birther sites hope that they can convince gullible people to ASSUME that Obama’s mother was one of the very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and one of the extremely few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy because of the risk of stillbirths (which was relatively high in 1961)—-and that she traveled alone to Kenya, and that she did so by ship, and that the officials of Kenya are lying and the officials of Hawaii are lying, and the Index Data and the DOH birth notices sent in 1961 are forged.

            How gullible. Want to buy a bridge?

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            As I said I don’t care where he was born. I know that he has no legitimate American birth certificate thus the computer generated document he presented on April 27th, 2011. That one is a forgery. We will just have to sit back and let it all unfold. There will eventually be an investigation. Where Obama was born isn’t a factor in this particular “natural born Citizen” debate, the important factor is who his Daddy was. An even bigger problem for this mutt is that he may have failed to renounce his Indonesian citizenship back in 1980 when he more than likely refused to register with the Selective Service using his Indonesian citizenship as an excuse not to sign up. Yes, this is conjecture since the mutt had Perkins/Coie seal his documents. The fraudulent Selective Service registration in 2008 will be easier to prove once the Selective Service is told to cooperate. This could end up being a back breaker for the mutt in that dual citizens are not eligible to be POTUS.

          • smrstrauss

            Responding to: “I know that he has no legitimate American birth certificate…”

            Answer: What you think that you “know” is filtered through your loony mind and your hatred. Rational people prefer to look at the FACTS. Obama has shown both his short form and long form birth certificates from Hawaii, and the officials in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that they sent them to him and that all the facts on the copy that the White House put online are exactly the same as on what they sent to him.

            The officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly stated in writing and in court papers that the FACTS on Obama’s birth certificate are identical to those on the short form and long form BCs that they sent to him. And they both say that Obama was born in HAWAII.

            THAT is in addition to the Index Data file that shows that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate issued in 1961 and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers that were from the Department of Health of Hawaii back in 1961 (and only the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the paper, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.) And that is in addition to the Hawaii teacher whose father’s name was Stanley (it really was, I’ve checked) and who said that she was told of the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley and that she wrote up that little tidbit and sent the letter to her father. (Are you claiming that Obama was able to find a teacher in Hawaii who had a father named Stanley and got her to lie about hearing about the birth of a child to a woman named Stanley?)

            And, guess what, we do not even know that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very few 18-year-olds did. And even fewer women traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the high risk of stillbirths. Yet birther sites hope that GULLIBLE people will assume that Obama’s mother was one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and also one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy—and that the birth certificate is forged and the officials of BOTH parties lying about it (and the Index Data and the birth notices and the teacher who wrote home).

            Here, by the way, are links to some (by no means all) of the confirmation documents from the officials in Hawaii. Notice that several of them say that the facts “MATCH.”

            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/01/heres-the-birth-certificate/

            BTW, Obama never had Indonesian Citizenship, as a telephone call to the Indonesian Embassy in Washington will confirm. Obama’s documents are not “sealed.” They are covered under the normal privacy laws—the same laws that have kept Mitt Romney’s grades and Paul Ryan’s grades and John McCain’s grades from being revealed.

            The fraudulent Selective Service registration was INDEED FORGED. Yes indeed, you got one fact right. One small factor, however. Wait for it. Wait some more. The small factor is that Obama did not publish his Selective Service registration, nor did any member of his team. The guy who published the alleged Selective Service Registration was a birther, and he is the only one who had the opportunity to forge it. (The guy did not even claim that he got it from Obama or a representative of Obama.)

            GULLIBLE. You are truly gullible. You are giving the conservative movement a bad name.

          • smrstrauss

            Re: “the important factor is who his Daddy was.”

            The citizenship of Obama’s father does not matter in the slightest. EVERY child born on US soil is a Natural Born US Citizen except for the children of foreign diplomats and enemy invaders.

            “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within
            the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.”
            (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin
            G. Hatch (R-UT).

            “Under the longstanding English common-law
            principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the
            sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are
            citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States
            are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less
            certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States
            citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President
            …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION
            (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the
            Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

            “Some
            birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by
            birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born”
            citizen on the other.

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            So why were there some 8 attempts to change the “natural born Citizen” clause by Congress since 2003 if they didn’t see it as a threat for their agenda (nothing to do with Obama, just wanted it changed)? All 8 attempts failed, thank God. Not all of those involved the movie star governor either.

          • smrstrauss

            Because some Republican members of Congress wanted to make former California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger, a naturalized US citizen, eligible to be president. The attempts were NOT to make Obama eligible because, duh, Obama IS ELIGIBLE.

            “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those
            persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

            “Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen”
            on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning.”—The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)

            “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)

          • smrstrauss
          • smrstrauss

            Re: “The important factor is who his daddy was.”

            Answer: No that does not matter in the slightest. EVERY child born on US soil is a Natural Born US Citizen except for the children of foreign diplomats and enemy invaders:

            “Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning.”—The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)

            “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham
            (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Check out Senate Resolution 511, you know the piece of crap the Democrats came up with when the left wing nut job original birthers attempted to prove McCain was not a “natural born Citizen.” The idiots (they got it right) even understood that both PARENTS (notice the “S”) had to be citizens (again notice the “S”) at the time of the child’s birth. Obama, Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal had parents who were NOT citizens at the time of their birth. Doesn’t get any better than that. Allow those following the comments decide by applying some simple logic.

            http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/11/logic-and-defining-natural-born-citizen.html

          • smrstrauss

            Senate Resolution 511 was an attempt to prove that McCain WAS eligible. And it did so by pointing out that he had two citizen parents and he was born on a US Naval base.

            That, duh, does not mean that everybody has to be born on a US Naval base to be eligible, and it does not mean that everybody needs two citizen parents in order to be eligible. McCain had two citizen parents, but the resolution does not say that others had to have two in order to be eligible. It did not even say that people have to have ONE citizen parent in order to be eligible. It just said that the US Senate believed that because McCain had two citizen parents and was born on a Naval base he was eligible.

            There was no similar resolution for Obama because, duh, EVERYBODY KNEW THAT HE WAS ELIGIBLE.

            Re the Puzo link.

            Mario Apuzzo, a birther lawyer, is wrong. The Heritage Foundation book is right:

            “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

            Mario Apuzzo, a birther lawyer, is wrong, and these appeals court rulings are right:

            Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling: “Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency…”

            Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

            Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”

            Purpura v. Obama (New Jersey 2012) ruling: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”

            Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”

            Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”

            Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”

            On October 1 of 2013, the US Supreme Court turned down an appeal of the last of the rulings shown above, the Farrar case, which had ruled that “children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” By rejecting the appeal, the US Supreme Court allowed the ruling of the lower court to STAND.

            In addition to those rulings specifically on presidential eligibility, there are these:

            Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

            “Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

            Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

            “Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

            Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

            “The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”
            That makes about 13 courts that I can cite easily that have ruled that the US born children of foreigners are Natural Born Citizens.

            In addition, there are articles like these:

            http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is-rubio-eligible/

            http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/birtherism-2012

            http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett

            http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/04/vattel-and-natural-born-citizen/

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Here suck on this for a little while. Obama worse nightmare is about to come crashing down on him and his corrupt administration. I call this Mutt names because he has committed the biggest fraud ever committed against this nation and he deserves nothing less than a lethal injection for all the pain and suffering he has caused all of us. Hell, you don’t even realize that he is bringing all this about intentionally and shame on you for defending and attempting to explain his fraudulent activity.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGxw7RS-DZM#t=522

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            I don’t hate the Mutt in Chief, the Liar in Chief, the Fraud in Chief. He is an elite con artist, nothing more nothing less. Take this an put it in your pipe and smoke it, a 3 minute Youtube that folks can judge for themselves, simply done and probably the fraud that will take this man and his enablers to prison.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkPh6NXZ7A

          • smrstrauss

            You CLAIM that you do not hate Obama, but you call him names. You CLAIM not to hate Obama but you post an allegation that he had his Selective Service documents forged. (They are forged, but since Obama never published him the ones that were published were, duh, forged by the guy who published them.)

            Obama did not publish his Selective Service registration. It IS forged, but Obama did not and could not have done it (The guy who put it online did not even claim to have gotten it from Obama).

          • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

            Now that is really funny! You couldn’t come up with something better. Hell he didn’t publish is April 27th, 2011 computer generated document either, someone else did, it is still a forgery. That is Obama’s Selective Service registration.

    • moriah steiner

      No-one and I mean no-one is talking about it…

      • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

        “No-one” in your circles of friends are talking about it. That doesn’t mean “NO ONE” is talking about it. Hell those that actually investigated the Liar in Chief have been presenting their findings to members of Congress and their Chiefs of Staff. They are doing much more than talking about it, they have packaged the evidence with multiple affidavits attached from very reliable experts to make it court room ready. This fight has just begun to gain momentum. You need to start paying attention. You must mean, NO ONE at Fox is talking about it, right. Those little cowards will be embarrassed when this scandal is finally exposed.

  • Jeff Ludwig

    This show has strength and wisdom. Great two sections. Everyone should watch them!!

    • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

      Barack Hussein Obama has committed the biggest fraud ever committed against this nation and folks like Frontgpage (Glazov Gang) completely ignore it. Their silence and the silence of most of the Conservative media is inexcusable and shameful. Conservatives are willing to hammer this Jerk in Chief 24/7 but are not willing to expose the fraudulent activity that will do long term damage to the entire radical Progressive movement. It is not just Barack Hussein Obama who is guilty of this fraud, he had plenty of help. Praise God for those amazing patriots who have spent many years of their lives gathering all the evidence that will eventually destroy this evil man. It will be a great day when the folks at Fox and Enemies are also exposed for their complete and utter silence. Hell, they were the worse abusers, they slandered those amazing efforts to expose this fraud. I have been called every damn name in the book by so-called conservatives just for keeping this issue alive in the comment sections of the Conservative blogs. I view those particular Conservatives as sorry sacks of human waste.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    I am so looking forward to the Glazov Gang interviewing Doug Vogt and Paul Irey and Reed Hayes, the document experts, about the affidavits they have submitted to the FBI and to the courts proving that this present day Fraud in Chief (aka Liar in Chief) has been using fraudulent documents in order to maintain is position of power. The Glazov Gang should follow up with interviews of Lt. Mike Zullo to discuss all the evidence he and his team of career law enforcement officers have collected during their two year criminal investigation. The Glazov Gang will be sick to their stomach listening to how corrupt this Fraud in Chief truly is. I believe Doug Vogt has found a way to expose this criminal by avoiding the corrupt judicial system and the DOJ. Check out this blog below.

    http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11/20-points-of-forgery-reporting.html

    • NAHALKIDES

      Clunk – nobody cares about Obama’s birth certificate any more. Maybe he was hiding something – probably his Muslim faith – and maybe he wasn’t, but it really doesn’t matter because the public doesn’t care, it’s too late to un-elect him, and we need to focus now on discrediting both Obama and Leftism for other reasons. Forget about birth certificates, Social Security numbers, etc. – there’s nothing of value (I don’t say nothing of interest) to be mined there.

      • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

        NAHALKIDES, it absolutely matters if these Bill Ayers types continue to get away with fraud and crimes. It doesn’t matter what people think or care about when it comes to the birth certificate, the fraudulent registration with the Selective Service and the fraudulent SS#. If you or I or any Republican had these crimes hanging over our heads we would be facing prison time. Obama is borderline treason with these acts. No one on earth should be able to get away with FRAUD, especially someone who sits next to the Nuclear Football for crying out loud. I am not into a conspiracy thing, I just don’t think anyone should get away with any damn crimes.

        • bshade

          Equal justice under the law! Never give up! Every lie and deception matters! Continue the fight! We are with you! Could we, the American people, ever, ever– get away with
          “no documents?”, fraudulent ssn#, fake birth certificates? NO voter ID?
          I mean really, can we all just get real here? Could we, normal taxpaying honest citizens ever— get away with lies and deceptions to the gov’t authorities, as these govt authorities, aka, the arrogant, narcissistic, ruling class so glibly and arrogantly lie to us? OBAMACARE, making 60 year olds pay for maternity??? Men pay for maternity???Taxing us, but it’s not a tax, you can keep your plan, your doctor, and save 2500 a year? Lies, lies, lies. Why are we accepting these lies from Obama, Pelosi, reid, Eric HOLDER, Debbie liar mouth. They think we are STUPID!! HOW DARE THEY??? When do we, the American people DEMAND TRUTH! Thank you
          sendtheclunkerbacktochicago. Send the fraud back to hell– the son of the father of lies –expose every lie, every deception, of every democrat, republican, every SINGLE LIAR HAS TO GO–NOW!! If we do not stand for TRUTH, WHO WILL??? Are there enough of us in REAL WORLD TAX PAYING AMERICA to DEMAND TRUTH,, FILE THE LAWSUITS!!! ONLY TRUTH CAN SAVE US!!!

  • laser1

    Complacency is our biggest enemy, like falling asleep at the
    wheel. It very seldom turns out well. Obama is using schemes to subvert our
    liberties and to deceive us. Also there
    is more than one player in this game of cards. And there is always bluffing
    when they don’t want you to see the hand they have and whatever they are going
    to do next. So we, just like the mighty
    men that surrounded King David “in Old Testament” in his time of trouble we to must take courage
    for we are free men and will stay free men. May the Lord be blessed for our freedom that
    we have.

  • Eileen Hill

    Monty Morton – you are brilliant! Love the analogy – “it’s one big Vegematic commercial. The difference is the Vegematic works. Obamacare doesn’t “So true!

  • joshuasweet

    Peace in our time after the destruction of Israel with Obamas assistance.

    • defcon 4

      What a depressing and cynical thought. Although it might get more than a few allah snackbars in just about any islam0fascist state.

      • joshuasweet

        with the evidence at hand under Obama’s regime what else is left to think about the situation?

  • Metatrona

    Kerry & Obama are worthless. Certainly, they don’t merit our respect.

    • defcon 4

      They’re only worthless depending on by what standards you’re judging them by. I imagine the islamic world might think them useless because they haven’t done enough to facilitate the spread of islam0fascism.

  • Walter Sieruk

    The mullahs in Iran believe in the Quran.An important question: is the Quran the Word of God or is it a fabrication of a Man. Thus, is the Quran the truth or a fiction and a hoax? The jihadists use many verses from the Quran as the Main source of justification for their violence, mayhem and murders. There, the question is clearly given on pages 145 through 157 in THE ISLAMIC INVASION by Robert Morey in which he wrote a section on the Quran with its self-contradictions. Just two of the many he cited are the following “The Quran differs on whether a day is a thousand years or fifty thousand years in God’s sight’ and “Who was first to believe? Abraham or Moses [Sura 6:14 versus 7:143]? The above is inconsistent and illogical. Further, Morey wrote about “The fact that Judaism and Christianity broke up into different sects was used in the Quran to prove that they are not of God [Suras 30:20-32. 42:13, 14]. Yet Islam has broken up into many warring sects and therefore cannot be true if the Quran is right.” Moreover, Morey in his book shows many more contradictions and absurdities in the Quran, there are and how Muhammad incorporated extra Biblical and Jewish folklore along with pre-Islamic Arabian myth and parts of Zoroastrian and Hindu stories into the Quran. Furthermore, the Muslims claim that “the Quran is the direct, literal word of God unmodified in any way by the Prophet who uttered them at the bidding of God.” Nevertheless, in the book UNVEILING ISLAM by Ergun Mehmet and Eethi Caner has shown that the Quran was modified in the following account on pages 45. “Muhammad felt the need to improve on the words of Allah, since he changed Allah’s wisdom for his own on several occasions. A hadith tells of the nonchalant emendations of Muhammad:’ On a number of occasions he [a scribe] had, with the Prophet’s consent changed the closing words of verses. For example, when the prophet had said ‘God is mighty and wise ‘ Adbollah b. Abi Sarh suggested writing down ‘Knowing and wise’ and the Prophet answered that there was no objection. Having observed a succession of changes of this type, Adbollah renounced Islam on the grounds that revelations, if from God could not be changed at the prompting of a scribe such as himself. After his apostasy he went to Mecca and joined the Qorayshites.’ Other writers reveal that later Muhammad and his people did go war with the Qorayshites and he personally killed Abdollah. Obviously Abdollah knew too much and Muhammad wanted Abdollah’s knowledge to die with him.” In conclusion, the Quran is not only a fiction, it’s also a hoax.

    • defcon 4

      Excellent critique of the holey quran. Of course, your critique is a felonious act in any islamic state!

  • popseal

    If the naiveté, on a treasonous level, of fools like Kerry weren’t so dangerous, they’d be sadly funny.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    I am also wondering why The Glazov Gang doesn’t run to Lt. Mike Zullo and Doug Vogt and Paul Irey and Reed Hayes for interviews so that they can explain to America why Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Hussein Obama) is a complete and utter fraud. They would finally have a platform from which they can explain to all the idiots in the Conservative media who refuse to discuss the fraud and lies committed by this Communist thug in the White House. You could go forth and explain to America how Conservatives allowed this man to commit the biggest fraud ever committed against this country on their watch by slandering those who have uncovered the details of that fraud. Shame on you for ignoring this scandal.

  • georgejochnowitz

    What’s a BFF? A Big Fat Fool?

  • Space Cowboy

    A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job. A recovery is when Barack Obama loses his job.

  • Space Cowboy

    A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job. A recovery is when Barack Obama loses his job.

  • johnlittle

    My friends, you have given Obama a pass on lying by not asking him to respond to the most important question of our time: Who engineered “Arab Spring?” Once this is asked, the answers to Benghazi will begin to fall in place.

    Cordially, John Little, Sr.

  • smrstrauss
  • johnlittle

    My friends, you have given Obama a pass on lying by not asking him to respond to the most important question of our time: Who engineered “Arab Spring?” Once this is asked, the answers to Benghazi will begin to fall in place.

    Cordially, John Little, Sr.

  • smrstrauss

    Oh, and here is the opinion of the National Review about Sheriff Joe:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

  • geneww1938

    Their worst crime / lie is what they and the investigators[?] do not say and report about assassins … and unexplained deaths of key wittiness. Forget the crime of controlling the world drug markets and destroying our country so it can be placed under the One World leadership who own the World Bank and IMF.

    Don’t say we miss Bush, his grandfather Preston Bush worked way way way across the isle to strengthen the future One World dominance. This evil One World system can exist with Satanic Islam but clashes with Biblical tenets and believers. Hence the separation of Biblical tenets [church] from society [state].

    Blame me…I always pull the republican lever because they are still the lesser evil of the slime on ballots. There are exceptions like Bachmann …

  • geneww1938

    Their worst crime / lie is what they and the investigators[?] do not say and report about assassins … and unexplained deaths of key wittiness. Forget the crime of controlling the world drug markets and destroying our country so it can be placed under the One World leadership who own the World Bank and IMF.

    Don’t say we miss Bush, his grandfather Preston Bush worked way way way across the isle to strengthen the future One World dominance. This evil One World system can exist with Satanic Islam but clashes with Biblical tenets and believers. Hence the separation of Biblical tenets [church] from society [state].

    Blame me…I always pull the republican lever because they are still the lesser evil of the slime on ballots. There are exceptions like Bachmann …

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Doug Vogt, Paul Irey, Mara Zebestand Reed Hayes (all experts in any software you can think of) have all filed affidavits with the FBI and the Alabama Supreme Court putting their reputations on the line and setting themselves up for sedition for attempting to unseat the POTUS with falsified evidence. I am willing to bet that the person who produced this worthless information would NEVER file an affidavit to refute the affidavits by Vogt, Irey, Zebest and Hayes for fear of being prosecuted for lying and misleading. None of them have walked into Congressional offices to present crap and worthless evidence like this presented in the above comment. Perkins and Coie will not be using this guy to defend this Fraud in Chief. Any bets?

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Much has happened since National Review Online weighed in on the fraud issues. At that time the criminal investigation being carried out by Lt. Mike Zullo had just begun. Zullo and his amazing investigators were able to get Reed Hayes, an expert in document fraud used by the law firm Obama has given 2 million bucks to in order to protect him from the fraud charges, has provided an affidavit proving the April 27th, 2011 computer generated birth document is indeed a forgery. When the time comes it will be nearly impossible for Perkins/Coie to refute a man they have used as an expert witness before.

    Shame on the National Review Online for writing the above article without investigating. They never corresponded with Sheriff Joe Arpaio nor any of the many document and software experts nor the lead investigator Lt. Mike Zullo. It will be a pleasure watching the editors at National Review Online attempting to explain themselves as they wipe the cakes of mud off their pathetic faces as the Fraud in Chief is brought to justice.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Amen to what? Amen to the crappers who think it is okay for this Fraud in Chief to get away with these crimes. Shame on you. We now have folks willing to call the POTUS a LIAR for crying out loud, you don’t think he was capable of committing the biggest fraud ever committed against this nation. He did exactly that and he will not survive this second term, remember “clunker” told you so.

  • smrstrauss

    All of those are birther “experts.” With the exception of Reed Hayes (whose complete 40-page has never been published. I wonder why not), not one of them has proven to a court that he or she is an expert. Reed Hayes has proven it, but he is an expert in physical document signatures, NOT in digital document analysis.

    Re Your bet. Dream on. What gave you that nutty idea. (Oh, and birthers will LOSE the case in Alabama, which isn’t even about the birth certificate. It is about whether the Alabama secretary of state has to check the eligibility of presidential candidates)

    Only birther “experts” have called Obama’s birth certificate forged, and they have not shown that they are even experts, much less fair and impartial. Those are two reasons why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review (or by Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or Gingrich or Santorum or Huckabee).

    One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.

    Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.

    And birther sites have not shown you these real experts.

    Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

    Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

    John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

    Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

    Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

    Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.

    And it is irrational (to say the least) to think that Obama’s relatives had enough money (Obama’s grandfather was just a furniture salesman and his grandmother a low-level employee in a bank at the time; and his father came to Hawaii on a free flight) or crazy enough to spend LOTS of money on a long and expensive and risky (incidents of stillbirths were high at the time) overseas trip for their pregnant daughter—–when there were perfectly good hospitals in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    Also, the government of Kenya has said that it investigated the “born in Kenya” claim, and that it did not happen.

  • smrstrauss

    Don’t like the National Revew? Too bad. Its opinion about birthers in general are shared by Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck—both of whom have called birthers “crazy.” And John McCain and Mitt Romney all think that the notion that Obama was born in a foreign country crazy.

    Re the two million bucks claim. That was for the total expense of legal services for the entire presidential campaign. Law firms do have to do such things as check on the contracts for the rental of stores for local campaign headquarters, you know (or you should know).

    Reed Hayes is, btw, an expert in physical document signatures, not an expert on digitial documents, and his complete 40-page report has never been published (I wonder why not?????)

    The Xerox WorkCenter research is still conclusive, and birthers have not even attempted to refute it:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

  • smrstrauss

    “clunker” is not exactly fair and impartial.

    The Xerox WorkCentre research is still conclusive:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Thank God Reed Hayes did not publish the affidavit proving the computer generated birth certificate to be a forgery. When the time comes the affidavit will be made known. When you speak of court cases there has not been one example where the evidence proving the computer generated birth certificate is a forgery never reached the point where the evidence was given a chance to be presented. The corrupt judges always used “lack of standing” as their fall back for not allowing the evidence to be shown.

    There is more evidence available to suggest that Obama was born in Kenya than there is for him being born in Hawaii. I personally don’t care where he was born, I just want him to answer for the fraudulent crimes. Fraud is a crime and even the POTUS should be held accountable for the crimes.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    If Eric Holder could prove that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his lead investigator were using fraudulent documents in their attempt to unseat this Fraud in Chief he would be all over it like flies on schit and most Americans would agree with me on this one. He doesn’t dare bring any case against these men knowing full well that it would mean the end of his boss and many in the radical progressive thugs from Chicago. Hold onto your panties, the Fraud in Chief is going down and the fall will be horrendous.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Doug Vogt (40 years of experience in the field), Paul Irey (50 years experience), Mara Zebest (over a hundred manuals and books on Adobe), Reed Hayes (used by the same law firm employed by Obama as an expert).

    The 2 MILLION was used to protect the Fraud in Chief (now known as the Liar in Chief) from being exposed for who he is, a fraud.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Are you kidding me, “fair” and “impartial”. LMAO!! How about judges using the lame excuse of “lack of standing” to the very people who pay this Fraud in Chief’s salary. What a joke. How about the media not giving Arpaio via Lt. Mike Zullo an opportunity to show the criminal evidence they have collected in their two year investigation of Obama? With one stroke of a brush (one 30 to 40 minute presentation) and the American people would have an opportunity to decide if the document is a forgery or not. It would be a total and wholesale crush for all “birthers” if the media could prove the evidence to be fictional. Not only that, there would be a great case for prosecuting these so-called “birther idiots.” The Arpaio/Zullo team is more than willing to take that chance, so all this ranting by “smrstrauss” is meaningless until those great patriots have their day. Who is afraid of “the big bad wolf” pal?

  • smrstrauss

    When about 200 different judges have ALL rule that the birther side does not have standing, it is time to read the precedents on standing and to learn that the judges are right and you are wrong. Your side really does NOT have standing.

    Re Sheriff Joe, Zullio and the Cold Case Posse:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

    And:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indicting-the-sheriff-joe-and-the-cold-case-posse/

    And:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/?s=xerox&submit=

    (And Sheriff Joe has not even attempted to refute the Xerox WorkCentre research shown in the link above.

    And not only does the National Review not believe the “the birth certificate was forged” mythology, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan don’t either, and neither does a single member of the 535 members of Congress, all of whom (INCLUDING Rand Paul and Michelle Bachmann) voted to confirm Obama’s election twice.

    Sheriff Joe and you and a few birther sites can keep on spouting the “it was forged, it must have been forged” LIES all that you want, but sensible people will not believe that baloney.

    And, BTW, Obama was born IN HAWAII, and it is nutty to think that he was born anywhere else.

    The officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly stated in writing and in court papers that the FACTS on Obama’s birth certificate are identical to those on the short form and long form BCs that they sent to him. And they both say that Obama was born in HAWAII.

    THAT is in addition to the Index Data file that shows that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate issued in 1961 and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers that were from the Department of Health of Hawaii back in 1961 (and only the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the paper, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.) And that is in addition to the Hawaii teacher whose father’s name was Stanley (it really was, I’ve checked) and who said that she was told of the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley and that she wrote up that little tidbit and sent the letter to her father. (Are you claiming that Obama was able to find a teacher in Hawaii who had a father named Stanley and got her to lie about hearing about the birth of a child to a woman named Stanley?)

    And, guess what, we do not even know that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very few 18-year-olds did. And even fewer women traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the high risk of stillbirths. Yet birther sites hope that GULLIBLE people will assume that Obama’s mother was one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and also one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy—and that the birth certificate is forged and the officials of BOTH parties lying about it (and the Index Data and the birth notices and the teacher who wrote home).

    Here, by the way, are links to some (by no means all) of the confirmation documents from the officials in Hawaii. Notice that several of them say that the facts “MATCH.”

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/01/heres-the-birth-certificate/

  • smrstrauss

    There is NO evidence that Obama was born in Kenya. Birther sites made up the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya. The transcript of the long-distance telephone call shows that the grandmother said repeatedly that Obama was born IN HAWAII “where his father was studying at the time.” Birther sites simply did not quote her and cut off the telephone call just BEFORE she was asked: “Where was he born?” (I wonder why they did that?)

    And guess what, the government of Kenya said that it had investigated, and that OBAMA WAS NOT BORN IN KENYA. And, guess what, the US INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) report for 1961 shows that a grand total of 63 people went from the USA to Kenya in 1961 and by far most of them went by sea, and a grand total of 21 people came from Kenya to the USA in 1961, and all but one of them came by sea—and there were no regularly scheduled ships from Hawaii to Kenya or vice versa.

    The “born in Kenya” story is the height of the loony side of the birther movement. It is based on forgeries like that of Lucas D. Smith, and falsifications–such as the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when she actually said right on the same tape that he was born IN HAWAII, and she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.

    Lucas D. Smith, a convicted felon, claimed that he went to Kenya and got Obama’s birth certificate at a hospital in Mombasa. But Lucas D. Smith has constantly refused to show proof that he, Smith, had ever gone to Kenya. All that he would have to do would be to show a Kenya stamp on a page of a passport, but Lucas D. Smith has refused to do that, constantly, and he has also constantly refused to say why he will not show that proof. (Moreover, his alleged “birth certificate” uses US date formats [month/day/year] and not the day/month/year format used in Kenya.)

    Laying aside for a moment the overwhelming proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, the evidence that Obama was NOT born in Kenya is also very strong. There
    were a grand total of 21 people who came to the USA from Kenya in 1961. Of these only seven were US citizens. And the birther myth has always been that Obama’s parents went there and returned by plane, but only one person came to the USA from Kenya in 1961 by plane and that person was, wait for it, NOT a US citizen.

    And Obama’s father did not go to Kenya in 1961 either (making it unlikely that his mother did, since travel late in pregnancy was rare, and even more rare without the husband going along). WND has proved with a FOI Act request that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961.

    And the Kenyan government investigated the “born in Kenya” story, and found that it was not true.

    “Jon Chessoni, a first secretary at the Kenyan Embassy in Washington, can’t understand why his office gets so many baseless questions about whether Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

    “It’s madness,” said Chessoni on Monday.“His father, in 1961, would not even have been in Kenya. When this matter first came up, the Kenyan government
    did its research and confirmed that these are all baseless claims.””

    http://washingtonindependent.com/53654/forged

    Obama has a Hawaii birth certificate that says that he was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, and the officials of both parties in Hawaii have confirmed that fact. It is also confirmed by the birth announcement in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961, which were sent to the papers only by the DOH of Hawaii.

    Obama’s birth announcement appeared in a section of the newspapers called Health Bureau Statistics. As the name indicates, and as the papers and the DOH
    also say, ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to the Health Bureau Statistics section of the paper. And the DOH only sent out those notices for
    children that it had issued birth certificates for, and in 1961 the DOH was not allowed to register the births of children who were not born in Hawaii.

    Oh, and there is this:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiol

    (Which birther sites have not shown you—I wonder why not?)

    Oh, and there isn’t even any evidence that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very very few 18-year-olds did in those days. So birther sites hope that they can convince gullible people to ASSUME that Obama’s mother was one of the very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and one of the extremely few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy because of the risk of stillbirths (which was relatively high in 1961)—-and that she traveled alone to Kenya, and that she did so by ship, and that the officials of Kenya are lying and the officials of Hawaii are lying, and the Index Data and the DOH birth notices sent in 1961 are forged.

    How gullible. Want to buy a bridge?

  • smrstrauss

    Re: “If Eric Holder could prove that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his lead investigator were using fraudulent documents…”

    Answer: Sure he would. First, what makes you think that LYING about documents is a federal crime? Second, Holder has bigger fish to fry—such as J.P. Morgan.

  • smrstrauss

    Here is Doug Vogt’s Web site. Notice that he claims to have found the original Altar of Abraham?

    http://www.vectorpub.com/Reality_Revealed.html

    (In other words, he is a nut.)

    And Paul Irey continued to claim that Obama did not attend Columbia College even after Columbia University said twice that Obama did indeed attend Columbia College and did indeed graduate. (In other words, Irey is not exactly an impartial person.)

    Reed Hayes is a specialist in HANDWRITING analysis, not digital documents—-and his complete report has never been shown by the Cold Case Posse (I wonder why not? Answer: Probably because he admits that he his not an expert in determining whether digital documents are forged or not.)

    And birther sites did not show their readers all of these experts:

    Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

    Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

    John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

    Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

    Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

    Nor have birther sites even discussed the Xerox WorkCentre research:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/11/blogger-shows-obama-birth-certificate-artifacts-caused-by-xerox-machine-no-joy-in-birtherville/

    Regarding the $2 million claim. That also was made up by birther sites. Obama showed his birth certificate twice, and there were no lawsuits against him, repeat, NO lawsuits against him for any information at all. There were only lawsuits against Obama to have him thrown off of ballots—-all of which cases Obama won. Since there was no lawsuit for information, duh, Obama did not spend a cent defending such a lawsuit (And the $2 million figure was the total cost of legal fees for the entire presidential campaign—and lawyers do a lot of things, like checking the contracts on rental space for local election offices.)

    It is nuts like you that give the conservative movement a bad name.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    As I said I don’t care where he was born. I know that he has no legitimate American birth certificate thus the computer generated document he presented on April 27th, 2011. That one is a forgery. We will just have to sit back and let it all unfold. There will eventually be an investigation. Where Obama was born isn’t a factor in this particular “natural born Citizen” debate, the important factor is who his Daddy was. An even bigger problem for this mutt is that he may have failed to renounce his Indonesian citizenship back in 1980 when he more than likely refused to register with the Selective Service using his Indonesian citizenship as an excuse not to sign up. Yes, this is conjecture since the mutt had Perkins/Coie seal his documents. The fraudulent Selective Service registration in 2008 will be easier to prove once the Selective Service is told to cooperate. This could end up being a back breaker for the mutt in that dual citizens are not eligible to be POTUS.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Fraudulent use of documents is a Federal crime if they are being used to obtain a political office. Yea, Holder has “bigger fish to fry” do you mean like the militant Black Panthers or lying about Fast and Furious or lying about the spying on news reporters or going after a meaningless punk like George Zimmerman, REALLY!!

  • smrstrauss

    Responding to: “I know that he has no legitimate American birth certificate…”

    Answer: What you think that you “know” is filtered through your loony mind and your hatred. Rational people prefer to look at the FACTS. Obama has shown both his short form and long form birth certificates from Hawaii, and the officials in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that they sent them to him and that all the facts on the copy that the White House put online are exactly the same as on what they sent to him.

    The officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly stated in writing and in court papers that the FACTS on Obama’s birth certificate are identical to those on the short form and long form BCs that they sent to him. And they both say that Obama was born in HAWAII.

    THAT is in addition to the Index Data file that shows that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate issued in 1961 and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers that were from the Department of Health of Hawaii back in 1961 (and only the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the paper, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.) And that is in addition to the Hawaii teacher whose father’s name was Stanley (it really was, I’ve checked) and who said that she was told of the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley and that she wrote up that little tidbit and sent the letter to her father. (Are you claiming that Obama was able to find a teacher in Hawaii who had a father named Stanley and got her to lie about hearing about the birth of a child to a woman named Stanley?)

    And, guess what, we do not even know that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very few 18-year-olds did. And even fewer women traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the high risk of stillbirths. Yet birther sites hope that GULLIBLE people will assume that Obama’s mother was one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and also one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy—and that the birth certificate is forged and the officials of BOTH parties lying about it (and the Index Data and the birth notices and the teacher who wrote home).

    Here, by the way, are links to some (by no means all) of the confirmation documents from the officials in Hawaii. Notice that several of them say that the facts “MATCH.”

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/01/heres-the-birth-certificate/

    BTW, Obama never had Indonesian Citizenship, as a telephone call to the Indonesian Embassy in Washington will confirm. Obama’s documents are not “sealed.” They are covered under the normal privacy laws—the same laws that have kept Mitt Romney’s grades and Paul Ryan’s grades and John McCain’s grades from being revealed.

    The fraudulent Selective Service registration was INDEED FORGED. Yes indeed, you got one fact right. One small factor, however. Wait for it. Wait some more. The small factor is that Obama did not publish his Selective Service registration, nor did any member of his team. The guy who published the alleged Selective Service Registration was a birther, and he is the only one who had the opportunity to forge it. (The guy did not even claim that he got it from Obama or a representative of Obama.)

    GULLIBLE. You are truly gullible. You are giving the conservative movement a bad name.

  • smrstrauss

    First, they would have to be federal documents. Second, only a federal office (Sheriff Joe is a local elected official). Third, to lie about a document is not a crime unless you can prove that it was done to make money, which would be fraud (and that would be a state crime).

    What about the Black Panthers? Are you referring to the case where a few alleged Black Panthers stood in front of a polling station in a mainly BLACK neighborhood in the 2008 election. What were they alleged to have done, stopped black people from voting? (There are, btw, more than 100,000 different polling places in a presidential election.)

    I notice you do not mention J. P. Morgan.

  • smrstrauss

    Re: “the important factor is who his Daddy was.”

    The citizenship of Obama’s father does not matter in the slightest. EVERY child born on US soil is a Natural Born US Citizen except for the children of foreign diplomats and enemy invaders.

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within
    the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.”
    (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin
    G. Hatch (R-UT).

    “Under the longstanding English common-law
    principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the
    sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are
    citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States
    are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less
    certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States
    citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President
    …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION
    (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the
    Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    “Some
    birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by
    birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born”
    citizen on the other.

  • smrstrauss

    Re: “The important factor is who his daddy was.”

    Answer: No that does not matter in the slightest. EVERY child born on US soil is a Natural Born US Citizen except for the children of foreign diplomats and enemy invaders:

    “Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning.”—The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)

    “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham
    (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    I don’t hate the Mutt in Chief, the Liar in Chief, the Fraud in Chief. He is an elite con artist, nothing more nothing less. Take this an put it in your pipe and smoke it, a 3 minute Youtube that folks can judge for themselves, simply done and probably the fraud that will take this man and his enablers to prison.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkPh6NXZ7A

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    Check out Senate Resolution 511, you know the piece of crap the Democrats came up with when the left wing nut job original birthers attempted to prove McCain was not a “natural born Citizen.” The idiots (they got it right) even understood that both PARENTS (notice the “S”) had to be citizens (again notice the “S”) at the time of the child’s birth. Obama, Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal had parents who were NOT citizens at the time of their birth. Doesn’t get any better than that. Allow those following the comments decide by applying some simple logic.

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/11/logic-and-defining-natural-born-citizen.html

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    So why were there some 8 attempts to change the “natural born Citizen” clause by Congress since 2003 if they didn’t see it as a threat for their agenda (nothing to do with Obama, just wanted it changed)? All 8 attempts failed, thank God. Not all of those involved the movie star governor either.

  • smrstrauss

    You CLAIM that you do not hate Obama, but you call him names. You CLAIM not to hate Obama but you post an allegation that he had his Selective Service documents forged. (They are forged, but since Obama never published him the ones that were published were, duh, forged by the guy who published them.)

    Obama did not publish his Selective Service registration. It IS forged, but Obama did not and could not have done it (The guy who put it online did not even claim to have gotten it from Obama).

  • smrstrauss

    Because some Republican members of Congress wanted to make former California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger, a naturalized US citizen, eligible to be president. The attempts were NOT to make Obama eligible because, duh, Obama IS ELIGIBLE.

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those
    persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    “Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen”
    on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning.”—The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)

    “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)

  • smrstrauss
  • smrstrauss

    Senate Resolution 511 was an attempt to prove that McCain WAS eligible. And it did so by pointing out that he had two citizen parents and he was born on a US Naval base.

    That, duh, does not mean that everybody has to be born on a US Naval base to be eligible, and it does not mean that everybody needs two citizen parents in order to be eligible. McCain had two citizen parents, but the resolution does not say that others had to have two in order to be eligible. It did not even say that people have to have ONE citizen parent in order to be eligible. It just said that the US Senate believed that because McCain had two citizen parents and was born on a Naval base he was eligible.

    There was no similar resolution for Obama because, duh, EVERYBODY KNEW THAT HE WAS ELIGIBLE.

    Re the Puzo link.

    Mario Apuzzo, a birther lawyer, is wrong. The Heritage Foundation book is right:

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    Mario Apuzzo, a birther lawyer, is wrong, and these appeals court rulings are right:

    Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling: “Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency…”

    Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

    Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”

    Purpura v. Obama (New Jersey 2012) ruling: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”

    Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”

    Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”

    Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”

    On October 1 of 2013, the US Supreme Court turned down an appeal of the last of the rulings shown above, the Farrar case, which had ruled that “children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” By rejecting the appeal, the US Supreme Court allowed the ruling of the lower court to STAND.

    In addition to those rulings specifically on presidential eligibility, there are these:

    Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

    “Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

    Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

    “Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

    Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

    “The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”
    That makes about 13 courts that I can cite easily that have ruled that the US born children of foreigners are Natural Born Citizens.

    In addition, there are articles like these:

    http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is-rubio-eligible/

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/birtherism-2012

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett

    http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/04/vattel-and-natural-born-citizen/

  • NJK

    I hate him. And also, he said himself he was born in Kenya. That was before he said Hawaii. Which is it?

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii

    You say there’s no proof he was born in Kenya. There’s no proof he was born in Hawaii. In 1961 it was taboo to have a baby out of wedlock. Then you add the fact that the baby is biracial, and this is probably why his mother went to Kenya and was given Obama Sr.’s name. His real father is Frank Marshall Davis, and he’s looking more and more like him everyday.

    http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=obama+and+frank+marshall+davis&qpvt=obama+and+frank+marshall+davis&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=E5C6BE04D2B2C467D0B3576EC1294C58467BADA7&selectedIndex=33

    • smrstrauss

      Obama NEVER said that he was born in Kenya. However, there is a FORGED video in which birthers claim that he said that he was born in Kenya. (I wonder why birthers would FORGE a video in which they claim that he said that he was born in Kenya? [It is easy to see that the video is forged because you cannot see his mouth move and there is no reaction from the audience].) Birthers have also forged a several “Kenyan birth certificates”—I wonder why they would do that? And birther sites LIED when they said that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya. The tape recording shows that she said repeatedly that he was BORN IN HAWAII, “where his father was studying at the time.” Birther sites simply did not quote that and cut off the tape recording just before she was asked “where was he born?” (I wonder why they would do that?????)

      The evidence of Obama being born in Hawaii is overwhelming:

      The officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly stated in writing and in court papers that the FACTS on Obama’s birth certificate are identical to those on the short form and long form BCs that they sent to him. And they both say that Obama was born in HAWAII.

      THAT is in addition to the Index Data file that shows that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate issued in 1961 and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers that were from the Department of Health of Hawaii back in 1961 (and only the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to the “Health Bureau Statistics” section of the paper, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.) And that is in addition to the Hawaii teacher whose father’s name was Stanley (it really was, I’ve checked) and who said that she was told of the birth in Hawaii of a child to a woman named Stanley and that she wrote up that little tidbit and sent the letter to her father. (Are you claiming that Obama was able to find a teacher in Hawaii who had a father named Stanley and got her to lie about hearing about the birth of a child to a woman named Stanley?)

      And, guess what, we do not even know that Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—–and very very few 18-year-olds did. And even fewer women traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the high risk of stillbirths. Yet birther sites hope that GULLIBLE people will assume that Obama’s mother was one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and also one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy—and that the birth certificate is forged and the officials of BOTH parties lying about it (and the Index Data and the birth notices and the teacher who wrote home).

      Here, by the way, are links to some (by no means all) of the confirmation documents from the officials in Hawaii. Notice that several of them say that the facts “MATCH.”

      http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/01/heres-the-birth-certificate/

      • smrstrauss

        Turning now to the “born in Kenya” story: It is as nutty as nutty can be.

        The “born in Kenya” story is the height of the loony side of the birther movement. It is based on forgeries like that of Lucas D. Smith, and falsifications–such as the claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when she actually said right on the same tape that he was born IN HAWAII, and she said in another interview that the first that her family in Kenya had heard of Obama’s birth was in a letter FROM HAWAII.

        Lucas D. Smith, a convicted felon, claimed that he went to Kenya and got Obama’s birth certificate at a hospital in Mombasa. But Lucas D. Smith has constantly refused to show proof that he, Smith, had ever gone to Kenya. All that he would have to do would be to show a Kenya stamp on a page of a passport, but Lucas D. Smith has refused to do that, constantly, and he has also constantly refused to say why he will not show that proof. (Moreover, his “birth certificate” uses US date formats [month/day/year] and not the day/month/year
        format used in Kenya.)

        Laying aside for a moment the overwhelming proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, the evidence that Obama was NOT born in Kenya is also very strong. There
        were a grand total of 21 people who came to the USA from Kenya in 1961. Of these only seven were US citizens. And the birther myth has always been that Obama’s parents went there and returned by plane, but only one person came to the USA from Kenya in 1961 by plane and that person was, wait for it, NOT a US citizen. And Obama’s father did not go to Kenya in 1961 either (making it unlikely that his mother did, since travel late in pregnancy was rare, and even more rare
        without the husband going along). WND has proved with a FOI Act request that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961.

        And the Kenyan government investigated the “born in Kenya” story, and found that it was not true.

        “Jon Chessoni, a first secretary at the Kenyan Embassy in Washington, can’t understand why his office gets so many baseless questions about whether Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

        “It’s madness,” said Chessoni on Monday.“His father, in 1961, would not even have been in Kenya. When this matter first came up, the Kenyan government
        did its research and confirmed that these are all baseless claims.””

        http://washingtonindependent.com/53654/forged

        Obama has a Hawaii birth certificate that says that he was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, and the officials of both parties in Hawaii have
        confirmed that fact. It is also confirmed by the birth announcement in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961, which were sent to the papers only by the DOH of
        Hawaii.

        Obama’s birth announcement appeared in a section of the newspapers called Health Bureau Statistics. As the name indicates, and as the papers and the DOH
        also say, ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to the Health Bureau Statistics section of the paper. And the DOH only sent out those notices for
        children that it had issued birth certificates for, and in 1961 the DOH was not allowed to register the births of children who were not born in Hawaii.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    So you and your other evil friends won’t be completely shocked when the roof comes crashing in on this Fraud in Chief’s head go to bed listening to this most recent update by Lt. Mike Zullo.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGxw7RS-DZM#t=522