• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

What I like about the Obama Administration

Steve

Well-known member
Our systems of checks and balances has been restored and I do not have to be afraid that the executive branch is becoming a dictatorship, led by a paranoid delusional secretive authoritarian.

maybe you can explain this?

what check and balance?

currently.. Democrats control the House. Senate, Executive, and the courts lean left... so who is checking who... ???

we had a botched overstuffed stimulus bill that no one read... a budget bloated with earmarks and pork...

might want to take the blinders off....
 

Steve

Well-known member
I have the reassurance that our nation's scientific research organizations and regulatory agencies will respect science and not be bought and sold, based on ideology or big business.

Global warming is slowly getting disproved by facts,.. yet they don't listen... instead wanting to force though an agenda based on their global warming ideology....

it is just as bad as forcing MTBE to be added to fuel to clean the air, only to pollute 70% of the ground water with it.... stupid policy based on flawed science.. causes more problems then it solves...
 

fff

Well-known member
What I like most about the new Administration:

It's ok to be smart again. (The Obama's first date was to museum? That's so cool! :D )
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
reader (the Second) said:
hypo challenged me and here's my response as to my views on the administration so far. I challenge you to actually learn about the administration for yourself, think for yourself and to debate the pros and cons instead of being lemmings and repeating "the sky is falling". From the beginning the liberals have said that time will tell.

reader (the Second) said:
hypocritexposer said:
So, why not let us know your opinion of Obama, 5 months in.

Has been too naive about certain things. Transparency, the naive stance on those who have been "lobbyists" the Middle East, bipartisanship.

That being said, I think transparency is brilliant and genuine and I'll be interested in seeing where it goes and how it is received.

I don't agree with his stance on energy, nor with his appointments.

I like his stance on healthcare and food safety and his appointments at the FDA.

I am concerned about Treasury. Geithner is working hard and doing the right things but I doubt that he's staffed up.

Haven't come to conclusions about the Homeland Security and CIA appointments or policies yet.

Like Gates. Like Obama keeping Gates on. Like him listening to his experienced generals on the ground.

Like that he cares about education. Wish there wasn't an economic crisis and two wars.

Love that he appoints scientists and is not afraid of technology and science like Bush.

Think State could be a real success but haven't seen proof of this yet. Hillary put some good and experienced senior managers in practically on Day One.

USDA I don't know. Probably depends upon the appointees below Vilsack. To me he's a cypher.

Middle East - naive but brilliant. I'm cautiously optimistic but concede it could all blow up like it did with the past presidents.

Stimulus - time will tell whether it stimulates or not.

I pretty much agree with you- especially on the energy (can't stand Waxman or Markey and they've kind of been running that ship), the bringing back of science and technology, and on the State Dept...

I questioned Hillary's appointment-- but from I've read she's really got the backing of the Dept... Under Bush the State Dept. took a backseat-to all the Hawks and Warmongers, with Rummy even trying to fill their ranks with CIA/NSA/Military Intelligence folks--one of the things that ran off Powell-- but now they are again playing a primary roll in the world...

Like you my decision on Vilsack is still out--but I get the feeling it is going to be much more producer oriented- depending on how well his underboss's can break up the corporate bureaucracy that is so deeply entrenched....
 

Steve

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
We don't have a cabal of an authoritarian Vice President and 5 podunk lawyers sworn to secrecy making policy that our judiciary and legislative branches are not privy to.

no we have an idiot vice president who is letting our secrets...
 

fff

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
We don't have a cabal of an authoritarian Vice President and 5 podunk lawyers sworn to secrecy making policy that our judiciary and legislative branches are not privy to.

Our Justice Department will again be working for all Americans, not just to get Republicans re-elected.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Your courts are using hearsay and blogs as evidence to dismiss cases under/against Obama.

How is that a credible justice system, that is working for all Americans?

"The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court," Robertson wrote.
 

fff

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Your courts are using hearsay and blogs as evidence to dismiss cases under/against Obama.

How is that a credible justice system, that is working for all Americans?

"The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court," Robertson wrote.

I don't have a clue who "Robertson" is, but there have been several cases claiming Obama wasn't eligible to be president thrown out of court and none of them that I saw referred to tweets or blogs. They referred to dull legal terms like "no standing to file." So apparently not a single piece of evidence was submitted showing President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born somewhere other than Hawaii. It's the plaintiff's responsibility to prove he WASN'T born in the US. They haven't done that yet.

But continue to spend your time worrying that scab while Obama continues to enjoy all the perks of being President. :lol:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Robertson is a Federal court Judge, who obviously believes in the internet to provide evidence for his court decisions.

But continue to spend your time worrying that scab while Obama continues to enjoy all the perks of being President.

It is your money paying for those perks.

It is all American citizens that will have to live with the consequences of your disregard and lack of respect for the Constitution. You fought for your constitutional rights while Bush Jr. was President, why are you ignoring a total disregard for it now?

And men and women in uniform fought for right to continue to have a constitution. At least show them some respect.

If you think you are just going to turn around one day, after watching your constitution progressively slip away, and ask for it back, without picking much bigger scabs, you might be mistaken.

Willing to take that chance?

If Obama is not a "Constitutional natural born citizen", so what? Why should anyone care?

Understandably, some Americans question the wisdom of "enforcing the law" and "upholding the Constitution" when the specific requirement being upheld or enforced seems to be an antiquated technicality. As long as Barack Obama is doing his job as President, why should his parents' citizenship matter? Obama was elected President, not his parents. His parents passed away many years ago, so how is their citizenship relevant? Is enforcing a parental citizenship requirement really worth the horrific political chaos and unimaginable governmental disruption that might result if Obama were found to be ineligible?

Birthers respond in this way... If the Constitution contains something that is no longer appropriate for modern-day society, the proper remedy is a Constitutional Amendment. If we want to be a nation that is ruled by law and the Constitution, we cannot just ignore a Constitutional requirement, merely because it is inconvenient or we think it doesn't matter. If any one part of the Constitution doesn't matter, why would any other part of the Constitution matter?

Many of our rights -- free speech, freedom of religion, privacy, trial by jury, property rights and so on -- come from the Constitution. If we say it's OK to ignore the Constitution regarding Obama's eligibility, we open the door for someone else to say it's OK to ignore the Constitution regarding issues which may directly affect our rights as citizens.
 

fff

Well-known member
ROWFLMAO! Talk about a "straw man." First and foremost, no one has shown Obama is not qualified under the Constitution to be President of the US. That's a simple fact. Cases have come before courts and, one at a time, after reasonable, sober hearings, various judges have thrown them out of court as having no merit. So don't try to scare me with that "ignoring the Constitiution" crap.

The Constitution is a living document. Sometimes it needs to be updated. Where were your objections when various Republicans were trying to get a Constitutional amendment banning abortion?

I spent eight years watching the Bush Administration chip away at the Constitution. I feel much safer today with Obama in the White House.

Of course it's my money financing those perks. Just as it was my money when Bush was spending a record number of days on vacation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The Constitution also does not lay out who he has to prove his qualifications to...Definitely not a Canuck or a Banker in WTF Nebraska who screams daily about it..
The closest I can see as to who the Constitution says has to make the responsibility on the decision if someone is qualified to be President is the voters of the country- and the electoral college- both of which already decided that Barack Obama is qualified to be the President of the US....Which was certified by a Joint Session of Congress (without even one objection)...

So you can wish in one hand- and sh*t in the other- but you aren't going to get any SCOTUS ruling overturning it.....

But rightwingernut crazies will keep whining as it gives them something to fearmonger, hatemonger, and further divide the country on...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Cases have come before courts and, one at a time, after reasonable, sober hearings, various judges have thrown them out of court as having no merit.


Can you let us all know which cases the evidence has been heard, before being dismissed? "Without standing", means that the case is not heard, because the plantiffs do not have the standing to bring a case. Is that not correct?


Has anybody shown him to be eligible as a "Natural Born Citizen"? When was that constitional decision made? The Supreme court would have public records of such a case, correct?


You sound like you've done a lot of research on this subject. Can you find a case that has erased the "doubt" of whether a citizen with a non-citizen parent is a "Natural Born citizen"

I can show you a case of congress saying that a citizen with 2 citizen parents, is a natural born citizen. Which would be a "statutory natural born citizen", which McCain was deemed.

In Minor v. Happersett, 1874, the Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen. Until the Supreme Court answers this question, it is by no means "settled" that Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

Secretary Chertoff:My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.

Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
So you can wish in one hand- and sh*t in the other-




:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
I'm wishing on the one hand that you would respect your Supreme Courts decisions and respect the constitution.

On the other hand, I'm watching you sh1t on both.

In Minor v. Happersett, 1874, the Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen. Until the Supreme Court answers this question, it is by no means "settled" that Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

It is those with "doubt", that are showing respect for the rule of law.

And you can applaud those that don't have respect for the constitution, all you want Kola, it's all fun and games.
 

fff

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Cases have come before courts and, one at a time, after reasonable, sober hearings, various judges have thrown them out of court as having no merit.


Can you let us all know which cases the evidence has been heard, before being dismissed? "Without standing", means that the case is not heard, because the plantiffs do not have the standing to bring a case. Is that not correct?


Has anybody shown him to be eligible as a "Natural Born Citizen"? When was that constitional decision made? The Supreme court would have public records of such a case, correct?


You sound like you've done a lot of research on this subject. Can you find a case that has erased the "doubt" of whether a citizen with a non-citizen parent is a "Natural Born citizen"

I can show you a case of congress saying that a citizen with 2 citizen parents, is a natural born citizen. Which would be a "statutory natural born citizen", which McCain was deemed.

In Minor v. Happersett, 1874, the Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen. Until the Supreme Court answers this question, it is by no means "settled" that Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

Secretary Chertoff:My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.

Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).

Nope, no special research. Several months ago, it was a hot topic here on this board as court after court around the country threw out cases claiming Obama wasn't qualified. If you want to know about them, Google is your friend.

Obama's mother was an American citizen; he was born in a US state. That makes him an American citizen. Hawaii says he was born there, his birth announcement is online.

This wouldn't even be an issue except for the color of Obama's skin.

I'll highlight this again because you seem to be ignoring it:

There has been no proof that he was born anywhere else.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
fff said:
hypocritexposer said:
Cases have come before courts and, one at a time, after reasonable, sober hearings, various judges have thrown them out of court as having no merit.


Can you let us all know which cases the evidence has been heard, before being dismissed? "Without standing", means that the case is not heard, because the plantiffs do not have the standing to bring a case. Is that not correct?


Has anybody shown him to be eligible as a "Natural Born Citizen"? When was that constitional decision made? The Supreme court would have public records of such a case, correct?


You sound like you've done a lot of research on this subject. Can you find a case that has erased the "doubt" of whether a citizen with a non-citizen parent is a "Natural Born citizen"

I can show you a case of congress saying that a citizen with 2 citizen parents, is a natural born citizen. Which would be a "statutory natural born citizen", which McCain was deemed.

In Minor v. Happersett, 1874, the Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen. Until the Supreme Court answers this question, it is by no means "settled" that Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

Secretary Chertoff:My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.

Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).

Nope, no special research. Several months ago, it was a hot topic here on this board as court after court around the country threw out cases claiming Obama wasn't qualified. If you want to know about them, Google is your friend.

Obama's mother was an American citizen; he was born in a US state. That makes him an American citizen. Hawaii says he was born there, his birth announcement is online.

I'll highlight this again because you seem to be ignoring it:

There has been no proof that he was born anywhere else.

You are correct, he is an American citizen, if he was born in Hawaii. So for arguments sake, we'll assume he was.

What would the situation need to be, to be deemed a "Natural Born Citizen"?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
fff said:
hypocritexposer said:
Can you let us all know which cases the evidence has been heard, before being dismissed? "Without standing", means that the case is not heard, because the plantiffs do not have the standing to bring a case. Is that not correct?


Has anybody shown him to be eligible as a "Natural Born Citizen"? When was that constitional decision made? The Supreme court would have public records of such a case, correct?


You sound like you've done a lot of research on this subject. Can you find a case that has erased the "doubt" of whether a citizen with a non-citizen parent is a "Natural Born citizen"

I can show you a case of congress saying that a citizen with 2 citizen parents, is a natural born citizen. Which would be a "statutory natural born citizen", which McCain was deemed.



Secretary Chertoff:My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.

Nope, no special research. Several months ago, it was a hot topic here on this board as court after court around the country threw out cases claiming Obama wasn't qualified. If you want to know about them, Google is your friend.

Obama's mother was an American citizen; he was born in a US state. That makes him an American citizen. Hawaii says he was born there, his birth announcement is online.

I'll highlight this again because you seem to be ignoring it:

There has been no proof that he was born anywhere else.

You are correct, he is an American citizen, if he was born in Hawaii. So for arguments sake, we'll assume he was.

What would the situation need to be, to be deemed a "Natural Born Citizen"?

The SCOTUS has never ruled or explicitly defined what our forefathers meant with that terminology-- but many things have changed in 230 years- and this new world where you can be halfway around the world in hours---so if they end up ruling now- you and the rightwingernut crazies won't like their ruling ....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Many things have changed, but not that part of the Constitution, it is still exactly as it was written. The only ruling we have to go by, is the "doubt" that the Supreme Court expressed in 1874.

Then you admit, in your opinion, that Obama does not fit the "Natural Born Citizen" clause as written, without a ruling by the Supreme Court, or an amendment to the Constitution?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Many things have change, but not that part of the Constitution, it is still exactly as it was written. The only ruling we have to go by, is the "doubt" that the Supreme Court expressed in 1874.

Then you admit, in your opinion, that Obama does not fit the "Natural Born Citizen" clause, without a ruling by the Supreme Court, or an amendment to the Constitution?

Nope- he was born in Hawaii of a American citizen mother....

Factcheck and PolitiFact bring up a good argument-- besides the vast numbers of people that you would have to get involved to pull off this "conspiracy"- his parents and grandparents would have had to start the conspiring way back in 1961 when he was born... :roll:

We think our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, who also dug into some of these loopy theories put it pretty well: "It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice of the world’s biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything’s possible. But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what’s reasonable has to take over."

In fact, the conspiracy would need to be even deeper than our colleagues realized. In late July, a researcher looking to dig up dirt on Obama instead found a birth announcement that had been published in the Honolulu Advertiser on Sunday, Aug. 13, 1961:


Obama's birth announcement



The announcement was posted by a pro-Hillary Clinton blogger who grudgingly concluded that Obama "likely" was born Aug. 4, 1961 in Honolulu.


Of course, it's distantly possible that Obama's grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday. We suggest that those who choose to go down that path should first equip themselves with a high-quality tinfoil hat.

The evidence is clear: Barack Obama was born in the U.S.A.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

In any court in the land- the certification by the State Registrar of Records is far and enough verification....


The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

Fukino also was quoted by several other news organizations. The Honolulu Advertiser quoted Fukino as saying the agency had been bombarded by requests, and that the registrar of statistics had even been called in at home in the middle of the night.

Honolulu Advertiser, Nov. 1 2008: "This has gotten ridiculous," state health director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said yesterday. "There are plenty of other, important things to focus on, like the economy, taxes, energy." . . . Will this be enough to quiet the doubters? "I hope so," Fukino said. "We need to get some work done."

Fukino said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."


SHEEEESH-- I wish I had bought stock in an aluminum company...The tinfoil hatmakers must be making bundles :wink: :p :lol:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
You've changed subjects OT. He was a dual citizen, by his own admission.

He will never be a definite "Natural Born Citizen", until there is an amendment to the Constitution, to remove any "doubt". It has nothing to do with his birth place.

In Minor v. Happersett, 1874, the Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen. Until the Supreme Court answers this question, it is by no means "settled" that Barack Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.


From Obama's own website.
FactCheck.org Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

Dual citizenship is where the "doubt" comes from.

Supreme Court stated that there is a legitimate unanswered question, or "doubt", as to whether a U.S.-born child of a non-citizen parent is a Constitutional natural born citizen.

The voters could not of voted for a "Natural Born Citizen", because there is still doubt on whether a Dual Citizen qualifies.

Obama and Congress agree, that if you are born of citizen parents, not a parent, but 2, you are a naturally "natural born citizen"

Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).

Secretary Chertoff. My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.



Chairman Leahy. That is mine, too. Thank you.

McCain was deemed a Natural Born Citizen, because of his 2 American Parents, not his birth place.
 
Top