What was behind the incredible plunge in the New York stock indexes Thursday? Could it be this press release signage in New York? Or was the fact that this book is #8 in rank at Amazon.com enough to trigger fears of the imminent collapse of America from utter stupidity? Stranger things have happened.
Scene from Times Square
By the way, I may shortly appear on the cover of Time Times Magazine. Stranger things have happened.
Maybe they misread the sign? They thought it said “WMD” as in weapons of mass destruction instead of “WND.”
I just read that a trader “entered a ‘b’ for billion instead of an ‘m’ for million in a trade.” So, I’m sort of right that it was caused by one letter being misread.
Wow, are you serious about the Time magazine cover or joking? If so, that is really cool and you’ll have to promise to keep us posted!
As serious as any headline you see in the Globe magazine.
Are you really Elvis?
Or Bigfoot?
(Or both?)
I think this is a viable theory!
I think it is a very viable theory. A “fundamental change” of the U.S. into a socialistic system with a complete collapse of its economy is a terribly scary thing for the entire world. For most of the MSP Obamabots and their minions, the idea that Obama is a socialist has been theory. They never did the work to determine the facts. So, establishing credibility to the, up till now theory, that Obama is a socialist bent on a complete revision of the U.S. is waking everyone up. Who can possibly contend with the facts represented in the book? It is in their face now. Many will continue to live in denial, but many are waking up, and the evidence is seen in the response by the market. We should all be concerned, and we should all be working feverishly to get this goon out of office, along with the entirety of congress. We need strict constitutionalists in our government!
Jan 23, 2009, the market closed just over 8,000.
March 6, 2009, the market closed at 6,626.
Right now, it’s at 10,441.
Obama’s 2/3ds less socialist now than he was last March?
One quarter less socialist than when he took office?
I guess he’s 10% more socialist than he was last week?
The trader who accidentally put in an order to sell 15 billion shares of Proctor and Gamble was probably just distracted by the huge number of errors in Klein’s book!
“Hey, Stu, look at this, Klein claims Ayers wrote Obama’s books even after the guy who wrote the software to compare materials said it was ‘highly unlikely,’ what is he thin…oh, crud, I just put in an order to sell 15 billion shares of P&G! That’s gonna leave a mark. At least it’s not as stupid as claiming that Obama might not be eligible for the Presidency without ever asking a single practicing Constitutional lawyer!”
Socialist…
Yep just like those damn union workers…or the police force….or the fire department…or the public library system…or public schooling system…or the VA….or Tricare….or the miltary…or Social Security…..or Medicare….or Medicaid…..!
You know….bloody socialsts…what have they ever done for us…!
(valiantly trying not to drop into Life of Brian quotes)
Yeah, because people are really going to read a work of fiction by a hack reporter….Just like Corsi’s work of fiction really affected the way the election went in 2008, right? The fact of the matter is that most Americans (99%) could care less or is knowledgable of what the birthers are? At least 69 million people knew all of the unfounded and unsourced allegations made against the President and still VOTED for him….So Farah and the rest of WND are just full of their usual crap…
Lets look at what unbiased reviewers are saying about the so called book. I mean if it is so powerful that it shook the stockmarket, it must be a real page turner….
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005050034
Ten reasons why Aaron Klein’s The Manchurian President is “ridiculous crap”
May 05, 2010 1:37 pm ET by Simon Maloy
Late last night, WorldNetDaily let us know that they have feelings too, publishing an article enumerating all the journalists who insulted them by refusing review copies of Aaron Klein’s new book, The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists. How rude of them, WND observed, to have “rejected the thoroughly documented book before receiving review copies of the title,” with one journalist reportedly going so far as to call the book “ridiculous crap.”
Well, I have read The Manchurian President, and it turns out that that journalist was prescient in his assessment. Here’s a rundown of some (but certainly not all) of the book’s qualities that put it firmly in the “ridiculous crap” category.
7. The Birther bonanza
What journalist wouldn’t take seriously a book that devotes an entire chapter to the completely and thoroughly discredited allegations that President Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen and is therefore ineligible for the presidency? Klein cites several “legal resources” that he says raise “legitimate questions about Barack Obama’s eligibility for the presidency, given that Obama’s father was not an American citizen.” Notably, every “legal resource” he cites predates the Spanish-American War. Conveniently omitted are the rulings of today’s courts, which have rejected, time and again, Birther arguments on substantive and procedural grounds.
(see article)
“A “fundamental change” of the U.S. into a socialistic system with a complete collapse of its economy is a terribly scary thing for the entire world.”
What part of the world? Communist China? The countries of Europe that are more “socialist” than what President Obama proposes? Exactly what part of the world is so scared of the economic reforms the administration is putting into place?
By the way- “Socialist” Canada is doing great through the recession, as is Australia. And Communist China is growing faster than we are….maybe we just aren’t socialist enough?
Chapter one is reason one not to take Klein’s new book seriously
May 04, 2010 4:33 pm ET by Simon Maloy
“Obama tied to Bill Ayers… at age 11!”
Such is the title of the first chapter of WorldNetDaily “reporter” Aaron Klein’s new book, The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists, and it should give you an inkling of the sort of scholarship you can expect here. While the physical book itself is new, its content is decidedly stale, re-examining as it does all of the “controversial” aspects of Obama’s background that nobody outside the nuttier corners of the blogosphere cared about back in 2008.
But Klein has added some remarkably asinine twists to the right’s fascination with Obama and Ayers, which brings us to the first chapter detailing Obama’s alleged boyhood links to Ayers, which is based on a WorldNetDaily article Klein wrote last June.
Klein writes on page 3: “Obama’s earliest exposure to Ayers’ ideology, astonishingly enough, traces back to Obama’s childhood and the Hawaiian church at which the future U.S. president attended Sunday school as a boy.” The church in question, First Unitarian of Honolulu, was, according to Klein, “a sanctuary for draft dodgers during the 1960s and 1970s and was strongly linked to the Students for a Democratic Society, or SDS, during the time Weatherman radical Bill Ayers was the leader in that organization.”
After indulging in a lengthy denunciation of the SDS, Klein offers his evidence of SDS’s “strong links” to the church: The church “granted sanctuary to U.S. military deserters recruited by SDS” before the church was raided in 1969, and anti-war statements from a draft dodger were read to the congregation at the church that same year and written up by an SDS publication.
That’s it.
From this, we’re supposed to believe that Obama, as a child who spent maybe an hour or two in Sunday school at this church every week, was somehow indoctrinated in the philosophy of Bill Ayers. As Klein himself acknowledges, Obama didn’t even return to Hawaii from Indonesia until 1971, making it extraordinarily unlikely that he was exposed to that bit of “Ayers’ ideology.”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005040042
Whether or not Obama is a socialist by any reasonable definition is totally irrelevant to his eligibility status.
We could be so lucky to find that our President cares for the middle class.
Big business will not be pleased, and neither will those who have been fooled into objecting to government…
Fooled again
sure john, that’s why worldwide value of
American brands jumped over 2 trillion dolars because of Obama.
john, get back on your meds you and the other 3 birthers.
Yeah, because when I look at Obama’s entire economic team and see all the connections to Wall Street & Goldman Sachs there, I immediately think “socialism”…right?
Yeah, because when I hear Tea Party folks ranting about how “ObamaCare” is “socialism” I realize that they mean ensuring that private industry insurance companies get more money is somehow “socialistic”, right?
Yeah, because when I hear that instead of saving the auto industry, we somehow “took it over” and then see that GM is paying us back our taxpayer investment 5 years early because of how successful that plan was to save them, allowing the US to now look to sell its shares…
I think you get the point.
Tell me please all you people fearing the bogeyman of “socialism” is all of a sudden taking over and dooming us…
…just where is this so called dreaded “socialism” actually happening in our country, exactly?
Because every example I’m given by Tea Party & GOP folks turns out to not really have much socialism in it after all.
No, it was actually a Wall Street ‘BM’. (B instead of an M).
Or this commentary on Klein’s so called piece of garbarge…
http://mediamatters.org/research/201005070018
Klein’s Obama attack book hurls kitchen sink of falsehoods, conspiracy theories, birtherism
WorldNetDaily reporter Aaron Klein’s book The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists uses false claims, discredited conspiracy theories, birther arguments, deceptive editing, and guilt by association to further its stated goal of tying Obama to “an Anti-American fringe nexus.”
Maybe it crashed because the birthers heard Obama can’t be a dual citizen if his parents’ marriage was “void ab initio.”
I’ve been trying to find something explicit in British law to back up the statement that “an unmarried father cannot pass on British citizenship automatically in the case of children born before 1 July 2006.” According to the British Nationality Act of 1981 an unmarried father can’t pass on his citizenship unless he marries the mother. This continued until 2006 when the law took effect that allowed an unmarried British father to pass on citizenship if he provides proof of paternity such as a birth certificate of the child or a DNA test. The application for citizenship must be done before the child is 18. This doesn’t answer, though, what the law was between 1948 and 1962.
I found an article in the Guardian about a woman born before 1961 (screen name EqualityMatters) who was trying to get citizenship through her British mother but had to pay a fee to claim it. The article said, “”EqualityMatters’ point is that if she had been born abroad to a British father, her entitlement to citizenship would have been automatic – as she would have been entitled to citizenship by descent – and she would not have had to incur the fee. It is important to note that this would only have been the case if her parents had been married; if her British father had not been married to her non-British mother, she would not be able to claim British citizenship at all.”
The Guardian had another article about a woman (screen name ukccen) who couldn’t get her passport because her British father was unmarried. It said, “ukccen is right that a person born before 1 July 2006 with a British father and non-British mother, and whose parents were never married, can’t claim British citizenship purely because their father is British, ….Historically, the law was biased against children of all ages who had an unmarried British father and non-British mother. Before 1 July 2006, British fathers could not pass on their British nationality to children born outside marriage. The British Nationality Act 1981 defined a child’s father as the husband, at the time of the child’s birth, of the woman who gives birth to the child.” Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/21/uk-citizenship-parent-unmarried
The applicable law for Obama would be the British Nationality Act of 1948 and it states,
“(2) Subject to the provisions of section twenty-three of this Act, any reference in this Act to a child shall be construed as a reference to a legitimate child; and the expressions “father”, “ancestor” and “descended” shall be construed accordingly.”
I take it that under British law the father is not legally considered the father unless the child is legitimated somehow. The marriage can be legitimated by a legal marriage after the birth of the child under the 1948 act.
I notice that some of the birthers claim it’s not true that illegitimacy makes a difference in citizenship under British law. They site the following as proof:
Children Bill [Lords], HC Deb 27 June 1958 vol 590 cc743-830.
British Nationality, HC Deb 16 July 1963 vol 681 cc341-3.
Both of those citations are not laws. They are debates about laws. Apuzzo’s quotes from the 1958 debate simply suggest that if a child has British citizenship, he can’t lose it while he’s a minor. As for the 1963 debate, Apuzzo quotes (leaving out the sentence I italicized):
Please note that Hawaii wasn’t a British colony when Obama was born; and that, “can have British nationality” only implies the possibility of nationality not the absolute attainment of it.
This article from the Child and Family Law Quarterly, 19 (1) contradicts Apuzzo:
“Before 1981, then, only married fathers (and, very exceptionally, unmarried
mothers) could transmit citizenship by birth. Citizenship was thus constructed in
English law primarily as something to be transmitted via the male line, passing
automatically from husband to wife, and from father to marital child….” http://kar.kent.ac.uk/1453/1/Unmarried_Fathers_Citizenship_8NOV07DP.pdf
It appears that prior to 1981 the child of an unmarried British father could gain citizenship only under “jus soli” or his parents’ subsequent legal marriage. He could not derive “citizenship by descent” from an unmarried father. Since Obama was born in Hawaii, he couldn’t obtain British citizenship from an unmarried father.
In British case Udny v Udny (1869) , Judge Lord Westbury wrote:
“It is a settled principle that no man shall be without a domicil; and to secure this end the law attributes to every individual as soon as he is born the domicil of his father if the child be legitimate, and the domicil of his mother if the child be illegitimate.”
Since the US and the UK recognize customary marriages if they’re legal in the country in which they take place, Obama Sr. could not have married Ann Dunham legally as he was already legally married to Keziah Aoko.
I think you have made a strong case!
I WANTED a more socialistic approach to Healthcare, i.e. a public option. I also would like it if we had a university system like Canada and the UK. Those of us who voted for Obama did so because we wanted to move America in a different direction. Hey, that’s what America is about. The majority moving the country in the direction they want!
nrly
Then why don’t you move to Canada or Europe? And America is a republic, not a democracy i.e. a tyranny of the majority.
Canada is not a republic. Many countries in Europe-France, Germany, Italy-are. By the way, Iran is a republic, as was the USSR (the R stood for republic). So a republic without democracy is not such a good thing.
I love the first line in the front cover of the book: “Tens of millions of Americans sense there is something very wrong with the President of the United States but they don’t know exactly what.”
Conservatives do!
We are under attack by an ideology of destruction of America for the purposes of gaining political power.
Todays Liberal Left is the by-product of decades of socialist programming teaching our yoots to expect something for nothing from our government.
Klien aptly starts out the first chapter with a discussion of Bill Ayers. Why can’t the rest of America connect the dots?
@ Black Lion,
What are the false claims?
What are the discredited conspiracy theories?
The birther arguments?
Deceptive editing?
Guilt by association is plain to see.
Obama’s legacy is the destruction of America by incorporating socialist ideology.
The Usurper, Obama’s only saving grace is the enormous amounts of guns and ammo sales to Americans as a direct result of implementing his ideology.
I applaud Obama on this one aspect of his presidency but fear for my country and its patriots.
Well, you and people like you can continue to cower in fear, clinging to your guns and kooky conspiracy theories, Navigator7.
The rest of will continue to live our lives happy, knowing that we are finally entering the 21st century with a smart, steady leader at the helm!
@ ‘G’,
Pray tell G, what makes you think conservatives are cowering? Clinging to guns, on the other hand, is only necessary as there is an over abundance of politicians who would see fit if there was a lot less of us roaming the country armed.
I have no doubt The Liberal Left will live happy lives for the short term. They Left ‘Thinks’ they are getting something for nothing which sounds like a bargin!
In my book, a bargin is something you can’t use at a price you can’t refuse. I remind you…I have commanded a a ship……Obama has only pick pocketed. He is no captain!
Read the article…They go into detail regarding the lies that Klein tells in his so called book….The only people that would read that piece of garbarge and believe it would be someone like you, who is predisposed to believe in that crap.
you are just plain goofy…Media Matters??? You are a hoot and a holler.
Watch Geraldo tonight…10 pm…Klein is the guest. Geraldo may cry.
Try reading the book YOURSELF…instead of letting other Obamamohammeds tell you what to think…
Novel idea, huh?
@ Oh Gosh G,
You went textbook liberal on me and ruined everything.
What we have is a ‘so-called President’. He is a Usurper.
There is a fundamental trouble with works produced by WND. As it is a Christian based…lying is not tolerated unlike information found in the mainstream media.
So…when you call something a ‘piece of garbage’ or insult conservatives with the strength of an argument that suggests something is a ‘piece of crap’….it seems to me the book is spot on.
I really hope you and your ‘truth’ driven comrades go ‘Palin’ on this one! Show America once again what liberals are made of!
Navigator7: There is a fundamental trouble with works produced by WND. As it is a Christian based…lying is not tolerated unlike information found in the mainstream media.
Joseph Farah admitted that lies regularly appear in guest articles on WND. One has to look no further than Janet Porter (of Faith2Action) who published a completely fabricated and false article in WND about a travel ban to Pakistan in 1981. While a careful syntactic reading of WorldNetDaily doesn’t usually show lies, the technique of leading questions and innuendo are used to mislead the reader. Misleading is lying in my book.
Navigator7, you call President Obama a “so-called President,” but I say to you that there is nothing even “so-called Christian” about WND. Just remember, Satan is the father of lies, and WorldNetDaily is there to twist everything into its right-wing world view. Whether it invites liars to write guest columns, or uses its staff to mislead, lies are lies.
Some commenters here complain about me and others twisting the facts, evading the truth, and telling lies. That doesn’t bother me because I know that I make every effort to get my information from authoritative sources, back things up with clear argument, and never resort to the trickery of the propagandist. My conscience is clear.
Dr. Conspiracy,
I have no trouble with the truth.
It’s not found in the liberal agenda.
It’s not found in our “so-called” president.
It’s not found in our Senate or Congress.
It’s not found in our mainstream media.
It’s not found in the minions who support Obama’s ideology.
I’ll put my trust in WND books before and the values promoted by Farah and many of his excellent principles writers.
I applaud you for attempting to follow journalistic principles few others in America are capable of these days: “….. I know that I make every effort to get my information from authoritative sources, back things up with clear argument, and never resort to the trickery of the propagandist. My conscience is clear.” ~ Dr. Conspiracy
Navigator7: I remind you…I have commanded a a ship
So did Captain Ahab.
True, But Captain Ahab did [probably meant “didn’t,” Doc] destroy a country.
So you let the myths and misrepresentations of others lead you to be more and more enslaved in ignorance, and hatred.
The fact that you rely on a single source indicates that you allow others to hold you enslaved.
You’ve made your choice. Sadly you have allowed others the power over you to make you look foolish and ill-informed.
Doc, some one is playing with the Like or Dislike function.
Navigator7 says:
Well, your statement of this, for one:
You said you fear for your country. In addition, your restated need to “cling to guns” looks like unnecessary fear to me.
At what point do you have enough ammo? What exactly are you worried about?
You all seem to fear gun rights being taken away from you. Haven’t seen that happen yet and don’t think it will.
I think the NRA and others with interest in making profit off of arms sales do a great job scaring the pants off you folks and putting these ideas in your head so you’ll run out and increase their profit margins. Obviously it works pretty well! LOL!
The only national gun laws that have changed since Obama took office actually INCREASED freedom for gun owners – such as being able to carry in a National Park.
Plus, you also talked about the destruction of America and stuff. Sounds like nothing but overblown fear and paranoia to me. Got any concrete examples of this so-called destruction that Obama’s bringing? Otherwise, it sounds like nothing but crazy talk to me.
Oh, and I always get a kick out of how extreme rightwing folks like you think that anyone who disagrees with you must be on the “left”. LMAO! You folks have moved so far over to the extreme right, everything must seem “left” to you. Based on your standards, Reagan is a no-good socialist lefty! LOL!
So, you’ve commanded a ship. Obama’s commanding an entire nation – the most powerful one in the entire world at that! That is like you pulling a pair of two’s to challenge his royal flush.
HolyRoller,
Well, as I don’t qualify enough as a liberal for any actual liberal to consider me one, I can’t show you what “liberals are made of, sorry”.
Most of the decent folks I know who have always considered themselves solid conservatives don’t share many of the nutbag views you spout off either, so maybe “ultra right-wing conspiracy kook style of conservativsm” would be more appropriate for you.
People like you give “conservative” a bad name and have really tarnished the value of that word over the last several years.
WND is a “Christian” site? LOL! Yeah, great Christian values displayed there. Your argument is what, that if somehow some place or some site claims itself to be “Christian” than it some how acts with morals?
You mean just like prominent Baptist minister, Dr. George Rekers, co-founder of The Family Research Council, who was just caught using a “rentboy” male prostitute for sex? Those Christian values?
Or do you mean like all of the pedophile Catholic priests? Those Christian values?
Or do you mean the felon, oh I mean former televangelist, Jim Bakker, busted for both adultery and accounting fraud? Those Christian values?
Shall I go on?
Oh, and we have a duly elected President, not an “usurper”. You don’t seem to understand what the word usurp means. Here in America, we have a very specific election process, which was followed and resulted in a definitive victory for Obama, without a single objection by Congress or the Electoral College. That is following the law.
I think you mean to say that the candidate you wanted did NOT win and you are just a sore loser still whining about it and looking for ways to fling poo because you can’t handle losing like a responsible adult.
Hey, in 2012, you will get your chance to vote for someone different. Until then, try to deal with it like a man and not a tantrum throwing baby.
@ NBC,
I’ve spent decades listening and reading WND. Often weeks and months ahead of other news sources.
WND will not keeps its customer reporting like the mainstream press.
My opinion is….anyone supporting Obama or anything other than that called out in the constitution is a threat to American way of life.
Illegal immigration: 12 million democratic votes or an illegal practice that must end?
G say:
“Got any concrete examples of this so-called destruction that Obama’s bringing? Otherwise, it sounds like nothing but crazy talk to me.”
I’ve got a long litany of things attraction my attention since before Obama was elected.
His lies about Bill Ayers
His opaqueness after promising transparency.
Everything Obama has done since taking office is the opposite of what should have been done. …If you want America to look like itself in the morning.
Obama is “Not Under Command”. His ideologies are disabled and adrift.
However…. views on Obama vary whether you believe it’s government’s job to care for the people or governments job to do the will if the people while following the constitution.
Obama’s friends, associates, cabinet, healthcare, climate change, now shutting down the oil wells…Obama is following precisely Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radical and the Cloward-Piven Study Methods for bringing down a free market society by crushing that society under it own weight and burden of something that does not work….Big Government.
Obama is using the ineffectiveness of the government he wishes to create as a toll to bring down our free market society.
And most liberals will join Obama in hell with a happy heart. Crystal Night.
Decades? WND only started 13 years ago. So perhaps you were imagining what you read?
Obama is “bringing down a free market society”?? The market is up approximately 40% in the 16 months since his inauguration. Those who actually make up the free market (as opposed to crackpots like you) seem to be applauding much of what Obama has done. As in investor, I know I am.
A welcome change from your pal GWB who managed to crash the markets not once, but twice, during his reign of error. You do know that Bush was the worst President for the markets since Hoover, don’t you? We’ll see where things are by the end of Obama’s time in office, but he’d have a hard time doing worse than his predecessor.
@ Scientist,
A climatologist no doubt?
The Left’s attack on Talk Radio back when The Murrah building was blown up was enough to show me the light.
We were fed a daily diet of liberal nonsense linking “Conservative” voices as the motivation behind those killed an wounded.
The Fairness Doctrine was tried to limit ”opposing” liberal speak.
The values held and implemented by the Left are insidious and just as evil as radical Islam that seek to end America.
It is no surprise we have elected Obama and his minions are blind to the destruction they are causing.
It’s on purpose.
Wrong again. So far you have a perfect record.
@ Scientist,
OIC…we are going for perfect records?
Like Obama’s promise of transparency but delivers opaque?
It appears you deleted your party patented “Blame George Bush” approach to problem solving.
What part of Wealth Redistribution works for you?
PS…I’m off to work with a misguided belief the money I actually earn from my endeavors will be best used as I see fit.
So far, there are a trillions reasons to the contrary.
Illegal immigrants can’t vote and thus far no one has been able to prove that voter fraud is a wide spread issue. So what did you think when Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to millions of illegal aliens?
Wealth redistribution? Where is that currently happening? Enough with the vague generalizations not based in reality.
Funny thing about the “blame George Bush” approach. Most of the stuff he was blamed for were under his watch. Now how about the “blame 9/11, blame Bill Clinton” approach the right took for 8 years of George Bush?
I caught them in a lie a few years ago during the Schiavo affair. Another case they tried to point to claimed that an old lady was going to be taken off a feading tube and starved to death by her granddaughter. After going through the legal documents of the case I wrote the editor. I pointed out that first off the old lady was never on a feeding tube that she had been fed and taken care of by her granddaughter. She was going to have to be put on one because she couldn’t swallow anymore.
The whole thing ended up becoming a legal dispute because another relative who never was involved wanted to become guardian of the old lady so made up lies about the granddaughter.
The editor wrote me back where he said they have updated the article and that they took the word of the relative. I said why didn’t you contact the judge in the case? Why didn’t you read the legal documents? Instead of fixing the article they changed the headline without issuing a correction. The gist of the article remained the same.
Trust in world nut daily? Good lord. Farrah has no principles and his rag is worse than the inquirer. Do you put your faith in them as well?
It is no surprise we have elected Obama
Yeah I can imagine voters are an irritant for you.
Not really “concrete” examples, are they? More generalized scare words – socialism, Alinsky, Bill Ayers.
What exactly did Obama say about Bill Ayers, and why was it a lie?
What transparency did Obama promise that he hasn’t delivered? Is he more or less transparent than previous presidents?
What, exactly, are the Alinsky rules for bringing down a free economy? What are the Cloward-Piven Study Methods? And how is Obama using them?
Do you understand the word concrete? Give us actual examples. What has Obama done, specifically, that is destroying the world. Then, give evidence of that destruction!
For example, if you claim that Obama is destroying the economy, deal with the fact that the economy seems to be recovering from a recession that began before Obama got into office.
I’m not sure, however, that the children of a marriage that is void ab initio are illegitimate. Here’s a list of the various state laws on void and voidable marriages. As you can see, Hawaii considers bigamous marriages prohibited (void ab initio). However, the children of annulled or prohibited marriages are legitimate.
Here’s the Hawaiian Law in question:
Obviously, the law changed in 1955 and then again in 1980, so, we’d need to see what the law was in 1961.
Greg: In terms of whether the President ever had British or Kenyan citizenship (or even a right to claim them) isn’t it British and Kenyan law that matter, not Hawaiian?
It’s a pointless distinction – the term “democracy” is understood in the modern idiom to mean a system in which people vote for elected representatives.
You’re nitpicking based upon an outdated definition, you obnoxious little twerp.
I think we’d have to research into how England applied conflict of laws principles to foreign marriages.
It gets rather complicated.
“The values held and implemented by the Left are insidious and just as evil as radical Islam that seek to end America.”
The values of the left?
That all American citizens should be allowed to vote safely?
That Corporations shouldn’t be allowed to spew polution without regulation?
That banks should be regulated to prevent complete financial meltdowns?
That markets should be regulated in an attempt to minimize corporate malfeasance?
That the little guy who only makes $10.00 an hour is important too.
That government does indeed have a role in our lives- that just as we have publicly funded fire departments to put out fires- not to protect individual homes but to prevent the entire city from burning down- that we can utilize public funds to keep our entire economy from melting down.
That just because someone’s skin is a slightly different color than pink, or their last name isn’t Smith isn’t enough reason to view them legally with suspicion.
That Miranda rights are important.
That torture is against the very principles of America.
That seperation of Church and State makes for both a more effective and just State and a more robust Church.
That I don’t want my neighbor having the unrestrained right to own 50 caliber machine guns.
That Unions can be annoying, but a U.S without Unions would be even worse.
That Social Security is a good thing.
That Medicaid is a good thing
That protecting individuals against excesses of powerful corporations and individuals should be a role of government.
That what consenting adults do in the bedroom is not governments business.
That government shouldn’t have the right to compel a woman to put her body at risk by requiring her to carry a fetus to term.
That government does have a role in protecting children from abuse, abandonment and neglect.
That women are just as capable of men, though sometimes in different ways, and should be treated the same as men.
Yeah, those are particularly insidious. I can see why those would threaten you.
Well stated, Greg & Scientist. You’ve already pointed out what I would have said.
Bottom line – you’ve got nothing Navigator7 that is concrete to point to, except more of your silly, baseless talking points that don’t have a hill of beans to do with how actual policy and actual changes have happened since his election.
You live trapped in a dreamworld of your own fears and hate, fully disconnected from reality. You can whine and moan all you want, but this country will be just fine.
Navigator7,
You are just a sad, brainwashed tool.
You’ve been taught to hate anyone who looks or thinks or acts differently from you and you willingly buy into any story, no matter how ludicrous it is, that will support your twisted worldview.
Your own answers on your blind support for dirt rags like WND shows what a dupe you are and prove that all you do is lap up the crazy conspiracy talk that is fed to you and can’t actually think for yourself. How pathetic and sad.
Scientist, I think Greg has a point. I think Great Britain considers a child legitimate if he is considered legitimate in the place he was born. If so, then the laws on legitimacy in Hawaii would enter into his eligibility for British citizenship. However, if in 1961 Great Britain didn’t take into account the laws of legitimacy in the place of birth, then Hawaiian law wouldn’t matter. It would be based solely on British law. As Greg said, it gets rather complicated.
Golly Bill?
How about a trillion spent, nay wasted, on a healthcare plan destined to ruin the best healthcare system in the world.
@ SFJeff,
You are in an ideological trap, Jeff.
You make the conclusion because something ‘seems’ right therefore the government should then do it…is not right!
Much of what you talk about.
You make claims that simple aren’t true and then you build upon falsehoods.
For clarity…I’ll just add the implied meaning to your first claim: Conservatives believe citizens should not be able to vote safely.
Hey…I’d like to reply to you guys but I can’t find your text. Who designed this blog anyway?
The US neither will be wasting money on the health insurance reform nor is it the best system in the world.
Sorry dude.
I hate to burst your bubble but Christians do lie and the WND does not appear to be much different. Other than they shroud themselves in a layer to protect themselves from libel. WND is hardly a reliable or reasonable source for information.
In Christ, my friend.
Exactly at it causes people to become enslaved by misleading statements rather than be set free by the truth.
Of course, anyone who relies on a single source of information is doomed to be enslaved by ignorance and myths.
@ NBC,
Any relation to the news network that can’t get it right?
When government “doesn’t have the right” to do something and they do it anyway…I have a real problem with that.
Healthcare reform should have begun with an argument asking the question: “Are American’s entitled to free healthcare via a socialist principle known as Wealth Redistribution?”
Then the Constitution should have been amended to reflect taxpayer healthcare is a right.
I do agree…I chose the wrong word. ‘Wasted’ doesn’t cover it. ‘Squandered’ is better. ‘Theft’ covers most of it. An ‘Alinsky Attack’ is another. A ‘Weapon’ to bring America to its knees is probably the most precise way of saying what government’s new intrusion into our live will do.
I’d like to thank all the rest of you for the wonderful insults hurled my way…but where did you hide your posts?
Somebody doing some gardening here?
Whats flipping burgers pay now days
That’s a very different argument than the one you originally proposed. Does this mean that you are rejecting your original claims?
It’s hard to follow ever moving goalposts.
How did you establish that the investment in health insurance reform is wasting trillions of dollars?
How did you establish that the US health care is ‘the best in the world’? By what standard?
That depends on the question if the Constitution requires to be amended. I am glad that you appear to be interested in the Constitutional principles. I personally am interested in birth right citizenship and separation of powers as well as religion and state.
Dear Mr Navigator: I’m just curious what other countries you have received health care in that makes you able to state that “the US has the best healthcare system in the world”? The statistics don’t necessarily support your claim. They definitely support that the US has by far the most expensive health care in the world.
“You make the conclusion because something ’seems’ right therefore the government should then do it…is not right!”
Nope, I come to conclusions based upon various reasons- I am quite aware that what may seem right may have adverse results. What do you base your conclusions that government should not do things?
“You make claims that simple aren’t true and then you build upon falsehoods.”
I made claims about my liberal beliefs, not about facts. You were the one claiming that my beliefs threaten America- without supporting in anyway your claim.
“For clarity…I’ll just add the implied meaning to your first claim: Conservatives believe citizens should not be able to vote safely.”
You can read into it whatever you want- my only claim is what I believe is a liberal philosophy- that all citizens have the right to vote safely. Do you have any argument with that belief? Or is this an area we agree on?
If you disagree with my other statements- or you want to express your opinion on what government should or should not do, feel free- I imagine Doc won’t mind.
Show me why the great liberal accomplishments of the last 100 years have destroyed the United States- the 40 hour work week, ending child labor, allowing Unions to be formed without the National Guard being called in.
Show me how the concept of Social Security has destroyed our country.
Compare the skies of Los Angeles today with the Los Angeles of 20 years ago and tell me that the Environmental movement is ruining America.
Tell me why free public libraries ruin America?
Tell me why unemployment compensation has destroyed America.
“When government “doesn’t have the right” to do something and they do it anyway…I have a rwal problem with that.”
Well that is clearly open for interpretation. But thats fine- thats your opinion.
“Healthcare reform should have begun with an argument asking the question: “Are American’s entitled to free healthcare via a socialist principle known as Wealth Redistribution?””
That could have been the question- or it could have been “Should we continue to provide health care to all via our hospital system and have the people with insurance subsidize the most expensive health care we can provide via our emergency rooms, or another question could be “should our country allow the poor to die because they can’t pay for healthcare?” Because that is happening.
But but but WND tells me so…
Sorry Navigator7, but you are wrong and you suck at math.
I think you are referring to the Health Care Law enacted, which the CBO clearly states will provide a HUGE savings and reduction to the national deficit.
Read them for yourself, instead of being such a slave to your biased crap hack sites and programs which fill your head with lies:
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm
My young adult son, a very hard working young man, faced with a serious illness was offered nothing under this “best” system. It is the best for the wealthy, not for everyone in between. Talk about swallowing propoganda. Look at the footage of poor people put out of a hospital with iv’s attached outside a homeless shelter in LA. The best. No, it is not. Oh, I am a military wife so I have lived with socialized medecine all of my adult life and have always enjoyed excellent care.
Navigator7 says:
Huh? Step away from the crack pipe, dude. All the posts and all the people are here.
Boy, you really came off unhinged and deluded before, and now this is the 2nd recent post you’ve made where you start talking about things hiding and disappearing that make no sense at all. What on earth are you talking about?
But but but…..Saint Sarah of Alaska revealed there are death panels staffed by Commie/Fascist/Socialist in the Obaminations Death Care Plan…..>8-)
Or as as they are called in the real world, the acturial accounts panels which in the current system decide who to deny care to if your condition is deemed to be too expensive for the bottom line…..Or better still if it can be classed as a “pre-existing condition”.
Lets not even get into the fun that is the massive disparity in adminstrative costs between the US and the rest of the OECD.
US…….average administrative costs 29%-31%
OECD…..average administrative costs 4%-7%
Even the 2007 (that was the Bush era remember and not Obama) report from the CRS damns the costs and lack of benefit.
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34175_20070917.pdf
Come on Navigator, gives us some demo of your BS now….come on I know you can…
I don’t have that section, but I do have this from 1955:
@ G,
Please … don’t accuse me of doing drugs.
I clearly don’t support our Obamanation so my suspected drug use as a possible reason for my views cannot be used. (Hint) Use your charges as if I were a business owner.
What I am telling you is my inbox if full of insults coming from this website. When I go to respond to the chatter, I can’t find the thread.
The thread starter…..Manchurian Candidate started the stock market crash is a mirthful one.
I liked the debate we are engaged in especially because few agree with me. Posts are getting deleted.
On the other hand….what good is a one sided debate?…..plus, I don’t have time. I looped in here on a lark.
I’m on Facebook
If you want to continue…maybe that is a better route so continuity in communication is maintained.
?
To Navigator7:
LOL! Fair enough and I thought that was a good post & explanation.
I will apologize for the drug comment! I hope you can realize why it was hard to fathom what you were complaining about on missing posts and understand why it sounded so “trippy” from my POV.
I think I understand what happened and what you experienced. There is a known problem where after a number of posts on a topic, the embedding in threads (and even the order that comments appear) sort of gets all out of whack. Dr. C is aware of it as it has been brought up a number of times.
It is some flaw in the software, that there isn’t a fix in place here yet, so we just get used to it and deal with it the best we can.
The best solution offered is to use the (Quote) feature next to the title of one post when replying to it. You can always highlight only the text you want to quote and it helps (a little) to make it easier to find replies and have an idea of what one is replying to.
Also, I’ll use the Like or Dislike comment feature to mark posts I’ve read (as they become a lighter color once you vote – so you can’t vote twice). This helps to make it easier for me to scan for new posts that I haven’t read. Just another hint that might help.
I’m sure the stuff you were looking for was somewhere on here (or another post topic). Sometimes they are just fine. Here and there, a few things trip the filter (multiple links, “blue” language) and they end up in moderation for awhile.
I honestly don’t have a problem with you having differences of opinion or not liking the president or his policies and I won’t attack you on that (maybe a respectful debate, but only because I expect that if you are going to bother to say something, you should be able to back up and support your position with more than just rhetoric).
However, when your examples or screeds are over the top and just come off like bitter, hyperbolic attacks, I’ll call you out on it.
We’re all Americans even if our perspectives differ. I would hope that in the future you could post more rationally, like you did in this instance, instead of always being so poisonous in your screed.