And we wonder why the California Republican Party is dying?
This was Los Angeles, also as of 3:47 p.m. today, which I presume was not the final count. (But I…
I'm not sure if these were the figures from today or yesterday, but here they are. Note: These estimates were…
It fit the tune, but the words could have been sharper. I had remembered it as Jimmy Jam, not Jimmy…
More evidence of long term involvement of Trump with Russia: https://youtu.be/YsIntuxmXf0?si=JGCTgRnqeoDxz_mb
Lord, a magisterial recap. I love it when the Yam's apologists try to deflect us "alarmists" with one idiot excuse…
They're moving along slowly but surely and Check it out - there’s a total of 14,597 ballots left to count,…
No, that fit the tune fine.
(Comment copied from the pre-race post to this more appropriate locale.) https://ocvote.gov/results/whats-left-to-count/total-ballots-left-to-count Registrar's "What's Left to Count" page says: 16,307…
The rule of thumb that red votes come in more quickly than blue ones still stands. As I recall, they…
https://ocvote.gov/results/whats-left-to-count/total-ballots-left-to-count Registrar's "What's Left to Count" page says: 16,307 ballots left to process. (As you'll see, that 16,307 number is…
Just like the Dems have their anti-war nutbags, the Libertarians have their “Legalize it” nutbags, so do the GOP.
The suggestion here that this activist represents the entire GOP is crazy – she is a part of, and that’s it. It takes all kinds to fill out the tent so to speak.
Sgt. York,
True, but you forget I was once a member of the OC GOP Central Committee. That body is full of kooks like this lady…
What’s wrong with legalizing it?
Sgt. York……true the left has their “nutbags”..being against the trumped up war in Iraq , wouldn’t classify one as a “nutbag”.
The main difference is these right wing “nutbags” are the tent stakes holding the Republican party together. It’s one thing to be on the fringe. It’s completely different when the fringe is the only thing holding you up.
I agree with this woman. Obama is BLACK and we know all black people are born in Kenya. Furthermore, everyone knows Jesus was a blond haired, blue eyed white man and therefore this black Obama guy is surely the anti-Christ.
I’m going to whip out my teabag and start protesting.
Many people justify their opinions with the facts and the law, whereas others do not let the facts and the law get in the way of their reasoning. Which one are you? If you are one of those people out there who thinks that the birthers are nuts, then let’s consider something that is not nuts — which one of the three burdens of proof applies to any candidate for President regarding his Article II eligibility? Is it by a preponderance of evidence? By clear and convincing evidence? How about by beyond a reasonable doubt?
Once you decide which one applies, and you must pick one if your argument is to be credible, then consider this before drawing a conclusion — Although Hawaii calls the posted Certification of Live Birth an “official” birth certificate, it is nothing more than a digital copy of a summary of a 1961 vital record that derives from one of the six birth records procedures in place at the time of Obama’s birth, five of which arguably lacked adequate indicia of reliability and trustworthiness because they were fraught with the potential for fraud.
Does anyone know which one of these procedures was used to generate a 1961 birth record for Barack? Barack won’t tell. Was it the one with a doctor’s signature and hospital documentation, or was it from one of the other five, one of which allowed a family member to mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC? Consider this hypo — state A issues a birth certificate to a person who supplies a hand-written note that claims baby B was born somewhere on so and so date. No independent witnesses are required. Later, the state issues an “official” scant summary of the “original” birth certificate.” The issue is, do you trust that summary? You can read the actual Hawaii Revised Laws in effect in 1961 at http://birther.com that would have allowed for such a thing to happen.
To date, not one single solitary person in the three branches of government has bothered to subject Obama’s 1961 vital record to any meaningful scrutiny. Furthermore, they have not even identified which burden of proof was applied to reach their conclusions. They have instead chosen to accept his posted Certification of Live Birth, a summary, as conclusive evidence of his alleged birthplace simply because it reads -“Born in Hawaii.” It reminds me of someone who tells another, “Because I say so.”
Now, for those on the Left who like to pretend that the birthers believe that the Hawaii newspaper birth announcement was planted so Obama could run for president 47 years later. Nobody on either side of the fence really believes that scenario. It is nothing but a ridiculous distraction from an alternative, plausible motive — the announcement could have been placed so Ann Dunham would have had documented evidence for immigration purposes should Barack’s birthplace ever be called into question by the INS when he was younger. Even if you are not willing to accept this scenario, in 1961 a family member could mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC. The state registrar would then send that information to the papers. So the Hawaii newspaper announcement is not reliable or trustworthy evidence either.
On a closing note, assuming arguendo, that Obama is completely barred from getting a copy of his original 1961 birth certificate, what prevents him from either admitting or denying that his 1961 vital record on file at the DOH Hawaii is the one with a doctor’s signature and supporting hospital documentation?
forseti.
Only after we find out who really killed JFK we will confirm the birth of president Obama. Until that date this hunt will liger in that huge file of unsolved mysteries that you can watch on Cold Case every week
Sgt. York, I will proudly say I am one of those nutbags. You could not come up with a worse way to deal with the drug issue than what we are doing now. As American boys continue to die in Afghanistan, I offer you this:
Newsweek September 2006.
“NATO officials say the Taliban seems to be flush with cash, thanks to the guerrillas’ alliance with prosperous opium traffickers. The fighters are paid more than $5 a day—good money in Afghanistan, and at least twice what the new Afghan National Army’s 30,000 soldiers receive. It’s a bad sign, too, that a shortage of local police has led Karzai to approve a plan allowing local warlords—often traffickers themselves—to rebuild their private armies. U.N. officials have spent the past three years trying to disband Afghanistan’s irregular militias, which are accused of widespread human-rights abuses. Now the warlords can rearm with the government’s blessing. Afghanistan is “unfortunately well on its way” to becoming a “narco-state,” NATO’s supreme commander, Marine Gen. Jim Jones, said before Congress last week.”
This lady is completely ignorant and nuts. Did she think her fundie President Dubya was elected fairly?! LMAO! She talks about getting back to the Constitution, etc etc but then forcing everyone to follow her mythical, 2000 year old book. No thanks, old bag. Your time is long gone.
Ignorant? Interesting argument considering this country was founded by men who held the same “mythical” beliefs. I guess we can assume then we are a nation founded and standing on the shoulders of ignorant men.
The ten-month investigation of the Warren Commission of 1963–1964, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) of 1976–1979, and other government investigations concluded that the President was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, who himself was murdered before he could stand trial, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_assasination.
That being said, you cannot compare the Kennedy assassination to Obama’s NBC issues. Unlike the government’s investigation into the assassination to get to the truth, to date, not one single solitary person in the three branches of government, or anyone else for that matter, has bothered to look at Obama’s 1961 vital record. They have instead just chosen to accept his posted 2007 Certification of Live Birth, a scant summary of that 1961 vital record, as conclusive evidence of his alleged birthplace simply because it reads -“Born in Hawaii.” It reminds me of someone who tells another, “Because I say so.”