Idiocracy in action [Archive]

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 5th 10, 10:17 PM

On Jul 4, 11:37*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 4, 11:44*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:

> > You can say "most people have their originals" all you want, but
> > you're just blathering. It simply isn't true.
>
> And it is true, even more true for African American families
> to keep birth certificates, death certificates, etc.

LOL!

No, it appears that Jews have the corner on this market.

> not the point, you barged in late on an ongoing conversation,
> transparency is "NOT HIDING ANYTHING"
> when you finally grasp that point we can keep- on talking.
> But i doubt that you are intellectually up to the task

But you haven't proved that Obama *is* hiding anything.

You have brainlessly *speculated* over and over (and over and over)
that he has. That's it.

> > Name a half-truth. You can't and you won't.

"Granny" sure called this one. LOL!

> > > I have been here a long time, talked a lot of audio
>
> > That complete evades the question, not surprisingly. Why are you
> > discussing Obama's birth certificate in an audio group?
>
> why are your very first posts on an audio group all about Obama's BC.
> Why haven't you ever written anything at all about audio?
> your persona just arrived here, supposedly to talk audio.

You brought this "point" up, Clyde.

Slowly back away from the bottle, take a deep breath, (try to) think,
and restate your position. LOL!

> You are a repetitive idot, repeating the same mantras over and over
> again,
> 'with no cpapcity to understand the concept of trans[arancy which is
> NOT HIDING ANYTHING

And again, you haven't proven anything IS BEING HIDDEN.

> byeee, you can talk to yourself from now on,
> or anyone else who wants to talk with you,
> try Boon, you can have a nice two way with him.
> I don't have time for self deluding idiots like you.
> byeee!

Ah, the run-and-hide technique to losing an argument.

More evidence that 2pid has stolen Clyde's password.

Clyde Slick

July 6th 10, 12:29 AM

On Jul 5, 5:17*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 11:37*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > On Jul 4, 11:44*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > You can say "most people have their originals" all you want, but
> > > you're just blathering. It simply isn't true.
>
> > And it is true, even more true for African American families
> > to keep birth certificates, death certificates, etc.
>
> LOL!
>
> No, it appears that Jews have the corner on this market.
>
> > not the point, you barged in late on an ongoing conversation,
> > transparency is "NOT HIDING ANYTHING"
> > when you finally grasp that point we can keep- on talking.
> > But i doubt that you are intellectually up to the task
>
> But you haven't proved that Obama *is* hiding anything.
>
> You have brainlessly *speculated* over and over (and over and over)
> that he has. That's it.
>
> > > Name a half-truth. You can't and you won't.
>
> "Granny" sure called this one. LOL!
>
> > > > I have been here a long time, talked a lot of audio
>
> > > That complete evades the question, not surprisingly. Why are you
> > > discussing Obama's birth certificate in an audio group?
>
> > why are your very first posts on an audio group all about Obama's BC.
> > Why haven't you ever written anything at all about audio?
> > your persona just arrived here, supposedly to talk audio.
>
> You brought this "point" up, Clyde.
>
> Slowly back away from the bottle, take a deep breath, (try to) think,
> and restate your position. LOL!
>
> > You are a repetitive idot, repeating the same mantras over and over
> > again,
> > 'with no cpapcity to understand the concept of trans[arancy which is
> > NOT HIDING ANYTHING
>
> And again, you haven't proven anything IS BEING HIDDEN.
>
> > byeee, you can talk to yourself from now on,
> > or anyone else who wants to talk with you,
> > try Boon, you can have a nice two way with him.
> > I don't have time for self deluding idiots like you.
> > byeee!
>
> Ah, the run-and-hide technique to losing an argument.
>
> More evidence that 2pid has stolen Clyde's password.

LOL! All i was getting from granny is the restatement of the same old
same old,
over and over. No point in going around in endless circles,
Granny can chase her tail with youse guys...

Iarnrod

July 6th 10, 12:45 AM

On Jul 5, 5:29*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 5:17*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 4, 11:37*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 4, 11:44*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > You can say "most people have their originals" all you want, but
> > > > you're just blathering. It simply isn't true.
>
> > > And it is true, even more true for African American families
> > > to keepbirthcertificates, death certificates, etc.
>
> > LOL!
>
> > No, it appears that Jews have the corner on this market.
>
> > > not the point, you barged in late on an ongoing conversation,
> > > transparency is "NOT HIDING ANYTHING"
> > > when you finally grasp that point we can keep- on talking.
> > > But i doubt that you are intellectually up to the task
>
> > But you haven't proved that Obama *is* hiding anything.
>
> > You have brainlessly *speculated* over and over (and over and over)
> > that he has. That's it.
>
> > > > Name a half-truth. You can't and you won't.
>
> > "Granny" sure called this one. LOL!
>
> > > > > I have been here a long time, talked a lot of audio
>
> > > > That complete evades the question, not surprisingly. Why are you
> > > > discussing Obama'sbirthcertificatein an audio group?
>
> > > why are your very first posts on an audio group all about Obama's BC.
> > > Why haven't you ever written anything at all about audio?
> > > your persona just arrived here, supposedly to talk audio.
>
> > You brought this "point" up, Clyde.
>
> > Slowly back away from the bottle, take a deep breath, (try to) think,
> > and restate your position. LOL!
>
> > > You are a repetitive idot, repeating the same mantras over and over
> > > again,
> > > 'with no cpapcity to understand the concept of trans[arancy which is
> > > NOT HIDING ANYTHING
>
> > And again, you haven't proven anything IS BEING HIDDEN.
>
> > > byeee, you can talk to yourself from now on,
> > > or anyone else who wants to talk with you,
> > > try Boon, you can have a nice two way with him.
> > > I don't have time for self deluding idiots like you.
> > > byeee!
>
> > Ah, the run-and-hide technique to losing an argument.
>
> > More evidence that 2pid has stolen Clyde's password.
>
> LOL! All i was getting from granny is the restatement of the same old
> same old,
> over and over.

So in other words, everyone kicks your stupid kooker ass here? Mmmmmm-
kay, fine by me.

I proved you wrong. All you had was baseless opinion and misinformed
polemic. Obama becomes the first president in US history ever to
release his birth certificate and you carry on as though he didn't. No
wonder people call you crazy.

> No point in going around in endless circles,
> Granny can chase her tail with youse guys...

Are you done letting em kick your stupid ass then? I got more if
you're willing...

You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 6th 10, 12:51 AM

On Jul 5, 6:45*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 5:29*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:

> > On Jul 5, 5:17*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 4, 11:37*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 4, 11:44*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > You can say "most people have their originals" all you want, but
> > > > > you're just blathering. It simply isn't true.
>
> > > > And it is true, even more true for African American families
> > > > to keepbirthcertificates, death certificates, etc.
>
> > > LOL!
>
> > > No, it appears that Jews have the corner on this market.
>
> > > > not the point, you barged in late on an ongoing conversation,
> > > > transparency is "NOT HIDING ANYTHING"
> > > > when you finally grasp that point we can keep- on talking.
> > > > But i doubt that you are intellectually up to the task
>
> > > But you haven't proved that Obama *is* hiding anything.
>
> > > You have brainlessly *speculated* over and over (and over and over)
> > > that he has. That's it.
>
> > > > > Name a half-truth. You can't and you won't.
>
> > > "Granny" sure called this one. LOL!
>
> > > > > > I have been here a long time, talked a lot of audio
>
> > > > > That complete evades the question, not surprisingly. Why are you
> > > > > discussing Obama'sbirthcertificatein an audio group?
>
> > > > why are your very first posts on an audio group all about Obama's BC.
> > > > Why haven't you ever written anything at all about audio?
> > > > your persona just arrived here, supposedly to talk audio.
>
> > > You brought this "point" up, Clyde.
>
> > > Slowly back away from the bottle, take a deep breath, (try to) think,
> > > and restate your position. LOL!
>
> > > > You are a repetitive idot, repeating the same mantras over and over
> > > > again,
> > > > 'with no cpapcity to understand the concept of trans[arancy which is
> > > > NOT HIDING ANYTHING
>
> > > And again, you haven't proven anything IS BEING HIDDEN.
>
> > > > byeee, you can talk to yourself from now on,
> > > > or anyone else who wants to talk with you,
> > > > try Boon, you can have a nice two way with him.
> > > > I don't have time for self deluding idiots like you.
> > > > byeee!
>
> > > Ah, the run-and-hide technique to losing an argument.
>
> > > More evidence that 2pid has stolen Clyde's password.
>
> > LOL! All i was getting from granny is the restatement of the same old
> > same old,
> > over and over.

While Clyde kept turning over new ground. LOL!

> So in other words, everyone kicks your stupid kooker ass here? Mmmmmm-
> kay, fine by me.
>
> I proved you wrong. All you had was baseless opinion and misinformed
> polemic. Obama becomes the first president in US history ever to
> release his birth certificate and you carry on as though he didn't. No
> wonder people call you crazy.
>
> > No point in going around in endless circles,
> > Granny can chase her tail with youse guys...

Except that "Granny" seems to be basing her arguments in fact, and
your 'arguments' are a little short in that department.

> Are you done letting em kick your stupid ass then? I got more if
> you're willing...
>
> You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.

Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.

You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
the CIA. It says so right on his birth certificate, right next to
where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
if he'd only release it...

Clyde Slick

July 6th 10, 06:16 AM

On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:

> > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> the CIA. It says so right on his birth certificate, right next to
> where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> if he'd only release it...

I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 6th 10, 06:35 AM

On Jul 6, 12:16*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > the CIA. It says so right on his birth certificate, right next to
> > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > if he'd only release it...
>
> I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.

Oh, how clever of you!

You're right. I've seen him on TV and he's quite opaque.

Iarnrod

July 6th 10, 01:35 PM

On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > if he'd only release it...
>
> I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.

And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
more so than any previous candidate for president ever.

Clyde Slick

July 6th 10, 02:30 PM

On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> more so than any previous candidate for president ever.

you still don't get what transparency means.
as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
case.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 6th 10, 03:36 PM

On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> you still don't get what transparency means.

Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
account. You're making Clyde look dumb.

> as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> case.

LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.

Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
10 Days Before an Election". No ****.

He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.

You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?

You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.

Jenn[_2_]

July 6th 10, 04:37 PM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
> >
> > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
> >
> > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > if he'd only release it...
> >
> > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
> >
> > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> you still don't get what transparency means.
> as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> case.

What problems did he present?

Boon[_2_]

July 6th 10, 04:40 PM

On Jul 6, 9:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > case.
>
> LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.

Besides, the Supreme Court dismissed the birther argument three times.
The third time they didn't even formally look at it because it was so
lacking in hard evidence.

And if his birth certificate had said "Muslim," so what? It was a well-
known fact that Obama's father was a Muslim, albeit a non-practicing
one. Add that to the fact that Obama has made countless statements
about his administration being tolerant and welcoming toward Islam,
both in and out of the US, and you've run out of conspiracies.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 04:04 AM

On Jul 6, 10:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > case.
>
> LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.

my issue has nothing to do with his citizenship.
It has to do with his lack of transparency. He has
refused to release the document, acting like'
he has something he wants hidden, If he wants to be
transparent, and live up to his self promoting hype,
he should release it.
I don't know what is on it, i don;t know what he is intentionally
hiding, if anything, but i want him to stop
hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 04:09 AM

On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > case.
>
> What problems did he present?

originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
successfully resolved.
that is why a bc became an issue for him
when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.

In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
\I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born citizen, and that Obama
is.
See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
Republic of Panama, not
in the US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
active US servicemn and
his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
abroad, in the repblic of
Panama.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 04:10 AM

On Jul 6, 11:40*am, Boon > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 9:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.. He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
>
> > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> > certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
>
> Besides, the Supreme Court dismissed the birther argument three times.
> The third time they didn't even formally look at it because it was so
> lacking in hard evidence.
>
> And if his birth certificate had said "Muslim," so what? It was a well-
> known fact that Obama's father was a Muslim, albeit a non-practicing
> one. Add that to the fact that Obama has made countless statements
> about his administration being tolerant and welcoming toward Islam,
> both in and out of the US, and you've run out of conspiracies.

that's how i feel, So what if it said that.?

Jenn[_2_]

July 7th 10, 04:42 AM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On Jul 6, 11:40*am, Boon > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 9:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> >
> >
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to
> > > > > > > > Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon,
> > > > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
> >
> > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
> >
> > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.
> > > > > > > He's
> > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd
> > > > > > > see,
> > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
> >
> > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
> >
> > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
> >
> > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> >
> > > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
> >
> > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > case.
> >
> > > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
> >
> > > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
> >
> > > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
> >
> > > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> > > certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
> >
> > > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
> >
> > Besides, the Supreme Court dismissed the birther argument three times.
> > The third time they didn't even formally look at it because it was so
> > lacking in hard evidence.
> >
> > And if his birth certificate had said "Muslim," so what? It was a well-
> > known fact that Obama's father was a Muslim, albeit a non-practicing
> > one. Add that to the fact that Obama has made countless statements
> > about his administration being tolerant and welcoming toward Islam,
> > both in and out of the US, and you've run out of conspiracies.
>
> that's how i feel, So what if it said that.?

NOTHING. That's the point! He has nothing to hide, so why do you
insist on believing that he's hiding something?

Jenn[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:25 AM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to
> > > > > > > Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon,
> > > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
> >
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
> >
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.
> > > > > > He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd
> > > > > > see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
> >
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
> >
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
> >
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
> >
> > What problems did he present?
>
> originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> successfully resolved.
> that is why a bc became an issue for him
> when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.

HE didn't "present a problem". Some idiots falsely accused him of
something. Then in spite of the fact that he disproved the false
allegations, some other people insist that should have/could have done
more. It's never enough.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 05:30 AM

On Jul 6, 10:10*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:

> that's how i feel,

You can also "feel" the moon is made of green cheese.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 05:32 AM

On Jul 6, 10:04*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 10:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.. He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
>
> > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> > certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
>
> my issue has nothing to do with his citizenship.
> It has to do with his lack of transparency. He has
> refused to release the document, acting like'
> he has something he wants hidden, If he wants to be
> transparent, and live up to his self promoting hype,
> he should release it.

He did.

Do you feel that if asked he should release copies of his driver's
license and his social security card, or that is he doesn't, he isn't
being "transparent"?

> I don't know what is on it, i don;t know what he is intentionally
> hiding, if anything, but i want him to stop

What could be "hidden"?

> hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.

You are either playing dumb or you really are dumb. Which is it?

Jenn[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:34 AM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> i want him to stop
> hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.

You CHOOSE to BELIEVE that he is hiding something.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 05:35 AM

On Jul 6, 10:09*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
> > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.. He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
>
> > What problems did he present?
>
> originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> successfully resolved.
> that is why a bc became an issue for him
> when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.

Oh, so you agree: case closed.

> In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
> \I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born *citizen, and that Obama
> is.
> See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
> Republic of Panama, not
> in the *US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
> active US servicemn and
> his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
> abroad, in the repblic of
> Panama.

Many children of servicepeople are born outside US territory, in
Germany, in Korea, in Japan, and hundreds of other places.

It's about as much of an 'issue' as Obama's was except the Dems aren't
as conspiracy prone as their counterparts.

Dems are smarter than that.

Boon[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:42 AM

On Jul 6, 10:10*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 11:40*am, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 9:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> > > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > case.
>
> > > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> > > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> > > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> > > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on his birth
> > > certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> > > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
>
> > Besides, the Supreme Court dismissed the birther argument three times.
> > The third time they didn't even formally look at it because it was so
> > lacking in hard evidence.
>
> > And if his birth certificate had said "Muslim," so what? It was a well-
> > known fact that Obama's father was a Muslim, albeit a non-practicing
> > one. Add that to the fact that Obama has made countless statements
> > about his administration being tolerant and welcoming toward Islam,
> > both in and out of the US, and you've run out of conspiracies.
>
> that's how i feel, So what if it said that.?

Is your main fear that it states he is a Muslim?

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 05:42 AM

On Jul 7, 12:34*am, Jenn > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > i want him to stop
> > hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.
>
> You CHOOSE to BELIEVE that he is hiding something.

If he provided all of the information, we would know for sure. T,the
fact is this, not all of the
information available on the original bc has been provided.
that is not a matter of what anyone "chooses" to believe.
it is fact.

Boon[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:44 AM

On Jul 6, 11:35*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 10:09*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > In article
> > > >,
> > > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > case.
>
> > > What problems did he present?
>
> > originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> > successfully resolved.
> > that is why a bc became an issue for him
> > when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.
>
> Oh, so you agree: case closed.
>
> > In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
> > \I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born *citizen, and that Obama
> > is.
> > See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
> > Republic of Panama, not
> > in the *US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
> > active US servicemn and
> > his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
> > abroad, in the repblic of
> > Panama.
>
> Many children of servicepeople are born outside US territory, in
> Germany, in Korea, in Japan, and hundreds of other places.
>
> It's about as much of an 'issue' as Obama's was except the Dems aren't
> as conspiracy prone as their counterparts.
>
> Dems are smarter than that.

If John McCain was a Democrat AND he won the election AND he was
black, you'd better believe they would be making a big deal about his
being born in the Panama Canal Zone.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 05:45 AM

On Jul 7, 12:35*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 10:09*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > In article
> > > >,
> > > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > case.
>
> > > What problems did he present?
>
> > originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> > successfully resolved.
> > that is why a bc became an issue for him
> > when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.
>
> Oh, so you agree: case closed.
>
> > In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
> > \I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born *citizen, and that Obama
> > is.
> > See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
> > Republic of Panama, not
> > in the *US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
> > active US servicemn and
> > his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
> > abroad, in the repblic of
> > Panama.
>
> Many children of servicepeople are born outside US territory, in
> Germany, in Korea, in Japan, and hundreds of other places.

Sure, you are absolutely correct, but are they natural born
and eligible to be President. Sure, they are citizens, but they were
not born
in the US..And, of course, there are many non-military children of
US citizens born abroad, are they eligible to be President?

> It's about as much of an 'issue' as Obama's was except the Dems aren't
> as conspiracy prone as their counterparts.
>

LOL!!!! Florida, 2000.

Jenn[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:46 AM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On Jul 7, 12:34*am, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> > > i want him to stop
> > > hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.
> >
> > You CHOOSE to BELIEVE that he is hiding something.
>
> If he provided all of the information, we would know for sure. T,the
> fact is this, not all of the
> information available on the original bc has been provided.

You don't know that! You CHOOSE to "know" it, for whatever reason.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 05:46 AM

On Jul 7, 12:30*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 10:10*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > that's how i feel,
>
> You can also "feel" the moon is made of green cheese.

and you can feel good about this administration

Boon[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:48 AM

On Jul 6, 11:45*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 12:35*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 10:09*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> > > > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > > case.
>
> > > > What problems did he present?
>
> > > originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> > > successfully resolved.
> > > that is why a bc became an issue for him
> > > when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.
>
> > Oh, so you agree: case closed.
>
> > > In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
> > > \I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born *citizen, and that Obama
> > > is.
> > > See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
> > > Republic of Panama, not
> > > in the *US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
> > > active US servicemn and
> > > his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
> > > abroad, in the repblic of
> > > Panama.
>
> > Many children of servicepeople are born outside US territory, in
> > Germany, in Korea, in Japan, and hundreds of other places.
>
> Sure, you are absolutely correct, but are they natural born
> and eligible to be President. Sure, they are citizens, but they were
> not born
> in the US..And, of course, there are many non-military children of
> US citizens born abroad, are they eligible to be President?
>
> > It's about as much of an 'issue' as Obama's was except the Dems aren't
> > as conspiracy prone as their counterparts.
>
> LOL!!!! Florida, 2000.

Really? You want to go THERE?

Boon[_2_]

July 7th 10, 05:52 AM

On Jul 6, 11:46*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 12:30*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 10:10*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > that's how i feel,
>
> > You can also "feel" the moon is made of green cheese.
>
> and you can feel good about this administration

Jehovah could show up on Earth, declare himself President of the
United States and solve all the world's problems and there'd still be
a bunch of people sitting on their front porches complaining about
that sumbitch in the White House.

Clyde Slick

July 7th 10, 04:58 PM

On Jul 7, 10:03*am, ScottW > wrote:

>
> Another, far more important issue, for discussion is Obama's
> treasonous act against Arizona. *He is using his office to aid and
> abett the breaking of law, and impeding the pursuit of justice and
> enforcement of laws for the purpose of allowing massive demographic
> changes to insure future democratic party empowerment. *He's doing so
> against the will and well-being of both present and future generations
> of American citizens.
> Obama should be impeached and Holder should be incarcerated for this
> crime.
>
> ScottW

I am certainly opposed to the suit against Arizona, but come on,
it is in no way a crime.
Holder should be replaced (not impeached) for other reasons, more
notably
about the Philadelphia voter intimidation case.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 06:36 PM

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 06:40 PM

On Jul 7, 9:03*am, ScottW > wrote:

> For reasons we can only speculate Obama has not given permission to
> release the "vital record" and thus has not lived up to his commitment
> of transparency.
>

Bull****. What information that is shown on your example is anybody's
business, or has anything to do with anything?

2pid, what's your social security number?

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 06:42 PM

On Jul 7, 9:03*am, ScottW > wrote:

> For a list of broken campaign promiseshttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-broken/

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2004/broken_promise.html

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 06:55 PM

On Jul 7, 10:58*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 10:03*am, ScottW > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Another, far more important issue, for discussion is Obama's
> > treasonous act against Arizona. *He is using his office to aid and
> > abett the breaking of law, and impeding the pursuit of justice and
> > enforcement of laws for the purpose of allowing massive demographic
> > changes to insure future democratic party empowerment. *He's doing so
> > against the will and well-being of both present and future generations
> > of American citizens.
> > Obama should be impeached and Holder should be incarcerated for this
> > crime.
>
> > ScottW
>
> I am certainly opposed to the suit against Arizona, but come on,
> it is in no way a crime.

Why would anybody be opposed to a suit to see if a law is
constitutional or not?

> Holder should be replaced (not impeached) for other reasons, more
> notably
> about the Philadelphia voter intimidation case.

As usual, when I Googled "Holder Voter Intimidation" all I got was
right-wing blogs. There was, however, an opinion piece in the WSJ from
somebody at the Heritage foundation. At least that was in the
legitimate press.

Oh well.

Jenn[_2_]

July 7th 10, 06:55 PM

In article
>,
"Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:

> On Jul 7, 10:58*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > On Jul 7, 10:03*am, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Another, far more important issue, for discussion is Obama's
> > > treasonous act against Arizona. *He is using his office to aid and
> > > abett the breaking of law, and impeding the pursuit of justice and
> > > enforcement of laws for the purpose of allowing massive demographic
> > > changes to insure future democratic party empowerment. *He's doing so
> > > against the will and well-being of both present and future generations
> > > of American citizens.
> > > Obama should be impeached and Holder should be incarcerated for this
> > > crime.
> >
> > > ScottW
> >
> > I am certainly opposed to the suit against Arizona, but come on,
> > it is in no way a crime.
>
> Why would anybody be opposed to a suit to see if a law is
> constitutional or not?
>
> > Holder should be replaced (not impeached) for other reasons, more
> > notably
> > about the Philadelphia voter intimidation case.
>
> As usual, when I Googled "Holder Voter Intimidation" all I got was
> right-wing blogs. There was, however, an opinion piece in the WSJ from
> somebody at the Heritage foundation. At least that was in the
> legitimate press.

Owned by Murdoch, of course.

>
> Oh well.

MiNe 109

July 7th 10, 07:09 PM

In article
>,
"Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:

> There was, however, an opinion piece in the WSJ from
> somebody at the Heritage foundation. At least that was in the
> legitimate press.
>
> Oh well.

The WSJ opinion section does not share the respect given the remainder
of the publication.

Stephen

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 07:12 PM

On Jul 7, 1:09*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> *"Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:
>
> > There was, however, an opinion piece in the WSJ from
> > somebody at the Heritage foundation. At least that was in the
> > legitimate press.
>
> > Oh well.
>
> The WSJ opinion section does not share the respect given the remainder
> of the publication.

It had three strikes against it:

1. It was an opinion piece.

2. It was written by somebody from the Heritage Foundation.

3. It was on the WSJ opinion page.

Umpire says, "And yer oughtta here!"

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 7th 10, 11:32 PM

On Jul 7, 2:26*pm, ScottW > wrote:

> If Arizona wins in court, and they (Obama administration) carry
> through with their threat to refuse to allow ICE to cooperate with Az.
> state and local law enforcement, continuing to impede enforcement in
> spite of the findings of the courts, will that be a crime IYO?

No. It will be a 'victory' for state's rights and they have no claim
to federal help.

Clyde Slick

July 8th 10, 02:28 AM

On Jul 7, 3:26*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 8:58*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 7, 10:03*am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > Another, far more important issue, for discussion is Obama's
> > > treasonous act against Arizona. *He is using his office to aid and
> > > abett the breaking of law, and impeding the pursuit of justice and
> > > enforcement of laws for the purpose of allowing massive demographic
> > > changes to insure future democratic party empowerment. *He's doing so
> > > against the will and well-being of both present and future generations
> > > of American citizens.
> > > Obama should be impeached and Holder should be incarcerated for this
> > > crime.
>
> > > ScottW
>
> > I am certainly opposed to the suit against Arizona, but come on,
> > it is in no way a crime.
>
> *His actions only difference with the Muslim Brotherhoods 100 year
> plan of cultural invasion is they do it within the scope of the
> current law.
> Obama is using the office of the president and the executive branch to
> outright impede enforcement of current law for the purpose of
> demographic (voter) advantages for the democrat party.
> How is that not a crime?
> If Arizona wins in court, and they (Obama administration) carry
> through with their threat to refuse to allow ICE to cooperate with Az.
> state and local law enforcement, continuing to impede enforcement in
> spite of the findings of the courts, will that be a crime IYO?
>
> ScottW

wrong, but not a crime

Clyde Slick

July 8th 10, 02:31 AM

On Jul 7, 6:32*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2:26*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > If Arizona wins in court, and they (Obama administration) carry
> > through with their threat to refuse to allow ICE to cooperate with Az.
> > state and local law enforcement, continuing to impede enforcement in
> > spite of the findings of the courts, will that be a crime IYO?
>
> No. It will be a 'victory' for state's rights and they have no claim
> to federal help.

the Feds can't win a suit against Arizona for enforcing it's state
law, and
Arizona can't win a suit against the Feds for the Feds NOT enforicng
its law

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 8th 10, 03:26 AM

On Jul 7, 8:31*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 6:32*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 7, 2:26*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > If Arizona wins in court, and they (Obama administration) carry
> > > through with their threat to refuse to allow ICE to cooperate with Az..
> > > state and local law enforcement, continuing to impede enforcement in
> > > spite of the findings of the courts, will that be a crime IYO?
>
> > No. It will be a 'victory' for state's rights and they have no claim
> > to federal help.
>
> the Feds can't win a suit against Arizona for enforcing it's state
> law,

(Unless it's found to be unconstitutional)

> and Arizona can't win a suit against the Feds for the Feds NOT enforicng
> its law

If Arizona wins it's on its own.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 04:15 AM

On Jul 6, 7:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> you still don't get what transparency means.

Yes I do. You do not. He already has been 100% more transparent than
any previous president in US history be cause he released his BC
proving he is a natural born citizen and became the only presidential
candidate ever to document his eligibility.

> as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> for which bc's were even an issue,

You're lying of course. Chester Arthur. Huge scandal. There was
question about whether FDR was actually born on Campobello. Of course
other candidates also faced scrutiny -- Romney, Goldwater, and of
course Panama Jack McCain.

> nor were they asked for, as in this
> case.

They weren't asked for in this case either except by you nutbags.
There was never any question that Obama was born in Hawaii. Yet Obama
proved it and still you nutbags pretend he still must show you his
papers! Too ****in' funny!

How come you only question the black guy?

Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
it, kook.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 04:17 AM

On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > if he'd only release it...
>
> I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.

And that's a lie because he of course is 100 more transparent than any
previous president.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 04:21 AM

On Jul 6, 9:04*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 10:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.. He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
>
> > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on hisbirth
> >certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
>
> my issue has nothing to do with his citizenship.
> It has to do with his lack of transparency.

That's a lie because he is patently more transparent than any previous
president in history.

> He has
> refused to release the document,

That is of course a lie.

Whaddaya think this is: http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg

He released it. Case is closed.

> acting like'
> he has something he wants hidden,

He is doing no such thing. He released it.

> If he wants to be
> transparent, and live up to his self promoting hype,
> he should release it.

He did.

> I don't know what is on it, i don;t know what he is intentionally
> hiding, if anything,

Nothing. He released what Hawaii gave him. Case closed. Your argument
is with Hawaii state law which protects all such documents. Even
yours.

> but i want him to stop
> hiding the document while he hypocritically claims to be transparent.

No, you want the black man out of the White House.

Clyde Slick

July 8th 10, 04:22 AM

On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 7:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> Yes I do. You do not. He already has been 100% more transparent than
> any previous president in US history be cause he released his BC
> proving he is a natural born citizen and became the only presidential
> candidate ever to document his eligibility.
>
> > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > for which bc's were even an issue,
>
> You're lying of course. Chester Arthur. Huge scandal. There was
> question about whether FDR was actually born on Campobello. Of course
> other candidates also faced scrutiny -- Romney, Goldwater, and of
> course Panama Jack McCain.
>

are you saying that bc's were requested and withheld? I did't
know that was true, if it is true.

> > nor were they asked for, as in this
> > case.
>
> They weren't asked for in this case either except by you nutbags.
> There was never any question that Obama was born in Hawaii. Yet Obama
> proved it and still you nutbags pretend he still must show you his
> papers! Too ****in' funny!
>

I want him to shoe it for other reasons, unrelated to his place of
birth.

> How come you only question the black guy?
>
I just questioned McCain, is he black?

> Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> it, kook.

no reason to suspect otherwise.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 04:22 AM

On Jul 6, 9:09*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 11:37*am, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
> > *Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35 am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51 pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.. He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
>
> > What problems did he present?
>
> originally, there was the question of where he was born, since
> successfully resolved.

No, there never was a question of where he was born. It has always
been well known he was born in Hawaii. Kooker rightard lies made up to
cause trouble don't create actual questions.

> that is why a bc became an issue for him
> when it wasn't an issue for anyone else.

No, that's a lie. It became an "issue" among birfers but not among the
sane.

>
> In reality, Mc Cain would have had a bigger problem than Obama.
> \I believe that Mc Cain IS NOT a natural born *citizen, and that Obama
> is.
> See, Mc Cain was supposedly born in a hopsital in the Panama City,
> Republic of Panama, not
> in the *US territory of the Canal Zone. Yes, he was the son of an
> active US servicemn and
> his parents were residents of the Canal Zone, but he was actually born
> abroad, in the repblic of
> Panama.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 04:23 AM

On Jul 6, 9:10*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 11:40*am, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 9:36*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 6, 8:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> > > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > > > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> > > Why not explain your particular definition, 2pid. And use your own
> > > account. You're making Clyde look dumb.
>
> > > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > > for which bc's were even an issue, nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > > case.
>
> > > LOL! Obama did not "present a problem". A certain group tried to
> > > create one and the dip****s of that group fell in line.
>
> > > Say, did you know the republicans have a "candidate's university" in
> > > Washington? They teach republican candidates how to run campaigns at
> > > it. One of the classes they give is called "How to File an Indictment
> > > 10 Days Before an Election". No ****.
>
> > > He was asked to prove he was a US citizen. He "transparently" provided
> > > incontrovertible proof of his US citizenship.
>
> > > You seem to 'think' there is some hidden data on hisbirth
> > >certificate. What do you suppose that is? Why is it important?
>
> > > You're full of speculation and **** and not much else.
>
> > Besides, the Supreme Court dismissed the birther argument three times.
> > The third time they didn't even formally look at it because it was so
> > lacking in hard evidence.
>
> > And if hisbirthcertificatehad said "Muslim," so what? It was a well-
> > known fact that Obama's father was a Muslim, albeit a non-practicing
> > one. Add that to the fact that Obama has made countless statements
> > about his administration being tolerant and welcoming toward Islam,
> > both in and out of the US, and you've run out of conspiracies.
>
> that's how i feel, So what if it said that.?

It cannot. Religion is not part of a birth certificate.

Jenn[_2_]

July 8th 10, 04:41 AM

In article
>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 7:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> >
> > > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to
> > > > > > > Pakistan in
> > > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon,
> > > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
> >
> > > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
> >
> > > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us.
> > > > > > He's
> > > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd
> > > > > > see,
> > > > > > if he'd only release it...
> >
> > > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
> >
> > > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
> >
> > > you still don't get what transparency means.
> >
> > Yes I do. You do not. He already has been 100% more transparent than
> > any previous president in US history be cause he released his BC
> > proving he is a natural born citizen and became the only presidential
> > candidate ever to document his eligibility.
> >
> > > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > > for which bc's were even an issue,
> >
> > You're lying of course. Chester Arthur. Huge scandal. There was
> > question about whether FDR was actually born on Campobello. Of course
> > other candidates also faced scrutiny -- Romney, Goldwater, and of
> > course Panama Jack McCain.
> >
>
> are you saying that bc's were requested and withheld? I did't
> know that was true, if it is true.
>
> > > nor were they asked for, as in this
> > > case.
> >
> > They weren't asked for in this case either except by you nutbags.
> > There was never any question that Obama was born in Hawaii. Yet Obama
> > proved it and still you nutbags pretend he still must show you his
> > papers! Too ****in' funny!
> >
>
> I want him to shoe it for other reasons, unrelated to his place of
> birth.
>
> > How come you only question the black guy?
> >
> I just questioned McCain, is he black?
>
> > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > it, kook.
>
> no reason to suspect otherwise.

And there's no reason to suspect that Obama was born outside the US.
But the nutters do anyway.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 8th 10, 07:51 AM

On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:

> > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > it, kook.
>
> no reason to suspect otherwise.

What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?

I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.

Clyde Slick

July 8th 10, 11:17 AM

On Jul 8, 2:51*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > > it, kook.
>
> > no reason to suspect otherwise.
>
> What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?
>

distrust over his lack of transparency, after promising transparency.
He must be hiding something to
break such a sacred campaign promise.

> I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.

I don't read any political blogs.

Iarnrod

July 8th 10, 01:26 PM

On Jul 8, 4:17*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2:51*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > > > it, kook.
>
> > > no reason to suspect otherwise.
>
> > What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?
>
> distrust over his lack of transparency,

But you have failed to show a lack of transparency while I have shown
he has more transparency than any previous president. EPIC FAIL. What
is the real reason?

> after promising transparency.
> He must be hiding something to
> break such a sacred campaign promise.

He is not doing any such thing. Try again, dearie.

> > I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.
>
> I don't read any political blogs.

Sounds like you barely read at all.

Boon[_2_]

July 8th 10, 04:26 PM

On Jul 7, 9:26*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 7, 8:31*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > On Jul 7, 6:32*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 7, 2:26*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > If Arizona wins in court, and they (Obama administration) carry
> > > > through with their threat to refuse to allow ICE to cooperate with Az.
> > > > state and local law enforcement, continuing to impede enforcement in
> > > > spite of the findings of the courts, will that be a crime IYO?
>
> > > No. It will be a 'victory' for state's rights and they have no claim
> > > to federal help.
>
> > the Feds can't win a suit against Arizona for enforcing it's state
> > law,
>
> (Unless it's found to be unconstitutional)
>
> > and Arizona can't win a suit against the Feds for the Feds NOT enforicng
> > its law
>
> If Arizona wins it's on its own.

Exactly. A state that goes against the federal government usually sees
a reduction in federal funding. It happened a decade ago when Kentucky
refused to enforce its marijuana laws since it improved the local
economies in the Eastern counties. The feds swooped down and said,
"Start busting thse pot farmers or we'll withhold all federal
funding."

The real question is whether or not Arizona can withstand such
penalties. Kentucky couldn't.

Boon[_2_]

July 8th 10, 04:28 PM

On Jul 7, 10:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 7:30*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 6, 8:35*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 5, 11:16*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 5, 7:51*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > You haven't yet gotten to the whole "how did he travel to Pakistan in
> > > > > > 1981" bull****, or the British dual citizenship crapola. C'mon, I've
> > > > > > been looking forward to fresh birther meat for a few weeks.
>
> > > > > Clyde is NOT a birther, he's a conspiracy theorist.
>
> > > > > You simply wouldn't believe the information he's hiding from us. He's
> > > > > a pro-Communist Al Queda frontman who used to do assassinations for
> > > > > the CIA. It says so right on hisbirthcertificate, right next to
> > > > > where his political affiliation is listed as "Socialist". You'd see,
> > > > > if he'd only release it...
>
> > > > I never said any such thing. I said he was not transparent.
>
> > > And that is of course a lie since he was transparent on this, much
> > > more so than any previous candidate for president ever.
>
> > you still don't get what transparency means.
>
> Yes I do. You do not. He already has been 100% more transparent than
> any previous president in US history be cause he released his BC
> proving he is a natural born citizen and became the only presidential
> candidate ever to document his eligibility.
>
> > as far as bc's, other presidents did not present problems
> > for which bc's were even an issue,
>
> You're lying of course. Chester Arthur. Huge scandal. There was
> question about whether FDR was actually born on Campobello. Of course
> other candidates also faced scrutiny -- Romney, Goldwater, and of
> course Panama Jack McCain.
>
> > nor were they asked for, as in this
> > case.
>
> They weren't asked for in this case either except by you nutbags.
> There was never any question that Obama was born in Hawaii. Yet Obama
> proved it and still you nutbags pretend he still must show you his
> papers! Too ****in' funny!
>
> How come you only question the black guy?
>
> Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> it, kook.

Exactly. Racism motivates the majority of anti-Obama sentiment in this
country. Racists have just gotten better at disguising their hate over
the years.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 8th 10, 07:22 PM

On Jul 8, 7:26*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 4:17*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > On Jul 8, 2:51*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > > > > it, kook.
>
> > > > no reason to suspect otherwise.
>
> > > What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?
>
> > distrust over his lack of transparency,
>
> But you have failed to show a lack of transparency while I have shown
> he has more transparency than any previous president. EPIC FAIL. What
> is the real reason?
>
> > after promising transparency.
> > He must be hiding something to
> > break such a sacred campaign promise.
>
> He is not doing any such thing. Try again, dearie.
>
> > > I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.
>
> > I don't read any political blogs.
>
> Sounds like you barely read at all.

Point to "Granny".

It's amusing to watch Clyde drive down the road of stupidity.

Boon[_2_]

July 9th 10, 03:12 AM

On Jul 8, 1:22*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Jul 8, 7:26*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 8, 4:17*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 8, 2:51*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > > > > > it, kook.
>
> > > > > no reason to suspect otherwise.
>
> > > > What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?
>
> > > distrust over his lack of transparency,
>
> > But you have failed to show a lack of transparency while I have shown
> > he has more transparency than any previous president. EPIC FAIL. What
> > is the real reason?
>
> > > after promising transparency.
> > > He must be hiding something to
> > > break such a sacred campaign promise.
>
> > He is not doing any such thing. Try again, dearie.
>
> > > > I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.
>
> > > I don't read any political blogs.
>
> > Sounds like you barely read at all.
>
> Point to "Granny".
>
> It's amusing to watch Clyde drive down the road of stupidity.

Until Scott shows up and runs him off the road, of course.

Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!

July 9th 10, 08:13 AM

On Jul 8, 9:12*pm, Boon > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 1:22*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 8, 7:26*am, Iarnrod > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 8, 4:17*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 8, 2:51*am, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Jul 7, 10:22*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 7, 11:15*pm, Iarnrod > wrote:
> > > > > > > Bush never proved he was born in the US. You just took his word for
> > > > > > > it, kook.
>
> > > > > > no reason to suspect otherwise.
>
> > > > > What "reason" can you give for "suspecting otherwise" with Obama?
>
> > > > distrust over his lack of transparency,
>
> > > But you have failed to show a lack of transparency while I have shown
> > > he has more transparency than any previous president. EPIC FAIL. What
> > > is the real reason?
>
> > > > after promising transparency.
> > > > He must be hiding something to
> > > > break such a sacred campaign promise.
>
> > > He is not doing any such thing. Try again, dearie.
>
> > > > > I mean other than right wing blogs, of course.
>
> > > > I don't read any political blogs.
>
> > > Sounds like you barely read at all.
>
> > Point to "Granny".
>
> > It's amusing to watch Clyde drive down the road of stupidity.
>
> Until Scott shows up and runs him off the road, of course.

Oh, you have to stay in the lanes?