WORST Political Leaders In History... NObama Will Be On The List!

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from gnome:

1. I strongly suggest you pull your head out of your ass. Being "sworn in" still doesn't alter the fact he's never provided actual proof of citizenship... it just got swept under the rug.

I tried to speak to you in a respectful manner, in deference to your age and your standing as a helpful member of the ET community. Let me now speak plainly. You're making a fool of yourself here. You've failed 3 times to speak to the fact that you have nothing but opinion and an almost religious belief that Obama is constitutionally ineligible to be POTUS. Why don't you man up]/b] and provide 3 fact-based points which support your black-helicopter theory that Obama's presidency signals the end of the free world. If you can't do that, go back to your area of core competency and leave the analysis to those of us who aren't so hysterical.

Putting Obama's name on the same list as Hitler and Idi Amin shows that you're a fucking moron. You may know something about monitors, but even a fucking moron can know something about monitors.

On Ignore.

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

can you please provide a link that shows where and when the high courts heard the eligibility issue and determined he was eligible under the law based on reviewing required documents firsthand?

The "issue" was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court via Leo C. Donofrio vs Nina Wells, the Secretary of State of New Jersey - - - not just over Obama's citizenship eligibility and name on the ballot, but Senator John McCain's and Roger Calero of the socialist labor party as well.

( In all of your rants regarding this subject, you have conveniently failed to mention that FACT as well. I guess McCain's and Calero's eligibility aren't of any interest to you either, eh? ).

The case was unsuccessful at the state level. At the Federal level Justice David Souter rejected it. It was resubmitted to Justice Clarence Thomas who then put it on the court's docket for private "conference" ( see attached document below).

4 of the 9 Justices are needed to vote to hear the case in full in order for an oral argument to be scheduled.

The "issue" was rejected due to lack of the votes needed to be heard. The Justices obviously felt that it did not have any merit.

End of story.

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

the evidence is enormous that obama is most likely not eligible to hold the office he was elected to. if he were white, he would have been forced to produce a long form birth certificate and a court ruling to show he never lost or always had natural born status. because the powers that be refuse to explore this issue beyond accepting a photoshopped fake certificate of birth plastered on obama's personal website and validated by obama's cronies, this now becomes a race issue. the powers that be are basically saying we can wipe our ass with the constitution because race relations and making history now trumps constitutional law.

This is a RACE issue?

Once again, you present totally ignorant "generalizations" without any basis in fact; just pure speculation on your part. If in fact this was a RACE issue then why did the Supreme Court Justices ALSO refuse to hear Mr. Donofrio's claim against Senator McCain and Roger Calero being U.S. citizens eligible for Presidential office?

Once again, you show how failed your logic is.

You really need to stop posting.
The more you post, the more you look like a total FOOL.

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

because the powers that be refuse to explore this issue beyond accepting a photoshopped fake certificate of birth plastered on obama's personal website and validated by obama's cronies, this now becomes a race issue.

Once again, your claims are proven to be WRONG.

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

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

it's absolutely a race issue at this point. only a total buffoon would say otherwise.

you gotta love the rationale of obama voters!

Once again, not one point or statement based in FACT by you.
Congratulations!

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

moving on, can the obamanites provide a link that shows where and when the high courts heard the eligibility issue and determined he was eligible under the law based on reviewing required documents firsthand as claimed? didn't think so.

Once again, you present "failed-logic" due to your total lack of understanding of how the High Court works.

It is NOT up to them to make a decision on a candidate's eligibility for President. But for some bizarre reason, you are unable to comprehend that fact.

I guess that if you think that you can keep presenting a question based in "failed-logic" . . . it is somehow a question with merit.

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

you might want to research who owns factcheck and their affiliation with you know who before making a bigger ass out of yourself. not exactly a non-biased source. and since when did private organizations begin doing document checking for top-secret clearance postions for the united states?

Yes, I am well aware who FactCheck is affiliated with, but at least they provided some photos ( with a raised State seal ) whereas you have PROVIDED ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, as usual.

By the way, since when does "Photo-Shop" allow one to re-create "raised" State seals?

And since when did the Supreme Court become the de-facto body to determine Presidential eligibility?

Keep posting.
Your racism continues to make you look like an even bigger FOOL.

 

[Landis82]

Typical rant by a RACIST.
No facts . . . just absurdity after absurdity.
Not surprising.

You were DONE as soon as I showed how absurd and ignorant your claim about the High Court being in THE de-facto position to determine a candidate's Presidential eligibility.

Have a nice day, Mr. RACIST.

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Mag Light:

a libtard/obamanite always goes to one of two wells when they are loosing an argument with a realist;

You consider yourself a REALIST?
That's funny . . . What FACTS in evidence have you presented in this thread?

 

[Landis82]

Quote from Landis82:


By the way, since when does "Photo-Shop" allow one to re-create "raised" State seals?

And since when did the Supreme Court become the de-facto body to determine Presidential eligibility?

Why is it that you avoided answering the above questions?

Do you suffer from ADD, or when you are shown to be totally incapable of supporting an argument with FACTS, you simply resort to posting "Obama Lover" posters?

How old are you?
Did you ever graduate from a 4 year college?
Still living with Mom, but with Internet access that allows you all sorts of "imaginary" friends?