*Is A False BC Considered Lying To Gain High Office?*

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Okay folks gather around.
2. We need to air out this dirty laundry.
3. If a person, who ever they are, wants to run for the office of *The Presidency*, and can *NOT* produce the proof that is required to *OBTAIN* said office, is it lying to *OBTAIN* this office, and then is it indeed stealing that office?
4. And is thief wrong as it pertains to *OBTAINING* high office.
5. The people voted right?
6. Is it *made legal* after the fact seeing the people voted for a thief in this situation, where Obama was not legally eligible?
7. So does the vote infact nullify the thieft?
8. And if the courts didn't do what was right, in obtaining formal documentation of Obama's lack of a *real birth certificate*, can it be said, that *the courts* are the ones at fault here, and not Obama's lying to get into office?
9. These questions need to be adressed.
10. I think I know the answers to these questions, but what say you people first?

EDIT: I forgot to add, *checkmate*, one and done again!
EDIT #2: When you are *CWN* all you have to do is ask the questions, and then everyone just falls over, *checkmate2*


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[kwc57]

Cwn > View attachment 12766

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Cwn > View attachment 12766

1. These are serious questions.
2. If you have nothing to say to support either side, then you can, *step off*!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[kwc57]

Sorry bout that,

Cwn > View attachment 12766

1. These are serious questions.
2. If you have nothing to say to support either side, then you can, *step off*!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Your a fucking moron. Shut the fuck up.

 

[bodecea]

Sorry bout that,

Cwn > View attachment 12766

1. These are serious questions.
2. If you have nothing to say to support either side, then you can, *step off*!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Your a fucking moron. Shut the fuck up.

No, let him keep on letting that Texas logic shine.

 

[jgarden]

Conservative Forum Strategy 101

1. put liberals on the defensive by throwing out "accusations" that have no basis in fact - the more outrageous the better

2. sit back and watch the liberals scurrying around trying to refute them

3. dispute and question the validity of any data source liberal's cite

4 make no attempt to provide liberals with reliable sources or references

5. don't bother reading liberal responses - responding to facts is a "fools'" game for liberals

6. repeat the same argument over and over again (researching and debating are not conservative strong points)

7. before the liberals totally "debunk" the original thread, conservatives should post another thread(s) thereby starting the whole process all over again

- Poll: *Is A False BC Considered Lying To Gain High Office?*
chesswarsnow

- *Could Obama Have A Fake Birth Certificate Made?*
chesswarsnow

- *Will Supreme Court Install McCain/Palin After Obama/Biden Get Canned This Year?*
chesswarsnow

8. "flooding" the forum with "right-wing" threads is the easiest way of setting the agenda

9. liberals will always look for signs of "intelligent life" in conservative threads - where none exists

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Sorry bout that,

Cwn > View attachment 12766

1. These are serious questions.
2. If you have nothing to say to support either side, then you can, *step off*!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Your a fucking moron. Shut the fuck up.

1. Oh I am so hurt, and thrown aback by your statements!!!!!
2. NOT!!!!!!,.....lol!!!!!!!!
3. My topic is more viable than you have garnered up in thought in twenty years.
4. You live in a *pawn reality*.
5. Try and keep up, *pawn*.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,



1. Okay I'm going to make this easy for you people.
2. Lets say a small black boy from south central LA calif. wandered into a small quickie mart, and stole a candy bar, or some candycorn, and the shop owner saw him do it, and said to the small black boy, "Hey stop thief I want my stuff you stuffed down in your pants."
3. The little black boy says he didn't steal the candycorn.
4. The cops show up and ask the shop keeper what evidence do you have the little black boy stole anything from your store?
5. The shop keeper says, its still in his pants, and also I have him on tape stealing it.
6. The boy keeps saying he didn't steal the candycorn.
7. Is this thieft?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[gekaap]

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Sorry bout that,


1. Okay folks gather around.
2. We need to air out this dirty laundry.
3. If a person, who ever they are, wants to run for the office of *The Presidency*, and can *NOT* produce the proof that is required to *OBTAIN* said office, is it lying to *OBTAIN* this office, and then is it indeed stealing that office?
4. And is thief wrong as it pertains to *OBTAINING* high office.
5. The people voted right?
6. Is it *made legal* after the fact seeing the people voted for a thief in this situation, where Obama was not legally eligible?
7. So does the vote infact nullify the thieft?
8. And if the courts didn't do what was right, in obtaining formal documentation of Obama's lack of a *real birth certificate*, can it be said, that *the courts* are the ones at fault here, and not Obama's lying to get into office?
9. These questions need to be adressed.
10. I think I know the answers to these questions, but what say you people first?

EDIT: I forgot to add, *checkmate*, one and done again!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I know we don't have a document, such as a birth certificate to prove Obama was born in the USA.

However....do we have a document to prove he wasn't?


I think he was born in the USA and the reason he hides his birth certificate is because during the time he was born there was a practice of recording people's religion and since his father was Muslim it most likely says Muslim on it. Obama and the media outlets that supported his candidacy knew that fact was political suicide and decided not to release it or pursue the story.

I could be wrong.

EDIT: Oh and I didn't vote as your poll has no viable option for me.

 

[Sallow]

Sorry 'bout that.

1. This is the first US president asked to Present a birth certificate. Wonder why that is?
2. This is the first black US president.
3. The first Catholic US president was called the "Manchurian" candidate by the birchers.
4. The first Catholic US president was called a Communist by the birchers.
5. The first Catholic US president was called a pawn of the Pope by the birchers.
6. It seems that the right wants to impose a political and religious litmus test on Candidates for the US presidency. That of course is Unconstitutional.
7. The right had no problem whatsoever with running a foreign born candidate for the office of US President.

Regards,
Sallow of the Wolf's den.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Sorry bout that,


1. Okay folks gather around.
2. We need to air out this dirty laundry.
3. If a person, who ever they are, wants to run for the office of *The Presidency*, and can *NOT* produce the proof that is required to *OBTAIN* said office, is it lying to *OBTAIN* this office, and then is it indeed stealing that office?
4. And is thief wrong as it pertains to *OBTAINING* high office.
5. The people voted right?
6. Is it *made legal* after the fact seeing the people voted for a thief in this situation, where Obama was not legally eligible?
7. So does the vote infact nullify the thieft?
8. And if the courts didn't do what was right, in obtaining formal documentation of Obama's lack of a *real birth certificate*, can it be said, that *the courts* are the ones at fault here, and not Obama's lying to get into office?
9. These questions need to be adressed.
10. I think I know the answers to these questions, but what say you people first?

EDIT: I forgot to add, *checkmate*, one and done again!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I know we don't have a document, such as a birth certificate to prove Obama was born in the USA.

However....do we have a document to prove he wasn't?


I think he was born in the USA and the reason he hides his birth certificate is because during the time he was born there was a practice of recording people's religion and since his father was Muslim it most likely says Muslim on it. Obama and the media outlets that supported his candidacy knew that fact was political suicide and decided not to release it or pursue the story.

I could be wrong.

EDIT: Oh and I didn't vote as your poll has no viable option for me.

Sure we do. It's right here...

http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/obama-bc.jpg

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Sorry bout that,


1. Okay folks gather around.
2. We need to air out this dirty laundry.
3. If a person, who ever they are, wants to run for the office of *The Presidency*, and can *NOT* produce the proof that is required to *OBTAIN* said office, is it lying to *OBTAIN* this office, and then is it indeed stealing that office?
4. And is thief wrong as it pertains to *OBTAINING* high office.
5. The people voted right?
6. Is it *made legal* after the fact seeing the people voted for a thief in this situation, where Obama was not legally eligible?
7. So does the vote infact nullify the thieft?
8. And if the courts didn't do what was right, in obtaining formal documentation of Obama's lack of a *real birth certificate*, can it be said, that *the courts* are the ones at fault here, and not Obama's lying to get into office?
9. These questions need to be adressed.
10. I think I know the answers to these questions, but what say you people first?

EDIT: I forgot to add, *checkmate*, one and done again!


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I know we don't have a document, such as a birth certificate to prove Obama was born in the USA.

However....do we have a document to prove he wasn't?


I think he was born in the USA and the reason he hides his birth certificate is because during the time he was born there was a practice of recording people's religion and since his father was Muslim it most likely says Muslim on it. Obama and the media outlets that supported his candidacy knew that fact was political suicide and decided not to release it or pursue the story.

I could be wrong.

EDIT: Oh and I didn't vote as your poll has no viable option for me.

1. This notion amuzes me, that he indeed has a BC, but he along with the liberal media decided not to use it for grounds it would embarass him to much that it would end all possibility of getting elected.
2. In a way you are saying you think he did infact lie. at least it appears that way to you, right?
3. But it was a good lie.
4. If its indeed only that he is ashamed it says his fathers a muslim, then thats fine, we don't want to know that either, and its perfectly reasonable to lie, in the face of that.
5. So if indeed it was as you say, a *good lie* then thats okay, its *all good* then?
6. The liberal media is off the hook, the courts are off the hook, and Obama is off the hook, am I right?
7. *Its All Good*.
8. Does this about sum up your position?
9. And what question on the poll would you of prefered?
10. I thought I covered a broad spectrum???


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Sorry bout that,


1. Okay folks gather around.
2. We need to air out this dirty laundry.
3. If a person, who ever they are, wants to run for the office of *The Presidency*, and can *NOT* produce the proof that is required to *OBTAIN* said office, is it lying to *OBTAIN* this office, and then is it indeed stealing that office?
4. And is thief wrong as it pertains to *OBTAINING* high office.
5. The people voted right?
6. Is it *made legal* after the fact seeing the people voted for a thief in this situation, where Obama was not legally eligible?
7. So does the vote infact nullify the thieft?
8. And if the courts didn't do what was right, in obtaining formal documentation of Obama's lack of a *real birth certificate*, can it be said, that *the courts* are the ones at fault here, and not Obama's lying to get into office?
9. These questions need to be adressed.
10. I think I know the answers to these questions, but what say you people first?

EDIT: I forgot to add, *checkmate*, one and done again!
EDIT #2: When you are *CWN* all you have to do is ask the questions, and then everyone just falls over, *checkmate2*


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Isn't Wapner about to start? You better hurry..

 

[whitehall]

Don't you see? It's not about lying. Being born in the USA is a Constitutional requirement for the job. If Obama lied about his birthplace he is not qualified to be president.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Sorry 'bout that.

1. This is the first US president asked to Present a birth certificate. Wonder why that is?
2. This is the first black US president.
3. The first Catholic US president was called the "Manchurian" candidate by the birchers.
4. The first Catholic US president was called a Communist by the birchers.
5. The first Catholic US president was called a pawn of the Pope by the birchers.
6. It seems that the right wants to impose a political and religious litmus test on Candidates for the US presidency. That of course is Unconstitutional.
7. The right had no problem whatsoever with running a foreign born candidate for the office of US President.

Regards,
Sallow of the Wolf's den.

1. Here's the kicker old chap.
2. You can not even get a *passport* without a birth certificate.
3. So, in order to aquire a *passport* everyone in America has to provide a birth certificate*.
4. When you apply to run for the office of *The Presidency* there are certain documents needed to supply in order to get on *The Presidential Ballot*, which would include a birth certificate.
5. Supply a *CLOB* is not the same as a birth certificate.
6. McCain is eligible, he comes from two American citizens, what do you think seeing he was born in Panama, he is a Panamanian?
7. Panama wouldn't have it, they have strict laws forbiding anyone born of two other nationalities being natural born citizens to thier country, simply because thier child was born in thier lands.
8. Thats how it is in most countries, and should be the same here, but the laws are screwed up, and the courts are too weak and dishonest and without integrity to fix the laws.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[jillian]

Isn't Wapner about to start? You better hurry..

the loon is in serious need of meds.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know.........it costs around 50,000 to file as a Presidential candidate.

I'm pretty sure that before they took your money they would vet you properly.

Crap Whore Sow is another one of them Orly Taitz lobotomized birthers.

 

[Mr Natural]

Is the constant, unnecesary, and incorrect use of numbered lists a sign of mental retardation?

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Don't you see? It's not about lying. Being born in the USA is a Constitutional requirement for the job. If Obama lied about his birthplace he is not qualified to be president.

1. THANK YOU!!!!!!!
2. SOME ONE DOES INDEED GET *IT*.
3. I WAS ABOUT TO THROW OUT THE WHOLE LOT OF YOU GUYS INTO THE DUST BIN.
4. I WAS GETTING WORRIED, BUT IT SEEMS MY WORRIES WERE NOT NEEDED.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas