Barack Obama unable to register for primaries as Alabama reviews his eligibility

Originally posted by Chickensalad
btw, the Democratic Oarty is in fact having theire own primary and Obama will NOt be on the ballot.

Do you have a source for that?

Originally posted by Chickensalad
reply to post by Kafternin

 

im sure it has more to do with the fact that "birther" in your sense, is used with a more condescending meaning. such as negro and "n*gger".

How is that a fact?
2nd

Originally posted by Chickensalad
in fact the senate defined "natural born citizen" in 2008 to clear up any questions about John McCain.

Source?

reply to post by TheRedneck


You're forgetting one teeny, tiny detail.

Wasn't it the Bush administration and particularly one Richard Cheney that worked tirelessly to expand the powers of the Presidential office? At one point, Cheney had MORE authority than Shrub.

Why weren't the good people of Alabama challenging Bush's legitimacy in 2000 and 2004? If they did, feel free to enlighten me. Otherwise, I believe that state is completely full of # and I won't shy away from saying it. The southern states are STILL run by ignoramuses that insist on pushing this legitimacy crap because they can't accept Obama as a president.

Originally posted by Chickensalad
btw, the Democratic Oarty is in fact having theire own primary and Obama will NOt be on the ballot.

Barack Obama won the NH primary.
Sorry.

THIS IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS A SOURCE FOR WHAT I JUST WROTE

Your turn. And your turn is going to require time travel so I am kind of excited.

Originally posted by Kafternin

Originally posted by Chickensalad
btw, the Democratic Oarty is in fact having theire own primary and Obama will NOt be on the ballot.

Barack Obama won the NH primary.
Sorry.

THIS IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS A SOURCE FOR WHAT I JUST WROTE

Your turn. And your turn is going to require time travel so I am kind of excited.

How many votes did Vermin Supreme get ?

I think he was the strongest candidate.

Yeah Obama is unable! Very unable!

Originally posted by Kafternin

Originally posted by Chickensalad
btw, the Democratic Oarty is in fact having theire own primary and Obama will NOt be on the ballot.

Barack Obama won the NH primary.
Sorry.

THIS IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS A SOURCE FOR WHAT I JUST WROTE

Your turn. And your turn is going to require time travel so I am kind of excited.

from the HuffingtonPost article:

Far fewer voters participated in the Democratic primary than the competitive GOP primary, which was also being held on Tuesday.

Do you think the low Democrat turnout is an indication of "former" Democrats that may be planning to vote Republican ?

Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

Just curious.

Obama won New Hampshire in the 2008 general election, but he lost the Democratic primary four years ago. Hillary Clinton's narrow defeat of Obama, a dramatic upset coming after Obama's victory in the Iowa caucuses, led to a protracted race for the Democratic nomination.

Was this a fluke ?

What impact could this have on this November's election ?

Just curious.

Originally posted by xuenchen
from the HuffingtonPost article:

Far fewer voters participated in the Democratic primary than the competitive GOP primary, which was also being held on Tuesday.

Do you think the low Democrat turnout is an indication of "former" Democrats that may be planning to vote Republican ?

Well I am no genius or anything but I am fairly certain the Democrats know who the nominee is going to be. There was no big rush to beat out anyone. There was no reason to vote for him at all really other than to show support.

Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

Just curious.

I would imagine it was because his name was the ONLY one to choose from on their side of the ticket.

Was this a fluke ?

What impact could this have on this November's election ?

Just curious.

edit on Jan-11-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)

Given he will be going up against Romney who lost to McCain who lost to Obama we can probably play that game all night.

reply to post by Kafternin

from my quote:
Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

Just curious.

I would imagine it was because his name was the ONLY one to choose from on their side of the ticket.

there were 14 names on the NH Dem primary ticket !

source

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Kafternin

 

from my quote:
Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

Just curious.

I would imagine it was because his name was the ONLY one to choose from on their side of the ticket.

there were 14 names on the NH Dem primary ticket !

source

One of which bears the name "Vermin Supreme."

Like I said.

reply to post by The Sword

You insinuate that we considered the Bush/Cheney administration as admirable. That is incorrect. I was not in favor of the Bush policies that began shortly after 9-11. I have vehemently opposed the Patriot Act as well as a number of those power grabs you mention.

But all that pales in comparison with Obama. He has out-spent Bush, out-sued Bush, and out-lied Bush.

Oh, and your feelings toward the South? Consider for a moment that they may be mutual.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by The Sword

You insinuate that we considered the Bush/Cheney administration as admirable. That is incorrect.

That is right, liberal Democrats voting him into his second term, right?
Liberal Democrats got McCain "I promise to continue everything Bush is doing" the nomination too, right?
When Republicans obviously brought the guy back in for a second go and tried to bring in another to do the same, it sounds empty to reject Bush now.

Sounds like you just might have to wait for another 4 years of Obama before all the liberal Democrats start pretending they never voted for Obama a second time.

Originally posted by Kafternin

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Kafternin

 

from my quote:
Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

Just curious.

I would imagine it was because his name was the ONLY one to choose from on their side of the ticket.

there were 14 names on the NH Dem primary ticket !

source

One of which bears the name "Vermin Supreme."

Like I said.

I understand Mr Supreme got 1% of the Democrat primary vote in N.H. !!

"My knida guy"

Originally posted by xuenchen

I understand Mr Supreme got 1% of the Democrat primary vote in N.H. !!

"My knida guy"

Don't get me wrong, I love truth in advertising.
Just something about those names all say to me that Democratic voters were pretty confident on this one.
That is just my opinion though. I could be way off.

Another reason I thought was Alex Keaton. I really do not know how things like this stack up in the past for Democrats. They usually seem a little more passive and harder to motivate when it comes to politics. Republicans are usually nerds. I really do not mean nerd as a bad thing either, just a different thing. They enjoy this stuff way more.
That is also just my opinion.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I doubt this will have much impact on the final outcome of the Presidential race (unfortunately). What it does do is present a message to a sitting President that literally sued Alabama in court over an attempt to do his job after he refused to do it.

'King' Obama apparently has some very warped ideas about how the US works. He seems to think:

• He gets to unilaterally decide which laws he enforces
  
• He gets to decide which companies succeed and which fail
  
• He gets to tell states which laws they will and will not enforce
  
• He can do whatever he chooses without Congressional involvement
  
• He has carte blanche to spend taxpayer contributions however he chooses
  
• He has no obligation to follow any laws
  
• His words alone are evidence of facts

... and I vehemently disagree with all of the above.

As a proud citizen of Alabama, I wholeheartedly support this message we are sending,

What message is that Red?

That even Moderators can post laundry lists that have no bearing on the OP?

That when one political party disagrees with another in this country...appeals to Xenophobia and championing psuedo racist campaigns of debunked lies is ok?

The only message I see hear is the message that Orly Taitz has been spouting for 3 years now.

There is no message from the courts, beyond...say your piece and do it quickly before we bring this circus to a close and count yourself lucky if we don't fine you...Orly has been fined by the courts before for her inane tactics and hoaxed evidence.

What message are you hearing?

You are wholey entitled to the opinions you listed, politically and idealogically...where does the leap occur to championing Orly Taitz and her message?

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Kafternin

• I have stated more than once that I consider the Birth Certificate issue to be moot.
  
  
• My feelings in this case are that this legal action may hopefully bring him some grief in return for the grief he has attempted to force onto Alabama.

Well that clears up your position...

Without a care for truth or veracity. Well aware of the fraudulant nature of the attacks but simply mute and gleeful that they are occuring.

Principles on mean something if you stand by them when they are inconvenient.

How well you sum up the views of many here on ATS. Well aware of the lies, but happy for them all the same.

reply to post by Kafternin

You realize all these assumptions are getting humorous, correct?

If Indigo5 can figure out what I wrote, I am sure you can too.


reply to post by Indigo5

What message is that Red?

You got it figured out in the post below.

That even Moderators can post laundry lists that have no bearing on the OP?

I was asked why I support the legal action (or I should say the attempted legal action now) outlined in the OP. I responded. Even Moderators get to respond to posts, or would you prefer if we just kept quiet?

Maybe if only those Moderators who disagree with you kept quiet that would be even better?

That when one political party disagrees with another in this country...appeals to Xenophobia and championing psuedo racist campaigns of debunked lies is ok?

Ahhhh, here we go!

"pseudo-racist"? Running out of other 'cards' to play?


reply to post by Indigo5

Well that clears up your position...

Ding! Ding! Ding! Houston, we have comprehension! Now, maybe you could explain it to Kafternin?

Without a care for truth or veracity. Well aware of the fraudulant nature of the attacks but simply mute and gleeful that they are occuring.

Principles on mean something if you stand by them when they are inconvenient.

Perhaps you should examine another principle... the principle of equality. Some call it "tit-for-tat". It basically means if you hit someone often enough and hard enough, eventually they will turn around and hit you back.

Just as I do not cry when someone attempting to kill an innocent is killed, or when a thief has their possessions stolen, or when a CEO who has caused untold financial suffering suffers themselves, I do not cry for Obama when his attempts to use legal maneuvering to progress an agenda that is against the will of the people he was elected to represent is himself beset by legal maneuvers. I do not care about the veracity or legality of the charges against him, because he does not care about the veracity or legality of charges he brings against Alabama.

You can save your shaming criticisms. I am well beyond that. If Obama makes it to another 4 years, he will do it without my vote, just as if Mitt Romney makes it to nominee, he will have to try and win the office without my support.

Try to understand one more thing: I do not care for either party. I do not tow any party lines. I care about what it best for the country and for the people in it... all the people. So go ahead and call someone who voted for Obama in 2008 a Republican... go ahead. I may have made the biggest mistake of my life that day, but at least it makes people who like to box others into nice little labels look like what they are: would-be manipulators.

Oh, and I should mention... I only voted for George W. Bush once too. I refused to vote for him the second go-around.

TheRedneck

reply to post by xuenchen

Do you think the low Democrat turnout is an indication of "former" Democrats that may be planning to vote Republican ?

No. It is an indication that he didn't have any serious opposition in the primary.

Do you think many Dems that voted Obama did so just because his name is more familiar than the others ?

No. They did so because they didn't see any particular reason to file a protest or humor vote.

Just trolling.

FIFY

Obama won New Hampshire in the 2008 general election, but he lost the Democratic primary four years ago. Hillary Clinton's narrow defeat of Obama, a dramatic upset coming after Obama's victory in the Iowa caucuses, led to a protracted race for the Democratic nomination.

Was this a fluke ?

In what way? In what way can a cutthroat competitive Democratic Party primary in 2008 have anything to say about a relatively meaningless Democratic Party primary in 2012 pitting an incumbent President against a field of joke candidates?

What impact could this have on this November's election ?

None what-so-ever.

Just trolling.

FIFY again.

reply to post by Kafternin

One of which bears the name "Vermin Supreme."

I know somebody personally (via the innertubes of course) who knows Vermin personally, they are good friends actually.

By all accounts, Vermin is a very personable, smart, guy. He likes to dress up in a clown suit and stand on the street corner with a 6-foot toothbrush and yell "Brush your teeth - its the law" at kids, but other than that, he seems to be fairly normal.

I think he came in third in the primary. Not bad.