Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Obama's SS # challenged in Ohio

  1. #1
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,161
    Post Thanks / Like

    Obama's SS # challenged in Ohio

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obamas-so...er-challenged/

    read this article...SOMETHING is up with this Prez- there are too many question marks- hopefully he'll continue to get the proper vetting he should have gotten in 2008.

  2. #2
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Conspiracy Theories and Birtherism is a sure route to an Obama win in 2012.

    There are real issues to wrangle over.

    This isn't one to anyone other than the fringe-right kookbrigade.
    Last edited by Warfish; 07-05-2012 at 12:29 PM.

  3. #3
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,460
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ridiculous

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker134 View Post
    http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obamas-so...er-challenged/

    read this article...SOMETHING is up with this Prez- there are too many question marks- hopefully he'll continue to get the proper vetting he should have gotten in 2008.
    The writer may be on to something with this. I will tune in tonight to Hannity to get the full story.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    The writer may be on to something with this. I will tune in tonight to Hannity to get the full story.
    Shouldn't you, given your crusade against corruption (R), tune in to Thom Hartmann instead for today's update on the Roberts-Ruled-for-Big-Insurance/Pharma Corruption Theory?

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,432
    Post Thanks / Like
    ^ ^ ^ all 0 votes except for the OP, so who cares about the fake indignation?

    If we have to care about heat and wind-burned dogs on the roof of Romney's VistaCruiser, 8 degrees of separation abortion disposal, the Romney family viaje to Mexico and suchlike then we also have to care about 0's entree to Harvard, post-Harvard wilderness years and most importantly the fact that B. Hussein was ineligible for the office from the get-go because of his dad's citizenship, his own opaque origin aside.

    The right handled 0 with kid gloves last go-round when it "should of" been on the attack 24x7. This election season, expect nothing more than a tsunami of everything the "principled" voters who mindlessly ushered in this disaster hate from negative ads to more sunlight on 0's shady cronies funders and bundlers.

    I wish some of you on-the-fence stand-for-nothing dopes were listening to Levin the other night. Basically, he tore you a new one for continuing to invent excuses to enable 0 and what the consequences will be.

  7. #7
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    ^ ^ ^ all 0 votes except for the OP, so who cares about the fake indignation?
    A factualy incorrect statement. There is a 0% chance of my vote going to Obama.

    The question you SHOULD ask yourself is "who cares about yet another birther conspiracy theory" in the General Electorate.

    The answer: not enough to win the 2012 election.

    Isn't that what counts most to a pragmatist such as yourself? Winning, hence keeping Obama out of office?

    Or do you really, truly, honestly, think that the key to victory in Election 2012, the key to the Moderates and Independants who are not already safley locked up as (R) voters, is Birther Conspairacies and Legal Challenges? If so, I'd enjoy reading your argument for that position.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    I wish some of you on-the-fence stand-for-nothing dopes were listening to Levin the other night. Basically, he tore you a new one for continuing to invent excuses to enable 0 and what the consequences will be.
    I listen to him almost every evening, I quite enjoy his show on the way home. For a man who previously all-but-loathed Romney, he has certainly done a rather floppy 180 turn on him.

    Pragmatism, I'm sure, but hardly convincing given his previous aggressive rants against Romeny.
    Last edited by Warfish; 07-05-2012 at 01:42 PM.

  8. #8
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    \
    I listen to him almost every evening, I quite enjoy his show on the way home. For a man who previously all-but-loathed Romney, he has certainly done a rather floppy 180 turn on him.

    Pragmatism, I'm sure, but hardly convincing given his previous aggressive rants against Romeny.
    Levin still has no qualms about voicing his disappointment in Romney.

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,161
    Post Thanks / Like
    I read the article and it certainly seems to have merit. I want this America hating racist out of our White House by any legal means available. If this woman found a glaring discrepancy concerning hid SS # then let's look into it. Phuk him.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker134 View Post
    I read the article and it certainly seems to have merit. I want this America hating racist out of our White House by any legal means available. If this woman found a glaring discrepancy concerning hid SS # then let's look into it. Phuk him.
    Grandma the PI is on the job! Please stop.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    The writer may be on to something with this. I will tune in tonight to Hannity to get the full story.
    I am sure he will do a splendid job covering this.

    Not as good as Ed or Rachel though.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    The funny thing is these stories actually help Obama b.c the deflect away from what people should really be talking about which are his failed policies and broken promises.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,432
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    A factualy incorrect statement. There is a 0% chance of my vote going to Obama.

    The question you SHOULD ask yourself is "who cares about yet another birther conspiracy theory" in the General Electorate.

    The answer: not enough to win the 2012 election.

    Isn't that what counts most to a pragmatist such as yourself? Winning, hence keeping Obama out of office?

    Or do you really, truly, honestly, think that the key to victory in Election 2012, the key to the Moderates and Independants who are not already safley locked up as (R) voters, is Birther Conspairacies and Legal Challenges? If so, I'd enjoy reading your argument for that position.



    I listen to him almost every evening, I quite enjoy his show on the way home. For a man who previously all-but-loathed Romney, he has certainly done a rather floppy 180 turn on him.

    Pragmatism, I'm sure, but hardly convincing given his previous aggressive rants against Romeny.

    No, a guy called (prolly a RP freak) and went on about how he didn't like Romney and that he's just like Roberts etc. Levin alluded to all his own concerns about Romney, mentioned who he was for (Bachmann, Sanatarium) but concluded vehemently that now it is time to not waste votes on 3rd parties because the only way to extricate B. Hussein out of the WH is to vote for Romney. Pure and simple. Long ago Chiefs in this forum mentioned the strategy of a (R) Congress forcing Romney right and nominating more conservative jurists when the sinister R. Buzzi Ginsberg retires/kicks the bucket and so forth. It's not just about winning, the court could be packed with more (D) rubber stamps like Unwise Latina and It's Pat then all your handwringing about whatever concerns you re the rule of law, "immigration" and 0/Big Sis/Withholder's non-enforcement of it will be for naught.

    Unlike crypto-liberals and faux libertarians I am for free speech in all ways. I care not one iota how much money (D) or (R) spends on political ads from private sources. I lament that that is reality of politics when people are in need but the money spent on elections is a pittance compared to the multi-T (D) waste of 0's reign of error. I loathe the Truther, Paulistinian, Occufilth and garden variety (D) sicko-phant with equal venom but they are free to speak, opine, speculate about any situation political or commercial as they see fit. I welcome klieg lights shined into the opaque murk that is B. Hussein's shady past and I could not possibly care less about what dopers/people who stand for nothing think about the propriety of it. I do care about money paid in tax sent to (D) unions sent back to B. Hussein but that can be cured by voting intelligently. Smart people can analyze ALL of 0's failings, lies and misrepresentation simultaneously. All the investigations about the (intentionally) hidden background serve a very valid purpose - to expose and dehumanize a sociopathic, racist liar who had been elevated to sainthood by the MSM and (D).

    What Levin is saying as I have said the new Romney broom can sweep clean but if you vote for a ineffective Swiffer and we still have the filthy 0 vacuum in the closet sucking $ out of our wallets it's all on you.
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 07-05-2012 at 04:20 PM.

  14. #14
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Here is my trouble understanding Flushing.

    On one hand, you (and Levin) are being VERY Pragmatic, encouraging us all to vote for a man, frankly, Levin loathes and has loathed the entire (R) primary process. Fine, I get the pragmatic belief there and (IMO unrealistic) idea that a (R) Congress (assuming wins in House and Senate) would push Romney "right". I tend to think that’s a lot of if's, maybe's and outright fantasy, but I understand the pragmatism behind it.

    On the other hand, you, as a defender of free speech, encourage looking at the "shadowy history" of Obama, a total loser with the electorate. Not just a loser, but the kind of issue that drives all the many Moderates (crypto-liberals), Independents (crypto-Liberals) and Undecided (Stupid crypto-liberals) to vote (D). That’s not very pragmatic at all, quite the contrary, it's quite counterproductive to the idea of an (R) win in November.

    Now, I am well aware you have no love for the crypto-liberals. But we both know elections are at the most basic level math problems. A > B or you lose. And (R) cannot > (D) if you reject/alienate/tell to **** themselves all the various middle crypto-liberals via "issues" they simply don't buy into such as Obama's shadowy past, specifically birtherism.

    So it seems to be a contradiction. On one hand, I (crypto-liberal) must suck it, ignore many of my own deeply held ideals and principles, and vote for a guy I, and Mark Levin, absolutely hate as a candidate......because he must be elected over Obama.

    But on the other hand, you (dedicated Conservative Republican), get to sit back and freely hurf-a-blurf and support hurf-ablurfing on a proven electoral loser and vote-rejecter like Shadowy Obama Birtherism?

    Would it not be fair to say you should also suck it, shelve the conspiracy theory voter offending silliness, and focus on the issues, and aggressively stamp down birtherism as the non-pragmatic, non-vote getter it is?

    I'm having trouble seeing consistency here. How can you tell others to vote Romney, pragmatism, and still be supportive (and dismissive of those not supportive) about a total electoral loser in the vital non-party voters?

    It just doesn't make sense to me. Seems very "cake and eat it too" to me.

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,432
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Here is my trouble understanding Flushing.

    On one hand, you (and Levin) are being VERY Pragmatic, encouraging us all to vote for a man, frankly, Levin loaths and has loathed the entire (R) primary process. Fine, I get the pragmatic belief there and (IMO unrealistic) idea that a (R) COngress (assuming wins in House and Senate) would push Romney "right". I tend to think thats alot of if's, maybe's and outrigth fantasy, but I understand the pragmatism behind it.

    On the other hand, you, as a defender of free speech, encourge looking at the "shadowy histroy" of Obama, a total loser with the electorate. Not just a loser, but the kind of issue that drives all the many Moderates (cryto-liberals), Independants (cryto-Liberals) and Undecideds (Stupid crypto-liberals) to vote (D). Thats not very pragmatic at all, quite the contrary, it's quite counterproductive to the idea of an (R) win in November.

    Now, I am well aware you have no love for the cryto-liberals. But we both know elections are at the most basic level math problems. A > B or you lose. And (R) cannot > (D) if you reject/alienate/tell to **** themselves all the various middle crypto-liberals via "issues" they simply don't buy into such as Obama's shadowy past, specificly birtherism.

    So it seems to be a contradiction. On one hand, I (crypto-liberal) must suck it, ignore many of my own deeply held ideals and principles, and vote for a guy I, and Mark Levin, absolutely hate as a candidate......because he must be elected over Obama.

    But on the other hand, you (dedicated Conservative Republican), get to sit back and freely hurf-a-blurf and support hurf-ablurfing on a proven electoral loser and vote-rejector like Shadowy Obama Birtherism?

    Would it not be fair to say you should also suck it, shelve the conspiracy theory voter offending sillyness, and focus on the issues, and aggressively stamp down birtherism as the non-pragmatic, non-vote getter it is?

    I'm having trouble seeing consistency here. How can you tell others to vote Romney, pragmatism, and still be supportive (and dismissive of those not supportive) about a total electoral loser in the vital non-party voters?

    It just doesn't make sense to me.
    1st, I am not and have not been in agreement with Levin's positions on candidates or for his preferred 2012 candidates at any time. IMO his judgment this cycle has been very poor. Although I agree with many of their stances on social issues they were wasting time with social issues when the primary issue is the awful economy. I voted for Romney in both of the last 2 GOP NYS primaries because he understands how an economy should work. I trust him on other issues as well.

    The only thing I really agree with in your semi-overlong navel-gazing post is that the FOCUS should not be on 0 but on his poor record as our leader. I do not hear Romney making 0's birth details or peripatetic travails an issue, do you? After the election if Romney wins the Birthers etc. can and will go to town. Nothing to do with my tacit, implicit, or overt approval of such an investigation. If you don't vote for Romney because you don't like some guy or gal in OH looking into B. Hussein's background that is pretty dumb/lame...but it's OK for (D) to fund harassment of Palin with incessant nuisance lawsuits before/during/after a national election....because you don't like her...not that I do or don't...I got it now
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 07-05-2012 at 05:01 PM.

  16. #16
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    I am not in agreement with Levin's positions on candidates or for his preferred 2012 candidates. IMO his judgment this cycle has been very poor.

    I voted for Romney in both of the last 2 GOP NYS primaries because he understands how an economy should work. I trust him on other issues as well.
    Fair enough.

    your semi-overlong navel-gazing
    Just had to get that in, eh?

    If you don't vote for Romney because you don't like some guy or gal in OH looking into B. Hussein's background that is pretty dumb/lame
    Indeed. Thankfully that would not be my reason.

    ...but it's OK for (D) to fund harassment of Palin with incessant nuisance lawsuits before/during/after a national election
    You'll have a hard time finding me saying anything like that.

    ....because you don't like her...not that I do or don't...I got it now
    No, I don't like her. And no it's not ok. And no, you don't got it (on this count).

    Short enough?

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,432
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Fair enough.



    Just had to get that in, eh?



    Indeed. Thankfully that would not be my reason.



    You'll have a hard time finding me saying anything like that.



    No, I don't like her. And no it's not ok. And no, you don't got it (on this count).

    Short enough?
    But yes I get your confusion, I am citing Levin, then it seems odd to you that I would differ from him when it comes to Romney. That shows (R) is not in lockstep. And yes it may also seem odd that Levin would work so diligently to diminish Romney in the primary season then have to regretfully conclude that Romney must be supported by all (R) to evict (D) and reverse the red tide, which I agree. At least Levin stands by his beliefs, he's not like a Michael Savage who goes nuclear on 0 (which I love) then he turns around and knocks Romney and qualifies his words by saying it's just one man's opinion, what do I matter? HTF does that effect change? It only effects a "meh", Eeyore, (D) = (R) attitude.

    Like myself, Levin doesn't support the RP/crypto-liberal fantasists that the GOP must be destroyed and lose today and rise like a phoenix from the ashes in the future. That was said in '08, we all had to endure the (D) supermajority disaster as a result. The TP was very effective but served up just enough losers to let (D) keep the Senate. Levin knows (R) could destroy itself, but also knows that the (D) misrule must not stand and enabling (D) is foolish.

    Romney is not the ideal GOP candidate for many, I don't think such a thing exists. Personally I wish Romney had Gingrich's or some commentators eloquence when it comes to criticizing 0, but I think the message will be focused when the convention and debates come along.

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    And yes it may also seem odd that Levin would work so diligently to diminish Romney in the primary season then have to regretfully conclude that Romney must be supported by all (R) to evict (D) and reverse the red tide, which I agree.

    Like myself, Levin doesn't support the RP/crypto-liberal fantasists that the GOP must be destroyed and lose today and rise like a phoenix from the ashes in the future.
    It is funny to me that Flush constantly has to defend this point of view. Most of the time from the strongest Obama opponents on this board.

    Maybe too many people see Obama and Romney as the same guy, I know I do, but the thought that a conservative voter will think Romney > Obama shouldn't really shock anyone. The idea that any R > than any D may not really make sense, but it does to a staunch conservative. If an R has to go, then an R better take their place.

    This abbreviated POV makes sense to me from a conservative, and I don't see how anyone could have a problem with it.

    I'm defending Flush, and the guy hates me.


    well, he doesn't think of me as important enough to hate, or whatever the insult du jour will be.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    There is no doubt the POS registered as a foriegn student at Occidental and Columbia.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us