Harvesting Pasta
The Museum of Hoaxes lists the top 100 April Fools jokes of all time. Here’s their number one:
1957: The respected BBC news show Panorama announced that thanks to a very mild winter and the virtual elimination of the dreaded spaghetti weevil, Swiss farmers were enjoying a bumper spaghetti crop. It accompanied this announcement with footage of Swiss peasants pulling strands of spaghetti down from trees. Huge numbers of viewers were taken in. Many called the BBC wanting to know how they could grow their own spaghetti tree. To this the BBC diplomatically replied, “place a sprig of spaghetti in a tin of tomato sauce and hope for the best.”
Other April Fools hoaxes include a rookie pitcher who could allegedly throw a 165 mph fastball, the sale of the Liberty Bell to Taco Bell and Nixon returning from retirement to run for President again. My personal favorite is number 7:
1998: The April 1998 issue of the New Mexicans for Science and Reason newsletter contained an article claiming that the Alabama state legislature had voted to change the value of the mathematical constant pi from 3.14159 to the ‘Biblical value’ of 3.0. Soon the article made its way onto the internet, and then it rapidly spread around the world, forwarded by email. It only became apparent how far the article had spread when the Alabama legislature began receiving hundreds of calls from people protesting the legislation. The original article, which was intended as a parody of legislative attempts to circumscribe the teaching of evolution, was written by physicist Mark Boslough.
The museum rates hoaxes on “notoriety, creativity, and number of people duped.” Not all hoaxes are April Fools jokes. The second biggest hoax in history is probably the October 1938 “War of the Worlds” broadcast which was an inadvertent hoax. Orson Wells and the Mercury Theater decided on the day before Halloween to present a dramatized version of the H. G. Wells classic and many people mistook it for a real newscast and thought New Jersey had been invaded by martians.
The biggest hoax in history is currently in London at the G20 Summit.
_______________________________________________________
UPDATE:
Laurie found the video:
Filed under: General
Referencing wet dreams down below, wet dreams on next thread. Hemmm? Careful, please don’t catch Klownitisbitus.
Yyeah, that’s it. This is all a big April Fool’s Joke and tomorrow we will all wake up and Hillary will be President.
I can’t wait for tomorrow.
Unfortunately it’s kinda like what Will Rogers said about Congress:
“When they make a law it’s a joke and when they make a joke it’s a law.”
I like this one on their list
#13: Kremvax
1984: A message distributed to the members of Usenet (the online messaging community that was one of the first forms the internet took) announced that the Soviet Union was joining Usenet. This generated enormous excitement, since most Usenet members had assumed that cold war security concerns would prevent such a link-up. The message purported to come from Konstantin Chernenko (from the address chernenko@kremvax.UUCP) who explained that the Soviet Union wanted to join the network in order to “have a means of having an open discussion forum with the American and European people.” The message created a flood of responses. Two weeks later its true author, a European man named Piet Beertema, revealed it was a hoax. This is believed to be the first hoax on the internet. Six years later, when Moscow really did link up to the internet, it adopted the domain name ‘kremvax’ in honor of the hoax.
Obama State Department Appointee Harold Koh supports Sharia Law
No its No Joke!
This is very consistent with the transnationalism ideology Obama, Geithner and many others in the O administration are advocating. The ultimate goal of Obama is BEING THE CHAMPION OF TRANSNATIONALISM.
wrong MyIQ, the biggest hoax in American History is the elligibiliy of O.
I know that this site is alergic to birthies and rightfully so as the Birth Certificate issue was the biggest diversion ala Alinski Obama ever performed.
No matter where Obama was born, he was not elligible to the Presidency of the US, as to be a “Natural Born” American citizen, one have to be born on the American soil to TWO citizens.
Obama’s father was not an American citizen at the time of Obama’s birth and that the end of the story.
The hoax was make believe that all American citizens are Natural Born citizens.
But just think of it… and without drowing you in legal case references (they are plenty and they are consistent), if there was no difference WHY WOULD THE CONSTITUTION MAKE ONE?
First of all, anyone born in the United States is a natural born citizen. Obama was born in the state of Hawaii AND his mother is a US citizen. Either way he was a citizen at the instant he was born.
A “naturalized” is someone who becomes a citizen at some time after they are born.
His father’s citizenship is irrelevant.
Finally, did you read the last line of my post???
Well speak of the devil:
And please spare ME the definition of naturalized citizen.
MyIQ. You are completely wrong on this. And that is just my point.
NOT ANYONE BORN IN THE UNITED STATES IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
TO BE A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN ONE HAVE TO BE BORN ON AMERICAN SOIL TO TWO CITIZENS.
if you are inclined to pursue this further I send you all the precedent cases and writing on the subject starting by Vatel in 1759 to the recent law passed by Congress last spring on that very issue.
And as for the Birth Certificate, one more time people confuse Original Birth Certificate and Certifiction of Live Birth. The trick in the matter is that the State of Hawaii issues Birth Certificate to children of Hawaian residents even if they are not born in Hawaii (this is motivated by the preservation of tribal linage and for non discrimination purposes extend to all residents)
The Original Birth Certificate shows that it is a “late registration”, but not the Certification of Live Birth.
Therefore children of Hawaian residents born abroad can have a Birth Certificate legally delivered by the State of Hawaii.
Point in case; Obama’s sister born in Jakarta has a birth certificate from Hawaii.
But as I said his place of birth is a mute issue as his father was not an American citizen.
And yes I had read your last line. I was just narrowing the issue.
According to you I am not a US citizen (I was born in Germany)
You absolutly are but you are not “natural born”.
And therefore according to the letter of the constitution you can hold any elected position you want except the position of the Presidency.
That exception comes from the conflict of interest a dual citizenship would convey on POTUS, including in his functions of Commender in Chief
MyiQ, THINK!!!
Natural born is defined as Born on the American Soil to TWO American citizens.
Where was McCain born?
I have been following this very closely (my lawyer bone got ticlkled). It is very complex with regards to courts, because and that’s the kicker, no state secretary is mandated to verify the elligibility of candidate. Verification is discretionnary. The eligibility rests on the honnor system. If a candidate declares himself eligible, the state secretary (in any state) has a discretionay power to accept the declaration at face value.
The most enligthning is the Opinion of Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison.
Also
Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirmed the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House of Representatives on March 9, 1866:
[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…[6]
The 14th Amendment was interpreted by Justice Horace Gray for the holding of the US Supreme Court in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101-102(1884), as follows:
“The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other…Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States…although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more “born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government…” (Emphasis added.)
Hemm, not natural…that explains everything, including that face!
Weren’t you on a base, so your SAFE! Just like in baseball.
A child born in the USA is a natural-born US citizen regardless of the parents citizenship.
It’s when children are born abroad that it may get complicated, depending on the year of birth and marital status of the parents.
The 14th Amendment states:
SCOTUS has never definitively ruled on the issue but here is a pretty good article on the topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
WRONG, WRONG. WRONG. One more time you are confusing the concept of citizenship with the quality of Natural Born. Not all American Citizens are Natural Born American Citizens.
I repeat : a child born in the United States is an American citizen reagrdless of the parents citizenship.
A child born in the United States to TWO American citizens is an American Natural Born citizen
If you are correct then why hasn’t a single court agreed?
MYIQ. spare me the wikipidia ref.
And please instead read closely the 14th amendment. Does it say that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States….. are “Natural Born” citizen of the United State?
NO
It says that they are CITIZENS.
Major difference. I have never disputed that O is an American Citizen, regardless of where he was born or what his father citizenship was,
I am disputing the fact that according to the well established and NEVER EVER disputed definition of Natural Born, Obama was not elligible because his father was not an American citizen at the time of O’s birth.
Can you show me a statute, constitutional clause or controlling case authority that clearly states:
I’m not understanding your argument. Are you trying to differentiate between “natural born” and “citizen”? If what you say is true then why are the children of illegal aliens considered American citizens? It sounds like the argument you are making is purely abstract.
Absolutly not. There is a major difference between being a citizen and being a Natural Born citizen.
You can be a citizen through many different circumstances :
Born abroad from one or two American Citizens.
Born in the US, from one or two American citizens
Born in the Us from non American citizens (anchored babies included)
Naturalized
BUT TO FIT THE VERY RESTRICTIVE CRITERIA IMPOSED BY THE CONSTITUTION IN ITS ARTICLE 2 TO POTUS CANDIDATES. YOU HAVE TO BE NATURAL BORN WHICH IS DEFINED BY SCOTUS AS BORN ON AMERICAN SOIL TO TWO AMERICAN CITIZENS.
Where did SCOTUS define “natural born citizen?”
Please cite the case
Oh, I think I get what you’re saying, FN.
But it’s useless to think that the SCOTUS would touch this issue, imo.
How I understand it, is that ‘Arnold’ Oprah’s other Main Man, is a naturalized citizen and can’t be POTUS. How I understand things, is that Obama was born (so says his birth certificate) in the States and he qualifies. So, until someone produces another birth certificate, or shows proof that if was forged, he is in and wee are just spinning our wheels here.
No one thing I would love to see is the marriage certificate of his parents since his dad was married and then I want to see the divorce decree, since he left them and went and got married in the States again.
Woman voter.
You are missing the point on several fronts.
Always go back to the definition of Natural Born Citizen.
It is : Born on the American soil to Two American Citizen.
The American Constitution demands ONLY to POTUS candidates to be American Natural Born Citizen.
All other candidates to any other elected official positions only have to be American citizens. (see above thread how you become an American citizen.)
So in the case of Arnold, he was not born on the American soil AND at least one of his parents was not an American citizen. He cannot have the qualification of Natural Born Citizen by two strikes.
And as for the BC issue. Do not confuse the copy of an Original (Vaulted/Archived) Birth Certificate and a copy of a Certification of Live Birth.
The BC is issued once usually soon following birth, and has extensive informations on it, including the name of the hospital where the birth occured and the name of the attending physician. And of course, the LOCATION of BIRTH.
A Certification of Live Birth is issued on demand as many times as the holder wants it. Informations given on it are limited and DO NOT INCLUDE THE LOCATION OF BIRTH.
Now which one of those two documents do you think Obama released copies of, and which one does he fight tooth and nail to keep sealed?
Well, IMHO, your argument is on the abstract side.
Article II consistently refers to the President as “he” so I’m guessing you don’t think women are “eligible” to be President either.
And as a sidebar FN, is the very disturbing fact (as I understand it) that although several lawsuits were brought forward to force Obama and co to show a certified birth certificate, all cases were dismissed– the most common cause of dismissal was that the party asking for the production of said birth certificate lacked standing. This I find really disturbing. Any American citizen who has the legal right to vote should be able to bring a cause of action to have a Presidential candidate produce documentation proving that they are eligible to be POTUS. The question remains, “exactly who has standing”?
SCOTUS did not answer this question as far as I have been able to find out.
That was EXTREMELY disturbing to all parties following the matter. But it had one purpose: To delay the cases after the confirming vote of Congress. At that point all pending cases got mute.
This entire episode of our legal history will be studied for generations to come. Every trick in the book was pulled to let the matter stay. But it is not over. Other legal procedures have kicked in. They are called Quo Warranto. And several are being filed.
We’ll see.
The birth certificate that is on line looks just like the one I recently ordered from North Dakota. They don’t give you the one with all the original info on it anymore. I do have the old copy, but it was falling apart, so I sent for a new one.
I would like to see the portion of Marbury v. Madison where “natural born citizen” is defined as born to two American citizens on U.S. soil. I recall when George Romney ran for President there was some controversy since he had been born in Mexico. But he ended up being able to run.
BB
Please refer to the answer I gave to Woman Voter up thread about the Birth Certificate. And please be precise. What Obama released was not a copy of his Birth Certificate but a copy of his Certification of Live Birth.
Also on the matter of the definition of Natural Born Citizen, you can imagine that Scotus was not asked that often in our history to stand on the issue.
That is why there is not that much on it directly,
And on the issue of who can run, well anybody can run but not every body can be elected…. See the nuance.
Read my comment up thread about the honnor system of elligibility. and on all pending cases being mute after the confirmation vote by Congress early January.
The whole thing is very complex and full of nuances (this is why some of us spent years in Law School. To make sense of things like that)
But the bottom of it, is that he should have never ever have been considered as a valid candidate by the Democratic Party. (no kidding!)
Once he left the gate, things were put in motion which were very difficult to stop.
As I understand it – he is an American citizen but doesn’t qualify for POTUS because he is not a Natural Born citizen, therefore he can run for any position except POTUS – ooops, we need a do over.
Joanelle. you got it.
Let’s see if the Quo Warranto suits are leading anywhere because that is exacrly what it would achieve. The whole election would be void.
We can hope can we? May be now that anger is mounting among the people the judicial might be more inclined to do hear them.
I agree with your point that no one seems to “have standing” to challenge a candidate’s eligibility and when the court challenge came in the form of holding a Secretary of State liable for NOT verifying a candidate’s eligibility, the cases were also dismissed. (There was another candidate that was definitely foreign born that slipped by several Secretary of States to make it on several state ballots.)
But this bothered me more than the Certificate of Live Birth put forward in place of the legally filed birth certificate and that is the DOUBLE STANDARD shown in the hounding of other candidates for their complete papertrail from both Senator Clinton and Senator McCain (plus the minute investigation into Governor Palin’s life) while not one piece of background information, school records, immigration records (to Indonesia), travel records, bar exam, back tax records, employment records, and all other pieces of paper that every U. S. citizen is responsible for producing in order to receive government clearance for any government job.
If we could spend 8 years investigating the papertrail of the Clinton’s involvement in a small real estate deal that the statute of limitations had probably expired on years before; we should be able to demand a papertrail on anyone who wishes to become president of our country. It’s not illegal, it’s not an “invasion of privacy”, and it has been done by every other candidate except one. And whatever name he goes by,
I’m sure we all know him as Barack Hussein Obama! Why is he the only candidate who doesn’t have to “show and tell”?
Besides my own blog entry earlier today, I told my family that our little yorkie poo had pups this morning. They all forgot she had been spayed and ran to see. “They are 2 of them – one named April, one named Fool” I told them.
Ah, that humour of yours, is still there!
nothing nicer than playing April Fools on your kids!!!!!!
On the radio show that I listen to each morning they were interviewing a legislator about a new bill he was attempting to get passed regarding global warming. The gist of the bill was that since human beings exhale carbon dioxide, any elimination of exhalation would be a benefit to the environment. Therefore, the new law would require the use of only one nostril while breathing while the other would need be plugged.
A lenghty discussion ensued about how our bodies can adapt, effect on athletes and children, etc for about 15 minutes. Calls started coming in about what about people with sinus problems, colds, and any number of other angry comments regarding the bill.
At the end of the hour the host admitted it was an April Fools Day prank. Which I had kind of figured out while listening.
But the fact that SO MANY callers actually believed him, as this is a normally serious broadcast, is scary.
These are the same folks who got us into this mess in the first place. What ever happened to critical thinking?
Robert Reich did a April Fool’s Day broad cast for the NPR Market show this morning, saying that Obama had a plan to give brokers and investment bankers $700 billion in tax credits for being honest. It was surrealistically real enough that I thought it might be real for awhile.
No wonder this f**kstick can’t do his taxes – he can’t count.
April Fools!!!
DOJ seeks to drop charges against Ted Stevens.
Dumb fcks withheld evidence from the defense.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29988577/
Excellent piece by Stiglitz in NY Times today, echoing Krugman. The question I have for Dakinikat is: when will the cost of this deceptive plan have effects on the economy and become apparent to the taxpayer?
Obama’s Ersatz Capitalism
By JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ
THE Obama administration’s $500 billion or more proposal to deal with America’s ailing banks has been described by some in the financial markets as a win-win-win proposal. Actually, it is a win-win-lose proposal: the banks win, investors win — and taxpayers lose.
–
Paying fair market values for the assets will not work. Only by overpaying for the assets will the banks be adequately recapitalized. But overpaying for the assets simply shifts the losses to the government. In other words, the Geithner plan works only if and when the taxpayer loses big time.
–
What the Obama administration is doing is far worse than nationalization: it is ersatz capitalism, the privatizing of gains and the socializing of losses. It is a “partnership” in which one partner robs the other. And such partnerships — with the private sector in control — have perverse incentives, worse even than the ones that got us into the mess.
–
But we are already suffering from a crisis of confidence. When the high costs of the administration’s plan become apparent, confidence will be eroded further. At that point the task of recreating a vibrant financial sector, and resuscitating the economy, will be even harder.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/opinion/01stiglitz.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
And we can only wish Fineman was joking about this one. How pathetic can MSNBC be? Pucker up Howard.
It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s Super Prez!
By Howard Fineman
And he seems to be doing all of this virtually on his own, as if floating on air.
Other than Franklin Roosevelt during World War II, no president in modern history has claimed (or gotten) more power and visibility.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29974630/
My eyes are going bad (see last night’s thread) so at first I thought you said:
“Fucker up Howard”
lol! That’s because yesterday was your birthday, and those years are adding up now huh MYIQ? I feel your pain.
Since it’s April Fool’s, I’ll forget my cares for the moment and indulge in a little levity by sharing the following:
Forget the pending economic collapse, there are even more pernicious things at work.
Today, I embarked upon what is a usual day for Makayla (2-year-old grandbaby) and I. We parked at our usual shopping center after dropping her dad at work, and did the grocery shopping. Then we toodled on down the sidewalk to the Starbucks there, to get our customary chai (“Neena juice”) for me and a milk (“cow juice”) for her .
The next part of our routine is to pop next door to the Barnes and Noble, browse some books, maybe buy a couple. I meandered to the front doors, chatting with Makayla all the way, pushed the door, and……it didn’t move. Nothing. I pushed the other one, thinking maybe I’d mistaken the exit for the entrance. Nope. They were LOCKED. Then I noticed a small placard on the glass: “This store is closed as of 3/31/09, due to the opening of the new Barnes and Noble at the Shops of La Cantera.”
I stood there for a second (“Huuuuh? Whuuuuu?”) before it sank in. La Cantera is a huge upscale mall 5 miles up the road, with no grocery store, no Lowes, no Target, nothing practical in the slightest, just lots of high-end shopping for jewelry and shoes and designer clothing. You can get valet parking, and sip champagne at Nieman Marcus, or buy $500 jeans from a sniffy over-gelled, too-skinny young man at one of the other multiple stores that have no actual merchandise, just tasteful displays.
BASTARDS! So my books are now to be lumped in with “luxury” items? No books for the hoi polloi, for those dirty blue-collar masses, those unruly populists. No books for those who may need a cheap bathmat, toilet paper, some spaghetti sauce, and wish to enjoy some Henry James or Ann Patchett. I SHALL MARCH ON THE CAPITOL!!! Forget the threat of the collapse of the dollar in world trade, this is SERIOUS. Cripple the labor unions all you want, but once you fuck with my books, I will go all RADICAL on your ass.
Amazon rocks. Although I feel for you, the whole experience of shopping for books is so much fun, especially with little ones.
WM – I had the same experience last Fall – (without Makayla)
They took my nice friendly B&N and moved it to a mall much further away and with none of the stores I would normally visit.
My reaction was: “Oh, poop!”
Wouldn’t know about Barnes & Noble. I usually try to buy books from Book People, an independent bookstore in Austin.
Gotta patronize the locally owned economy, if you can.
Oh, I do. But it was really nice having it right there where my groceries, etc are, since I often have the 2-year-old in tow.
Support your local library.
Natural born is defined as Born on the American Soil to TWO American citizens.
WHERE is it defined???
That’s what I want to know. And what does it have to do with Marbury v. Madison?
The most enligthning is the Opinion of Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison.
Considering the issues in that case any mention of “natural born citizen” would be dicta, not part of the holding.
OK, can we get to some lighter stuff like jokes…it is April Fools Day and I need some thing to cheer me up. Come on folks, we can argue on April 2nd.
just read WMCb’s post upthread if you need a laugh.
spew alert-make sure you’re not drinking or eating anything
Catarina-this is for you:
http://tinyurl.com/dcc35k
I added the video to my post
LOL!
Of you loosing your eye sight?
bwahaha! that’s my mother in law in the checkered apron!
Alegre has a lovely Hillary April Fool’s video:
http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/
Jumping Jeebus! Our POTUS-trainee is at it agaIn:
I guess he only got his toes wet:
Then there’s this:
(That last part was an April Fools joke from from Jonah Goldberg but I bet you believed it for a second, didn’t you?)
Did BZero really use “England” for the entire United Kingdom.? ZOMG. Idjit. Bad, bad. And this guy’s in politics? That’s like calling the United States “New York.”
The last part was very funny-but I thought the next to last part was a joke too. C’mon he didn’t really give an 83 year old Queen an ipod?
Or did he?
Oh, come on! That’s a joke.
No, I think the iPod part is true?
The IPod part is true.
No way! Where’s the link?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/04/01/barack_obamas_gift_for_the_queen_an_ipod_your_majesty
Ah, and this is the presidential couple who are supposed to be brimming with class? Really, really tacky, and really stupid after the gift fiasco with Gordon Brown and his wife. This sort of behavior is typical of very selfish people. Michelle shows up in sequins, pearls, and diamonds – and hands the Queen of England an iPod from Wal-Mart? Well, Liz probably does have her own vacuum cleaner and electric toothbrush and gardening tools already.
Not only that but he didn’t know that he was to shake with one hand and grabbed with both…ooops. Must have thought he was ‘Hi Mannning’ J Z in Chicago. Or is that the Chicago shake?
Considering that the Queen Mother lived hale and heartily to past 100, 83 is still sorta middle-aged. I don’t think all older people are all against newer technology; that’s a stereotype.
But young or old, looking at photos & videos on an iPod is a squint-inducing experience. Let’s hope he got the right converter for the battery charger, since they are different overseas!
My mom is 82, and she has a computer. She does need some help with it, but I talk her through things on the phone. I don’t know if she could handle an i-pod. She probably could if she were highly motivated. Do you think the queen spends a lot of time listening to music with earphones on? Maybe…
Actually my mom hasn’t figured out how to use the on-demand feature on her cable remote. But again, she isn’t highly motivated to do it.
Technology, schmenology – the value is the thing – she gave them gifts fully representative of the UK – original in nature – this is what happens when you have not experience and surround yourself with folks who are uncouth and just don’t know protocol. Uncouth I guess I could accept but not knowing protocol when your boss is representing your country to the world – geeesh.
The Queen was a mechanic in WWII — I bet she’s a tech head.
But an ipod as a gift to a monarch — what did they do, blow the whole junket budget on the 330 grand limo?
Not that a nice gift has to be expensive — just, you know, thoughtful and unique. The Obamas need a better social secretary.
Below is a link to a piece by John Dean at Findlaw on the “natural born citizen” issue. According to Dean, no one knows for sure what the founders meant, but it has been assumed that Presidents have to be born within the U.S. However, this question came up about McCain in 2000, and he was permitted to run.
There is no indication that both parents must be citizens for a person to be “natural born.” As far as I know, if one of your parents is an American citizen, you are a citizen.
http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/dean/20041008.html
I also looked at the Constitution just now, and the other requirement is that the person has to have lived in the U.S. for 14 years (not that their parents must have).
McCain was allowed to run, but also had to go before a judge and produce extensive documentation.
I am not real hepped up on the birth certificate thing, but I will admit that a few things give me pause:
1) There is some evidence that Obama was not actually born in Hawaii, but in Kenya, and brought back as an infant.
2) He has spent a lot of time and money and lawyer-hours to shut down any investigation into the issue at ALL. I question why he would do that, if there is not something there.
3) He travelled to Pakistan twice as a college student, during a time when it was almost impossible to get into that country on a US passport. Those with Indonesian passports were readily admitted. If he did it on an Indonesian passport, then yes, his US citizenship is in question, as he would have had to claim Indonesian citizenship. I also have a suspicion that this may have something to do with why his college records are locked up tighter than fort know – if he got in via a “foreign student” program, that could be a problem.
There may be nothing there, but there are enough questions that it seems odd that he would not allow them to be cleared up, and instead has gone to great lengths to make sure none of it is looked into.
I don’t think there is actual evidence that he was born in Kenya. Why would his mother travel there to give birth? And what proof is there?
The trip to Pakistan is something to consider, but I tend to agree with Joseph Cannon that the trip to Pakistan and the high level people that Obama apparently stayed with there suggests a CIA connection. After all, Obama’s mother worked for the Ford Foundation, a well known CIA front. We will probably never know.
I think he is keeping his college records sealed because he didn’t do well academically and he got in with help from Affirmative Action, which the Repubs could have played up. W never opened up his college records. DId Bill Clinton?
Bill was a Rhodes Scholar
Why would Stanley Ann Dunham travel to Kenya to give birth in a third-world hospital?
Why would Hawaiian papers publish his birth announcment saying he was born there?
All I’m saying, myiq, is that he has been determinedly secretive enough about his early past (EXTREMELY so), and has fought tooth and nail to keep anyone from looking into any of it at all – that stinks to high heaven to me.
Maybe he’s a citizen, maybe he’s not, but my gut says the man is hiding something big. I may not be able to identify specifically where the stench is coming from, but I can damn well smell it.
Yup, I try to keep the tinfoil hat locked away, but the extreme secretiveness about Obama’s real history is rather unsettling. The only version of his life which is allowed any currency is that which he chose to create for ‘his’ books. The MSM are NOT interested in independently verifying any of this ‘history’, nor in digging up anything on their own. It’s one big protective scrim and I’m sorry, but that seems awfully fishy.
Because the father of her child was from Kenya – and “she’d follow him anywhere”
How’s this for a dinner party round up!
http://timesonline.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451586c69e201156eb8abc0970c-popup
Obama is sitting next to Angela Merkel. That may be uncomfortable for him.
It’s “The Honorable” part that gets me.
He’s sitting next to Angela Merkle; good, she can see through facades for substance.
Let’s hope he make any remarks about her “periodially” getting “moody” and trying to increase her “appeal.”
Oh goodie! If he says anything idiotic she’ll shoot him down quick. And if he tries to lecture her I’m sure he’ll get an earful from her.
Always go back to the definition of Natural Born Citizen
WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS DEFINITION?????
Did you see my link? No one knows what the founders meant, but it definitely doesn’t mean what the conspiracy theorists say it means, which is that both parents have to be American citizens. First they claimed he wasn’t born in Hawaii, now they are trying some other argument.
The SCOTUS ruled on this issue in 1898:
In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who
* is born in the United States
* of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
* whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
* whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution.
However, this question came up about McCain in 2000, and he was permitted to run.
*********
Barry Goldwater, also.
Also George Romney. But none of those people ever got elected, so the issue went away.
There are rumors that Chester A. Arthur was born in Canada. Even if he was born in the U.S. his father was an Irish citizen when Chester was born (his mom was a US citizen)
Then he was a citizen.
I’d die laughing if the Queen came out of the palace wearing a shirt that said:
“The President of the United States came to visit and all I got was this lousy T shirt”
Also on the matter of the definition of Natural Born Citizen, you can imagine that Scotus was not asked that often in our history to stand on the issue.
That is why there is not that much on it directly
If there is nothing on it directly then it is just a legal theory, not the law.
Exactly. Congress should just pass a law and clarify it. Unfortunately, Dean thinks Schwarzenegger should be eligible. Please noooooooo!
Myiq,
Did you read the comments on that Telegraph link you posted? They are hilarious!
SCOTUS needs to clarify several issues on voters rights. They have in the past given too wide of discretion to the political parties to run their campaigns as they wished. This has stripped the individual voter of the rights she should have. The vote in America should be nearly sacred. Instead it seems the rights of the Democrat and Republican parties are held to be nearly sacred. This issue of SCOTUS denying standing to individual voters with lawsuits seeking disclosure of Obama B certificate is an example of voters rights being dismissed summarily.
Maybe if voters had rights, we’d have Clinton now instead of That One.
Yep.
Living in Europe as I do, I cannot believe that a photo id is not required for voting. Another anomaly is the registration of voters by private, or billionaire(Soros) funded groups like Acorn. Over here voter registration is done by the local town hall, under strict observance of procedural rules.
Democrats in the US seem to think producing ID for voting is equal to voter suppression. Seems reasonable enough to me.
I know, that’s what Obama argued-wonder why…
Re: Obama’s gift of an iPod to the Queen, give poor Bambi a break. He probably did genuinely believe it was a perfect and thoughtful gift. It was loaded up with news video of Her Majesty’s visit to the US.
See, to Bambi, that would be the perfect gift. He’d be thrilled! “Golly, I get to watch endless footage of MYSELF??? Thank you so SO much!” His little narcissistic brain probably can’t wrap around the fact that the Queen may not be as enamored of looking in the mirror as he.
C’mon-Michelle thinks a $600 bonus is just about enough for a pair of earrings. He’s taking his basketball coach for an expenses paid tour of London.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31285
“Bethesda, Md. — Doctors were said to be treating President Barack Obama at Bethesda Naval Hospital today for exhaustion and possible vocal cord injuries after a freak television accident occurred at the White House Tuesday evening.
According to a statement read by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, President Obama, noted for his near total dependence on the teleprompter when speaking, was leaving a practice session for an upcoming press conference when he happened upon a muted television set near the White House Briefing Room on which someone had activated the “closed captioning” function.
“Apparently, Mr. Obama mistook the captioning for his new flat screen teleprompter and began reading the text aloud,” Gibbs said. Gibbs stated that “what followed was a tragic marathon speaking session that lasted for nearly 14 hours before staff discovered Obama and disconnected the device.””
_______________________
Too bad those late night comedians can’t find anything funny about Obama (although, I think they have been of late).
LOL
OT – but did everyone see the story yesterday about the woman who was working at the Harvard group that manages investment funds for the institution. She was fired by Summers after she spoke out in 2002 about the risky and misunderstood new financial products they were buying.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=527380
Why is it always the women who blow the whistle?
P.S. – Don’t really know how to do the linky link thingie.
Yes, that’s a good story.
Barack Obama’s gift for the Queen: an iPod, your Majesty
Barack Obama met the Queen at Buckingham Palace today and gave her a gift of an iPod loaded with video footage and photographs of her 2007 United States visit to Richmond, Jamestown and Williamsburg in Virginia. In return, the Queen gave the President a silver framed signed photograph of herself and the Duke of Edinburgh – apparently a standard present for visiting dignitaries.
It is believed the Queen already has an iPod, a 6GB silver Mini version she is said to have bought in 2005 at the suggestion of Prince Andrew.
UPDATE: Pool reporter Richard Wolf of USA Today says that an Obama aide told him the President also gave the Queen a “rare songbook signed by Richard Rodgers”. END UPDATE
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/04/01/barack_obamas_gift_for_the_queen_an_ipod_your_majesty
Speaking of fools…I just read about this myself. What a complete idiot. Very classy Barack. Not only that–she already has one. Notice how they scrambled to add (later) that he also gave her the songbook? I wonder who ran out and had that shipped over immediately to cover for that latest gift-gaffe. What a bunch of juveniles.
Please tell me it’s not true. He gave Queenie an ipod? Noooo!!! Just can’t imagine her listening to “99 Problems but a b!tch ain’t one.”
Must be an April Fools joke, right?
Well, I thought of that, and I am sure some one will see what he loaded on there. If it does, we can blame it on Mr Fish ‘em… Chief of Staff! I hear that he shook her hand with both of his, clasping hers in his. Naughty, naughty…always trying for the next promotion…age is no barrier to his ambitions.
http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/35059/
“By Alex Hering – When she returned from Iraq in 2005, Army veteran Shannon Morgan might have benefited from a bill that was introduced Tuesday.
The bill would improve post traumatic stress disorder treatment for female veterans. Morgan, 27, of Mena, Ark., who repaired tracked vehicles, needed counseling and went to a Veterans Affairs Department therapist.
“He basically said, ‘There is no way you were in combat – you are a female,’” she said. “The nightmares and flashbacks and things like that, that’s what I needed help with. I needed to get myself on medication. I was a total wreck and driving my parents crazy.”
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., introduced the bill, which would require counseling, improve women’s health care programs and provide a pilot program for child care services.
Morgan said she sought help from another Veterans Affairs clinic, where one of an increasing number of female therapists helped her.
“I don’t know what to say. It’s hard to ask for help to begin with and open yourself up to someone on that level,” she said. “For them to reject me like that – it astonished me more than anything.”
Murray said the there are approximately 1.8 million female veterans who, according to VA data, are receiving “lower quality care” than men receive.”
Just what the Queen needs..an Ipod from a holgram.
Amen! He could have brought some special historical item, after all he did get a private meeting and all. He could have made more effort…they probably picked up the Ipod at the airport and hopefully it is UK compatible, and not useless like the DVDs he gave Brown.
an ipod from a HOLOGRAM…spelling wrong..sorry.
I got ya, although at first I thought you meant Hooligan.
NEW THREAD up
[...] The Swiss Spaghetti Harvest (by myiq2xu at The Confluence) The Museum of Hoaxes lists the top 100 April Fools jokes of all time. Here’s their number one: “1957: The respected BBC news show Panorama announced that thanks to a very mild winter and the virtual elimination of the dreaded spaghetti weevil, Swiss farmers were enjoying a bumper spaghetti crop. It accompanied this announcement with footage of Swiss peasants pulling strands of spaghetti down from trees. Huge numbers of viewers were taken in. Many called the BBC wanting to know how they could grow their own spaghetti tree. To this the BBC diplomatically replied, ‘place a sprig of spaghetti in a tin of tomato sauce and hope for the best.’” Absolutely, the best. I saw it years ago, and it has always been my favorite. [...]