Philip J Berg

sharon kinsella · Post by **sharon kinsella** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:08 am

Who do you think you are - who dare you tell me I have to prove anything to you - You prove I'm wrong. Make sure it's not a little blog.

You really are arrogant.

Why do you feel like you need to come out swinging. Is winning all that important to you? Do you have a life? What makes you feel like a biggie boy.

I'm done. You're a child..

Phil Florian · Post by **Phil Florian** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:47 am

Will Brown wrote:There is an unresolved question about the constitutional provision, but it would take a pretty mean-spirited court to rule that the child of American military personnel or missionaries (Romney, if I recall correctly) born overseas is not a natural born American citizen (does that also exclude people born by C sections?). The provision would obviously bar the governor of California from serving.

I can understand why the provision was included when the country was just being formed, but when a country that has benefited so much from immigrants, and which still nominally welcomes them, retains such a provisio n, it seems counter to what I think of as American values and should probably be removed. Just think, Ivor cannot, under current law, become president, even though he is as American as any of us.

Its interesting that a poster can assert that the attorney cited is a whack job who has been fined for filing frivolous lawsuits, but provides absolutely no reference to anything corroborating her "facts", yet no one asks for that corroboration. Could it be that everyone assumes that there is no such corroboration?

Just to be clear, you feel the highest court in the land should only support laws if they aren't "mean spirited?" Just to be clear. I would agree that it might be a silly part of the Constitution now but clearly it is still a part of the Constitution. Their job isn't to be nice and friendly...they are there to protect the Constitution. The Right should have thought of this years ago before nominating someone who isn't eligible to be President by the current laws.

Berg does have a history of filing wacky lawsuits as he was someone probably a year ago you would have agreed is wacky as he was always picking on George W. Bush and his cronies for their role in causing the 9/11 attacks. Here is one of this affidavits: http://www.911forthetruth.com/pages/affidavit.htm

He basically has called for the arrest and prosecution of Bush and Cheney in relation to crimes committed on 9/11/01. The Right was calling him a nutjob long before the Left. Now, with the Obama lawsuit, we all can agree he is the master of the frivolous.

If Berg is the best hope that McCain has, well, good luck with that.

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:00 am

Berg does have a history of filing wacky lawsuits as he was someone probably a year ago you would have agreed is wacky as he was always picking on George W. Bush and his cronies for their role in causing the 9/11 attacks. Here is one of this affidavits: http://www.911forthetruth.com/pages/affidavit.htm

He basically has called for the arrest and prosecution of Bush and Cheney in relation to crimes committed on 9/11/01. The Right was calling him a nutjob long before the Left. Now, with the Obama lawsuit, we all can agree he is the master of the frivolous.

If Berg is the best hope that McCain has, well, good luck with that.

He sounds like a mainstream Democrat to me... :wink:

sharon kinsella · Post by **sharon kinsella** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:10 am

Phil, did you see on there that Berg had his kid, I think he was 16 then, run for the senate?

I think he has too much time on his hands.

Greg Morley · Post by **Greg Morley** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:43 am

Stephen Eisel wrote:
Greg Morley wrote:Yes I did ...............then I checked on snopes and ............. well then John McCain even said " That one" is a decent man.
So how can it be legit with out a state seal?

The State Seal is on the back of the document.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200808150001

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:01 am

Greg Morley wrote:
Stephen Eisel wrote:
Greg Morley wrote:Yes I did ...............then I checked on snopes and ............. well then John McCain even said " That one" is a decent man.
So how can it be legit with out a state seal?

The State Seal is on the back of the document.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200808150001

thanks!

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:43 am

Berg is done

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/d ... nship.html

No. He held both U.S. and Kenyan citizenship as a child, but lost his Kenyan citizenship automatically on his 21st birthday.
The Rocky Mountain News did in fact run an online article asserting that Barack Obama holds both American and Kenyan citizenship. The article was incorrect, and the paper removed the item from the article and ran a correction. The paper's editor, John Temple, formally apologized for the error in an Aug. 15, 2007, column. Neither the correction nor the apology has prevented the column from circulating across the Internet as part of the latest set of baseless rumors that Obama is ineligible to run for president.

There was a grain of truth to what the Rocky Mountain News reported, though understanding why requires a brief history lesson.

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom's dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children:

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:45 am

Yeah, when even Hot Air is defending Obama, you know the claim is bogus.

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:14 am

Brian Pedaci wrote:Yeah, when even Hot Air is defending Obama, you know the claim is bogus.

these are strange times....

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:04 am

http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/ ... ials-admit

from a blog... If this is true then FactCheck.org has no credibility

Conspicuously, Hawaiian officials refuse to confirm that the information on the "original" certificate conforms to what has appeared on the "Certification of Live Birth" produced in 2007 that has so far been passed off as original by the Obama "Fight the Smears" site (here) and the Annenberg-backed site FactCheck.org (here). The latter dedicated a photoshoot to examining in pornographic detail a computer-generated facsimile that may bear no relation to the original document that the State of Hawaii now admits holding.

Greg Morley · Post by **Greg Morley** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:23 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27461933/

It may not belong here.......but what the hell. Since mud is being thrown around the deck about a baby killing socialist, wait marxist, wait redistributionist..............................

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:38 am

Greg Morley wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27461933/

It may not belong here.......but what the hell. Since mud is being thrown around the deck about a baby killing socialist, wait marxist, wait redistributionist..............................

lol... indirectly vs. directly (and a toast to boot)...

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 12:02 pm

Greg Morley wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27461933/

It may not belong here.......but what the hell. Since mud is being thrown around the deck about a baby killing socialist, wait marxist, wait redistributionist..............................

Also, did you actually read my last couple of post in this thread?