Is He Legitimate?

[rigney]

I'm sure someone has posed these questions and I simply haven't found the post yet. Google is filled with this rhetoric and I was hoping one of you might set me straight on the issue. Please don't quote me on the following, but it's verbatim from the internet. If the quotes below are true, I repeat, "TRUE", then: WE have BEEN "HAD" BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT OFFICALS FOR NOT CHALLANGING THIS MAN"S PRESIDENCY? IF NOT TRUE, THEN ME AND OTHERS LIKE ME, OWE HIM OUR APOLOGIES.

 

THE FOLLOWING ARE QUOTES FROM GOOGLE:

 

*BARACK OBAMA IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DUE TO THE FOLLOWING:

 

* The United States Constitution mandates the President of the United States must be a United

States “natural born” Citizen –

Article II, Section I;

* Obama was born in Mombasa, in what is now Kenya, Africa;

* Obama’s legal name is Barry Soetoro;

* Obama is an Indonesian Citizen as he was adopted/acknowledged by his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, an

Indonesian Citizen; and

* The Healthcare bill (ObamaCare) signed into Law by Obama on March 23, 2010 is unconstitutional and

voidable since he is ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

[insane_alien]

he's hawaiian. he has the birth certificate to prove it too.

 

also, there isn't anything unconstitutional about the healthcare bill.

 

this has been covered, there ain't anything wrong with his eligibility.

[Ophiolite]

IF NOT TRUE, THEN ME AND OTHERS LIKE ME, OWE HIM OUR APOLOGIES..

You owe him an apology.

You owe yourself a more critical approach to what you read.

[Sisyphus]

Barack Obama was born in the United States to a United States citizen. The definition of "natural born" is unclear and subject to dispute, but he is a natural born citizen under any definition. Also, there is no legal mechanism by which he could have lost his American citizenship while living with his stepfather. So those statements are false.

 

But even if they were true, what do you really think would happen if somebody proved it? He's been sworn in. He's been President for a year and a half. You think they're going to take him away in cuffs? And do you think that President Joe Biden would not sign the same bills?

[Mr Skeptic]

George Washington

John Adams

Thomas Jefferson

James Madison

James Monroe

John Quincy Adams

Andrew Jackson

 

None of these were natural-born citizens of the US, but became so after birth.

 

John McCain was not born in the US, but rather on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone. He's still considered a natural-born citizen though.

 

Obama was born in the United States (in Hawaii after it became a state) and has the birth certificate to prove it. As far as I know, the public has never before been shown the birth certificate of a president.

 

You owe him an apology.

You owe yourself a more critical approach to what you read.

 

Yup.

[Pangloss]

I'm surprised the whole "birthers" thing has stuck around so long, but it doesn't seem to have any traction amongst any respectable critics on the right. It's down low in the 9/11-denial territory, kept alive mostly by Glenn Beck and similar charlatans.

 

There's plenty of snake oil to be found in mainstream politics. No sense inventing more of it.

[jackson33]

rigney; Rather than going back over the "birther" question, leading up to the election and all it involved, once elected and confirmed by Congress, that question has been mooted. Even if later proved he was born outside the US, or had a different name than used to get elected or in deceived the electorate in getting elected, nothing being done by Government (Executive being the administration and enforcement) could or would be illegal on those grounds. Since I feel your real question is the HCB...

 

Taking "legitimate" out of the picture, then any legislation (Congress), the entirety or any part can and very often is tested through the legal system, if some one or thing can 1ST demonstrate being harmed or that harm is inevitable (hard to prove)and then because of that legislation.

 

As for the HCB (Congressional Legislation), I believe somewhere over 30 States have started legal action for different reasons and/or hoped results (State Rights/Mandating State Co-payments or on behalf of individuals forced to buy a service). Having said this those are parts of the 3000 page law, soon to be volumes of law and will not invalidate the "Bill" in total.

 

There is only one process, I'm aware of that can overturn the legislation and that's it repeal, which is also contestable and questionable if any political party can achieve, even if willing. Another talked about action falls under funding, which would take a majority of both chambers of Congress and until at least 2013 with the majority to over ride a VETO.

 

Since SS (1936) Medicare/Medicaid (1965) have been tested and found Constitutionally legal (as argued) and the HCB is itself an add on to that previous legislation (in part), IMO the idea of overturning the entirety is unlikely. From here, it get a little hairy and argumentative, I do believe certain parts can be overturned, but in overturning them, the end result would simply allow a 'Single Payer System' and exactly what I thing is/was intended.

 

To complicated this, Congress could pass an Amendment, leaving out the Executive, but this would require a 2/3rd vote both chambers (improbably, but possible), then ratification by 3/4th the States. How this would be written or offered is above my expertise, but the best approach.

 

 

 

 

None of these were natural-born citizens of the US, but became so after birth.

 

John McCain was not born in the US, but rather on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone. He's still considered a natural-born citizen though.[/Quote]

 

Skeptic, the reason born in America was inserted by most historians, was to encourage "The Head of State" be understanding of the Country, it's traditions and cultures of the Society. While every person here was a British Subject until 1776, ALL the Presidents were in fact born on American Territory. McCain was covered under the 1903 Panama Act, then all persons with American Parents were deemed 'Natural Born'....

 

 

George Washington (1789-97) Virginia

John Adams (1797-1801) Massachusetts

Thomas Jefferson (1801-09) Virginia

James Madison (1809-17) Virginia

James Monroe (1817-25) Virginia

John Quincy Adams (1825-29) Massachusetts

Andrew Jackson (1829-37) South Carolina

Martin Van Buren (1837-41) New York

William Henry Harrison (1841) Virginia

John Tyler (1841-45) Virginia

James K. Polk (1845-49) North Carolina [/Quote]

 

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/lessons/01/g35/presidents.html

[john5746]

Quick! Stop Obama, the illegal alien, before he shoots a cop!

[rigney]

Barack Obama was born in the United States to a United States citizen. The definition of "natural born" is unclear and subject to dispute, but he is a natural born citizen under any definition. Also, there is no legal mechanism by which he could have lost his American citizenship while living with his stepfather. So those statements are false.

 

But even if they were true, what do you really think would happen if somebody proved it? He's been sworn in. He's been President for a year and a half. You think they're going to take him away in cuffs? And do you think that President Joe Biden would not sign the same bills?

 

 

Try posing as a doctor, dentist or an attorney for a couple of years. Then let it be proven that you are a phoney. Know what your job will be? Stamping out license plates at "State Pen"

 

Quick! Stop Obama, the illegal alien, before he shoots a cop!

 

Well, you do have a sense of humor, even though it is a sick one.

 

he's hawaiian. he has the birth certificate to prove it too.

 

also, there isn't anything unconstitutional about the healthcare bill.

 

this has been covered, there ain't anything wrong with his eligibility.

 

 

You are quite vociferous in your stance "Nutcase". Have you ever actually read anything on the issue, or do you just have a funny, runny mouth that make statements reading like a bunch of bean farts? And, you keep the whole world guessing because you won't share this wealth of knowledge with them. Shame on you! Help Obama out. Prove your statements instead of letting an absolute idiot like me stir the sh--.

[ParanoiA]

Try posing as a doctor, dentist or an attorney for a couple of years. Then let it be proven that you are a phoney. Know what your job will be? Stamping out license plates at "State Pen".

 

You're absolutely right. Except that Obama has provided documentation on his birth certificate and has been accepted by congress. If I remember correctly, the qualification process is the obligation of the congress and even if they abdicate it in practice it does not transfer. He has been stamped as qualified and it's a done deal.

 

And it's an ugly accusation anyway. I have co-workers that cry out "photoshop!" when it's pointed out that he's presented his birth certificate. And it's pathetic, really. I reply that they are not citizens either and can't prove it since all of their documentation is photoshopped as well. It becomes an exercise in teenage logic to do battle by that standard.

 

Obama is a horrible president for more than enough reasons, one doesn't need to perpetuate the ridiculous to counter him - and it makes them look like nut jubs, and that won't help in 2012.

 

You owe yourself a more critical approach to what you read.

 

That hardly seems fair. He came here to ask, to query and confirm in a political forum full of brilliant minds - to critically reconcile what he read. That's very much a part of the critical thinking process. Not sure he deserves to be scolded to do what he did.

[Pangloss]

That hardly seems fair. He came here to ask, to query and confirm in a political forum full of brilliant minds - to critically reconcile what he read. That's very much a part of the critical thinking process. Not sure he deserves to be scolded to do what he did.

 

His second post (#9 above) suggests that his inquiry was posed dishonestly. But you're right that we can't assume that to be the case when people post initially.

 

Prove your statements instead of letting an absolute idiot like me stir the sh--.

 

The burdon of proof is on you, not him, and you're going to find that we have an extremely low tolerance for either unsubstantiated allegations posed as facts, or extremism in general, on this forum. Please consider this fair warning from a member of the staff: We're not interested in what you're selling in this thread. Thanks.

[rigney]

His second post (#9 above) suggests that his inquiry was posed dishonestly. But you're right that we can't assume that to be the case when people post initially.

 

 

 

The burdon of proof is on you, not him, and you're going to find that we have an extremely low tolerance for either unsubstantiated allegations posed as facts, or extremism in general, on this forum. Please consider this fair warning from a member of the staff: We're not interested in what you're selling in this thread. Thanks.

 

Selling what? And extremism? Are we on the same page? May I remind you Sir, no where did I make a personal accusation, slur or even the slightest innuendo concerning Mr. Obama. Those quotes were taken directly from "google". I merely asked for some formal direction in understanding the issue. Now, If that disqualifies me from being a part of this forum, so be it, and I really can't stop you. But don't threaten me as being dishonest by trying to hobble my curiosity or convictions. You may not agree with where I stand on the issues, but do you actually placate some of the insults I answered to, as part of a supposed, "civil discussion"? As Judge Judy says, dont pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. I don't like replying to insults, but I can.

[DJBruce]

President Obama was born Barrack Hussein Obama II in Honolulu, Hawaii. He has released a copy of his official Certificate of Live Birth, ie: a birth certificate. Any thoughts on the contrary are either uninformed, or simply pure idiotic smear. Anyone claiming his birth certificate is false is not correct, as there are numerous individuals who have personally held, and even in some cases photographed it, and are willing to stated the validity of the document.

 

Here is the copy of his certificate released by his campaighn.

 

This site discusses this conspiracy, and has more photos of the certificate. Even close ups of the seal, and the signature.

[rigney]

I'm surprised the whole "birthers" thing has stuck around so long, but it doesn't seem to have any traction amongst any respectable critics on the right. It's down low in the 9/11-denial territory, kept alive mostly by Glenn Beck and similar charlatans.

 

There's plenty of snake oil to be found in mainstream politics. No sense inventing more of it.

 

Glenn Beck?? Ah! so what? The guy admits to being in the tank for ten years and not knowing if he was even, or ever sober during that time. But using the word charlatan in conjunction with him seems a bit underhanded and unfair, dont you think? There's always two sides to a peanut butter sandwich. Reminds me of troubled times when we were duped by every nut case coming down the road with something to sell. Sadder yet, we're still getting the same snake oil treatment today, regardless of who's selling it.

 

President Obama was born Barrack Hussein Obama II in Honolulu, Hawaii. He has released a copy of his official Certificate of Live Birth, ie: a birth certificate. Any thoughts on the contrary are either uninformed, or simply pure idiotic smear. Anyone claiming his birth certificate is false is not correct, as there are numerous individuals who have personally held, and even in some cases photographed it, and are willing to stated the validity of the document.

 

Here is the copy of his certificate released by his campaighn.

 

This site discusses this conspiracy, and has more photos of the certificate. Even close ups of the seal, and the signature.

 

Thanks DJ, I appreciate your honest endeavor to supply me with some information on the issue. Curious? To say I am not, would be a damn lie. While I'm more conservative than liberal, I'm neither a Democrat nor a Republican, and continue to vote my convictions. To be perfectly honest, I have never voted along straight party lines, ever. Since I don't particurally like our Presidents politics and saw this: obama crimes.com thing on the tube, i googled it up. The rest is yesterday and todays history, with the exception of a three hour session of playing cards with one of my sons today. I won!

[Pangloss]

But using the word charlatan in conjunction with him seems a bit underhanded and unfair, dont you think? There's always two sides to a peanut butter sandwich.

 

No, there is only one side to an opinion, nor is that wrong or unfair. I have a specific opinion about Glenn Beck that you're certainly welcome to disagree with, but it is my opinion, and I've backed it up in previous discussions on this forum that you're more than welcome to review at your leisure.

 

At any rate, if you're making an honest inquiry, fine, perhaps you were just overreacting to being hammered by the members over a familiar subject that they fully dealt with when it was in the active news cycle in the fall of 2008. That having been said, I expect you to bear in mind that just as I prevent the majority liberal members from descending this board to the level of Democratic Underground, I also prevent the minority conservatives from descending it to the level of Free Republic. You're welcome -- no no, there's no charge.

[rigney]

rigney; Rather than going back over the "birther" question, leading up to the election and all it involved, once elected and confirmed by Congress, that question has been mooted. Even if later proved he was born outside the US, or had a different name than used to get elected or in deceived the electorate in getting elected, nothing being done by Government (Executive being the administration and enforcement) could or would be illegal on those grounds. Since I feel your real question is the HCB...

 

Taking "legitimate" out of the picture, then any legislation (Congress), the entirety or any part can and very often is tested through the legal system, if some one or thing can 1ST demonstrate being harmed or that harm is inevitable (hard to prove)and then because of that legislation.

 

As for the HCB (Congressional Legislation), I believe somewhere over 30 States have started legal action for different reasons and/or hoped results (State Rights/Mandating State Co-payments or on behalf of individuals forced to buy a service). Having said this those are parts of the 3000 page law, soon to be volumes of law and will not invalidate the "Bill" in total.

 

There is only one process, I'm aware of that can overturn the legislation and that's it repeal, which is also contestable and questionable if any political party can achieve, even if willing. Another talked about action falls under funding, which would take a majority of both chambers of Congress and until at least 2013 with the majority to over ride a VETO.

 

Since SS (1936) Medicare/Medicaid (1965) have been tested and found Constitutionally legal (as argued) and the HCB is itself an add on to that previous legislation (in part), IMO the idea of overturning the entirety is unlikely. From here, it get a little hairy and argumentative, I do believe certain parts can be overturned, but in overturning them, the end result would simply allow a 'Single Payer System' and exactly what I thing is/was intended.

 

To complicated this, Congress could pass an Amendment, leaving out the Executive, but this would require a 2/3rd vote both chambers (improbably, but possible), then ratification by 3/4th the States. How this would be written or offered is above my expertise, but the best approach.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skeptic, the reason born in America was inserted by most historians, was to encourage "The Head of State" be understanding of the Country, it's traditions and cultures of the Society. While every person here was a British Subject until 1776, ALL the Presidents were in fact born on American Territory. McCain was covered under the 1903 Panama Act, then all persons with American Parents were deemed 'Natural Born'....

 

 

 

 

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/lessons/01/g35/presidents.html

 

 

Birther???? Guess I'll have to catch up on some politics before I put my feet in the fire again. Took several minutes to realize there is no such word as birther. Or at least there wasn't four years ago when I bought an: American Heritage College Dictionary. I didn't read the bill, just the paraphrasing on Google. Well, Flas. Rep. Posey sure opened a can of worms. I had heard the complaints, wondered about them and still don't know?

 

Quick! Stop Obama, the illegal alien, before he shoots a cop!

 

 

I know it was just a joke John Boy, but even with the lol, a very serious one. Have an acquaintence who ran tour trips to Germany for Lufthanza, some twenty or so years ago. The plane was in taxi mode ready to depart Cleveland Hopkins for Frankfurt. A couple of good old boys with too much sauce already under their belts, decided to have a little fun. A couple of seats apart, one yells at the other, "HI JACK". His buddy yells back, "HI JACK". After a couple exchanges, one of the stewardesses tells the Captain who taxis the plane to a far end of the runway, the two idiots are taken off in cuffs. After about an hour, the plane is finally allowed to leaves, while the two jackasses were explaining their actions to a judge. I don't know if they ever got their money back? Joe Holtzer, the tour guide; wasn't a happy camper either.

 

No, there is only one side to an opinion, nor is that wrong or unfair. I have a specific opinion about Glenn Beck that you're certainly welcome to disagree with, but it is my opinion, and I've backed it up in previous discussions on this forum that you're more than welcome to review at your leisure.

 

At any rate, if you're making an honest inquiry, fine, perhaps you were just overreacting to being hammered by the members over a familiar subject that they fully dealt with when it was in the active news cycle in the fall of 2008. That having been said, I expect you to bear in mind that just as I prevent the majority liberal members from descending this board to the level of Democratic Underground, I also prevent the minority conservatives from descending it to the level of Free Republic. You're welcome -- no no, there's no charge.

 

 

Even I realize this thing has run into total redundancy. But perhaps ten or maybe twelve years ago, I misplaced or lost my drivers licences. After looking several days and not finding them, I decided I'd best get a duplicate. Called the DMV and asked what I should bring to substantiate gettin a new one. Was instructed to bring my birth certificate, SS#, a couple pieces of mail and/or bills would do.

I'm seventy eight years old and still have my original birth regisrtration, pieced together with scotch tape. Put everything on the counter and after some discussion between a couple clerks, was told my original birth registration certificate, dated December 11, 1932 woud not suffice. I had to have an original birth certificate. Guess what? I called birth registration in Charleston, W.V., explained the situation, gave them my SS#, my mother and fathers names, when and where I was born, my credit card# for $20.00 dollars and 5 days later I had a brand new original birth certificate. Next day, I had a brand new drivers licenses.

Moder science is truely amazing. And there's no charge for that little nugget of wisdom either. Simply put, dont lose your drivers licensces without having a birth certificate to back up you claim to get a new one.

Edited July 17, 2010 by rigney

[Pangloss]

I'm seventy eight old and still have my original birth regisrtration, pieced together with scotch tape. Put everything on the counter and after some discussion between a couple clerks, was told my original birth registration certificate, dated December 11, 1932 woud not suffice. I had to have an original birth certificate. Guess what? I called birth registration in Charleston, W.V., explained the situation, gave them my SS#, my mother and fathers names, when and where I was born, my credit card# for $20.00 dollars and 5 days later I had a brand new original birth certificate. Next day, I had a brand new drivers licenses.

 

Yes, I've heard this is becoming more common but I don't believe it's been implemented in all states yet. I have a personal interest in this area and I'm hopefull that it will be the case in all 50 states soon (if indeed it's not already).

 

My father (about your age) has always had trouble in this area. He was born in the Phillipines prior to WW2 (lived in the American "colonial" community), and many records were lost during the Japanese occupation, so he's always had trouble dealing with documents like passports and such. As you say, modern technology is truly amazing.

[Marat]

While I don't doubt that Obama is a 'natural born citizen' of the U.S., there is an interesting legal question about what would now have to be done if it were discovered that he was not. Bills become law only after passed by Congress and signed by the President, so all these laws would be arguably invalid. However, when it was discovered that all the laws of Manitoba, Canada, were invalid because they had not been passed in French and English, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that the need to preserve the rule of law trumped the need to have all valid statutes in both official languages, and so it validated all the invalid statutes to preserve the integrity of the legal system. The province was required to prepare the required French translations, but the laws were still valid pending that translation.

 

I don't doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court would reach some similar solution.

 

Similar questions about the eligibility of George Romney, the father of former Governor Romney of Massachusetts, to become President were raised in 1964 because of his purported birth to American Mormons hiding out from U.S. anti-polygamy laws in Mexico. Romney's candidacy never got far enough for the issue to be tested, however.

[rigney]

While I don't doubt that Obama is a 'natural born citizen' of the U.S., there is an interesting legal question about what would now have to be done if it were discovered that he was not. Bills become law only after passed by Congress and signed by the President, so all these laws would be arguably invalid. However, when it was discovered that all the laws of Manitoba, Canada, were invalid because they had not been passed in French and English, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that the need to preserve the rule of law trumped the need to have all valid statutes in both official languages, and so it validated all the invalid statutes to preserve the integrity of the legal system. The province was required to prepare the required French translations, but the laws were still valid pending that translation.

 

I don't doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court would reach some similar solution.

 

Similar questions about the eligibility of George Romney, the father of former Governor Romney of Massachusetts, to become President were raised in 1964 because of his purported birth to American Mormons hiding out from U.S. anti-polygamy laws in Mexico. Romney's candidacy never got far enough for the issue to be tested, however.

 

Glad you didn't beat me up too bad about my post offering. Hells fire! President Obama is just a single person. A man, no more, no less than Washington, Lincoln or any of the others presidents. Did I vote for him? No! That's what secret ballot boxes are all about. They elected him, not me. Our problem is in electing people to the Senate and Congress who lead these Presidents astray, and by the nose. Right now Obama is probably as twitchy as a whore in church wondering who's trying to cut his proverbial throat or screw him.

[jackson33]

While I don't doubt that Obama is a 'natural born citizen' of the U.S., there is an interesting legal question about what would now have to be done if it were discovered that he was not.[/Quote]

 

Marat; Nor do I, but I do question the spirit of the Constitution and the reason for having that requirement.

 

Bills become law only after passed by Congress and signed by the President, so all these laws would be arguably invalid. [/Quote]

 

Technically, not true and there are 535 other people involved in producing any legislation, any one of which as responsible. If the President does NOT sign any BILL and Congress is in Session for the following ten days, that bill automatically becomes law (If they go into recess, then it's dead). If he VETO's any bill, Congress can override the VETO and he (Administration) is still liable to administer and enforce that Bill/Law. Then he/she has no say in an Amendment to the Constitution, the ultimate laws of the land.

 

I don't doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court would reach some similar solution.[/Quote]

 

More importantly it would never reach SCOTUS. Presidents, all 42 have/are been protective of the Office and maintain some powers even after leaving office. The very nature of the Office, demands harming certain persons, whom under law would have legal standing, to sue. While Filing Suit against Government is not impossible, very FEW reputable attorneys would actually take such a case and in most cases it's simply not legal. If a person loses a home and can prove it was because of taxes, obviously harmed, but he can not then sue himself (the Government) for damages.

 

Governor Romney of Massachusetts, to become President were raised in 1964 because of his purported birth to American Mormons hiding out from U.S. anti-polygamy laws in Mexico.[/Quote]

 

Willard Mitt Romney Governor of Massachusetts (2003-2007), was born in Michigan 1947 and a Natural Born American. Your thinking his Father George Wilcken Romney, Governor of Michigan who was born in Mexico to American Residents and "working in Mexico" 1907 and legally elected in 1962. He would have been a legal candidate for President.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Romney

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Q&A about posting pictures moved

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/50773-posting-pictures/page__pid__554984#entry554984

[rigney]

Would like to make this possibly last post to this topic. Bear with it if you will.

 

Nothing earth shaking, just some cold, hard facts concerning my life, and how and why I was born with a silver plated spoon in my mouth. My Mom demanded that I have the spoon. Just a short synopsis of my life growing up dirt poor and proud. My Dad made 2 bucks a day for ten or twelve hours of ass breaking work, loading coal in a mine back in the early thirties. My Gandpa, the same. Me, I never stepped inside one. My Dad and Grandpa were both union men. United Mine Workers of America. Both served as President of their local unions. Until I went into the Army in 1953, I thought there were only two kinds of people in this world, those who wore the "Riding Breeches" and black, shiny leather boots, or those wearing coal dirt covered overalls, hard hats and filthy faces. All of this I later found out, was Bull Shit. We, as a nation of individuals make our own heat. I don't blame any president from Washington down through Obama for our problems. But I do blame the as- holes we elect to other government positions that stir the shi- making solutions impossible for the presidents. To wit, Our Congress and Senate. These conniving bast--ds to a (man)? I use the term loosy in comdemnation, not in admiration; of both right and left. Look at what these individuals make in pay and insurances, "not earn"; in comparison to you, me or any one else. Lucrative? Bet you as-. Are any of them, left, right, black, white, or other race more intelligent than you? Hell no! Smarter? Hell yes. They have us on the hook and they know it. People like Washington, Adams, Hamilton and Jefferson must be flipping in their graves to imagine what our government has become. How do we retrieve and return integrity to our system of government? Term Limits. Let some new thinkers get into the mix. They can't screw things up any worse than they have become over the past sixty years. Again gentlemen, Term limits. Had an acquaintence who told me in confidence, "If I can make it to the Ohio Senate, I can retire, if not from that, something even better. Well, the poor bastard didn't make it. He's a clerk at Sears with a Masters. Just remember, there has never been a bill passed that one or more of these greasy fingered sons a bit---s haven't manipulated putting their hands in your and my pockets to pay for it. Term limits gentlemen, must be mandated. That is probably our only salvation if it can be made to happen. Few of these political mavens go into government without $ signs and lifelong security in mind and their eyes. Very few of them want to go back to working at any kind of a job. Pray that you had their lifelong retirement and insurance plans. And the handouts and bailouts? They should have never happened in the first place. Shut them down. Better they fall than destroy a nation with their greed and stupidity. As I said, I'm more of a middle of the roader since I've worked my entire life trying to maintain my own esteem and that of my wife and family. I lean neither right nor left since I don't believe in Socialism, Oligarchy or a Welfare state. Take your pick, they all suck. But it is all of our faults. The trickle down thing? If there is no industry, or enterprising from the "Haves", in this country, then there is no trickle down, only stagnation for the rest of us. If government breaks these "haves" with excess taxes, then you and I had better have some damn good friends in Sherwood Forest. I find life fulfilling, not from any wealth, which I have never amassed, but the fact I've spent the better part of my life working with no regrets. I'm honest and have never conned a single person out of anything. We are on the verge of killing this golden goose that has sustained us for three hundred years plus. Let's not let it happen. It's time we started controlling our government, not our president. He is but a single person. Thanks

Edited July 18, 2010 by rigney

[iNow]

Can you talk more about this golden goose which has been sustaining us since at least 1710?

[rigney]

Can you talk more about this golden goose which has been sustaining us since at least 1710?

 

Sorry about that. Guess I should have said, better than four hundred years. But then, who's counting?

[iNow]

Sorry about that. Guess I should have said, better than four hundred years. But then, who's counting?

Right. Perhaps I can say this another way. I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you please elaborate?