On Apr 28, 8:50*pm, J. D. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:18:18 -0500, "Paul K. Dickman"
wrote:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:19:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:34:51 -0500, "Paul K. Dickman"
wrote:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:03:21 -0500, "Paul K. Dickman"
wrote:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:99lgr654inlfod4dp0mf35rie1qnpf2j5i@4ax. com...
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:25:16 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:
rangerssuck wrote:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/...mas-long-form-...
"It may have been good politics and good TV, but it was bad for the
American
people and distracting from the many challenges we face as a
country."
It certainly distracted a lot of people from his genuine
shortcomings,
so
thanks a lot birthers.
So..is it a forgery or is it real?
So lets see an actual Photocopy of the birth certificate. *You do
know
that the above..is not a photocopy, dontcha?
It is a photocopy, you moron.
What it "isn't", is a Photostat. A process that made negative copies.
Paul K. Dickman
Photostat..ok. *So its NOT a photostat of the actual document. Correct?
Odd how its all green and everything. Were things printed on green
paper
in 1961?
Once again, you moron.
The green part isn't the part that is copied,
it is the paper it is copied onto.
It is green safety copier paper.
Paul K. Dickman
Id rather like to see *the original...it would be far far more
belivable.
Afterall..the Democrat Gov of Hawaii said it couldnt be found.....
So I take it you voted for Obama, given all the frothing you are doing
about the questioning if its real or not.
So hows that Hopey/Changey thingy working out for you?
Gunner
From another newsgroup...
After two and a half years, Obama comes up with a forgery.
Anybody with two eyes who buys this piece of **** as genuine, I
got a country full of trees with hundred dollar bills growing on
every branch I'd like to sell you. *Cheap.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ama/8477589/Ba
rack-Obama-hits-back-at-birthers-and-releases-birth-
certificate.html
Look at the type. *If this birth certificate was prepared on the
same typewriter, the partial strikes of the "O" and "K" keys
would be consistent throughout the document. *They are not. *The
capital "O" is misaligned in 6b yet aligned with other letters
through the document. *This is an impossibility since the upper
and lower characters are on the same striking key.
Compare blocks 7d, 11 and 16. *Same thing. *Typewriters may have
been antiquidated pieces of ****, but the striking keys did not
jump all over the place like they do on this supposed long form
document.
Where was this "birth certificate" when the Lt. Governor of
Hawaii was looking for it to certify Obama's eligibility for the
ballot? *Why couldn't the state registrar find it then? *The Lt.
Governor refused to certify Obama because the birth certificate
did not exist then.
All this time, and Obama couldn't still couldn't hire a good
enough forger to pull it off."
Interesting....very interesting....
Gunner
Hey, moron.
Take a look at blocks 7b, 12b and 16 of the birth certificate you claim is
what they are supposed to look like.
This is what they are supposed to look like...G
http://www.wnd.com/images/090728birthcert.gif
That's what I got.
Manual typewriters do that all the time.
But of course you know it must be a fake, because you know the truth.
He is the love child of Malcolm X and Xena: warrior princess, and he was
actually born in an alien spacecraft hovering over a Potemkin village in the
Urals.
Paul K. Dickman
The interesting point is not really whether Obama's birth certificate
is true or false, it is "why wasn't this discovered this before the
election?"
The argument seems to be that Obama wasn't a native born citizen and
thus can't legally be President. One would think that the party he was
running for, or the party he was running against would have assured
themselves that he really was qualified before the election, doesn't
one?
Apparently neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have enough sense
to pound sand in a rat hole and we are presently governed by the
smartest guy in the whole bunch..... after all he must have slickered
everyone.
Cheers,
John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)
One WOULD think those things, and one would be correct in one's
thinking. The problem is that after the election, certain people were
not happy with the results and have, since then, done everything they
could think of to change the result.
Perhaps if their party had taken the election (and their opponent)
seriously, and put up serious canditates for President AND vice
president, the result would have been different. But they thought it
all a joke and a beauty contest, and they got what they got.
And the guy in the White House is, most certainly the smartest of the
whole bunch who ran in that election, and I, for one, am happy that
the smartest candidate won.