Thread: obamas birth certificate here....

Originally Posted by dujac

you're the guy that thinks old hickory was born at sea, right?

Andrew Jackson's place of birth was murky. The Kenyan was born in Hawaii and his place of birth isn't murky.

Both North Carolina and South Carolina claim that Andrew Jackson was a native son. Jackson's birth certificate was elusive, just like that of the Hawaii born Kenyan.

I first read about Jackson's alleged birth at sea in The Frontiersman by Allen Eckert. It's the story of Simon Kenton who had an encounter with Andrew Jackson as a young man. The encounter was recorded. Check it out:

"But historian and novelist Allen W. Eckert claims in a footnote in his book, The Frontiersman, to have uncovered evidence that Jackson was actually born on a ship at sea in 1755. The evidence comes in the form of a story about a bar fight between Jackson and the book’s protagonist, Simon Kenton, that Kenton recounted in interviews later in his life. According to Kenton, he and Jackson, whom he did not know at the time, were about the same age. There is also, according to Eckert, a secondhand account of a remark by Jackson who responded to a question from a man named Marshall Anderson about his place of birth with the answer, 'I was born at sea.'"

http://personalliberty.com/2012/03/1...murky-history/

Here's the book...check it out yourself:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Frontiersm.../dp/0945084919

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

If you mean it is not a tragedy like the Beirut barracks bombing was not a tragedy, and the invasion of Iraq was not a tragedy, but were the end results of foreign policy decisions made by Obama, Reagan and Bush- I can accept that.

But I still consider all of those tragedies on the human level.

I am referring to foreign policy decisions the consequences of which were roughly foreseeable. Now the entire house of cards is collapsing for Obama and America in the Middle East and the Maghreb.

I suspect that the Hawaii born Kenyan will no longer be taking victory laps over the death of Osama bin Laden. It's too bad that the price of experience is so high.

The foreign policy tragedies for America are only just beginning. It might be advisable for Obama to stop claiming his foreign policy has been successful. Maybe the Hawaii born Kenyan should focus on jobs. That would be more productive than claiming an illusory expertise in foreign affairs.

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

I am referring to foreign policy decisions the consequences of which were roughly foreseeable. Now the entire house of cards is collapsing for Obama and America in the Middle East and the Maghreb.

I suspect that the Hawaii born Kenyan will no longer be taking victory laps over the death of Osama bin Laden. It's too bad that the price of experience is so high.

The foreign policy tragedies for America are only just beginning. It might be advisable for Obama to stop claiming his foreign policy has been successful. Maybe the Hawaii born Kenyan should focus on jobs. That would be more productive than claiming an illusory expertise in foreign affairs.

And again I would say- if you mean it is not a tragedy like the Beirut barracks bombing was not a tragedy, and the invasion of Iraq was not a tragedy, but were the end results of foreign policy decisions made by Obama, Reagan and Bush- I can accept that.

But I still consider all of those tragedies on the human level.

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

And again I would say- if you mean it is not a tragedy like the Beirut barracks bombing was not a tragedy, and the invasion of Iraq was not a tragedy, but were the end results of foreign policy decisions made by Obama, Reagan and Bush- I can accept that.

Jeff can't you read? I agreed with your interpretation.

But I still consider all of those tragedies on the human level.

That goes without saying. It appears that the ambassador may have been tortured and humiliated before being murdered. That is how Gadhafi died. In the Arab world "an eye for an eye" is the preferred approach.

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

Jeff can't you read? I agreed with your interpretation.



That goes without saying. It appears that the ambassador may have been tortured and humiliated before being murdered. That is how Gadhafi died. In the Arab world "an eye for an eye" is the preferred approach.

Sorry Albert- I didn't get that from your post.

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

Sorry Albert- I didn't get that from your post.

Not a problem my friend.

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

"But historian and novelist Allen W. Eckert claims in a footnote in his book, The Frontiersman…

exactly as i thought

Eckert has sparked controversy with his "hidden dialogue" technique in his historical narratives, using a novelist's technique to enhance dramatic events. After many years of research on a topic, he has felt free to recreate historical conversations and thoughts in what some critics have considered to be "an entertaining blend of fact and fiction" purporting to be a straight biography. His colorful evocations of history have been praised as more accessible than drier, more strictly factual, accounts. However, what he has termed “narrative biography” has been criticized as “an apparent euphemism for poetic license”.

kirkus reviews 1991


jackson was born in carolina, he said it, his mother said it and other witnesses said it

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/...ty_number.html




when you lie you have to remember twice as much. i noticed the podiums no longer sport the presidential seal. just barackobama.com sign of the times, hope, and change.

msnbc's motto is "lean forward".

I understand your concerns but I think that using drones like this is far better than either a) doing nothing or b) invading entire countries. The use of drones will continue to be evaluated, but from what I have read, the use of drones plus our extensive worldwide listening ability has reduced the capabilities of terrorists to act against the United States. I approve of that.

JEFF; It's "International Law", not a concern of mine. I understand it's cheaper, the drones are reusable and don't require people to go into harms way setting targets for missiles (controlled by computer pilots), but to intentionally kill, from a list or not, for suspicion of being something, really doesn't make much sense. What probably should concern people is the policy of "taking no prisoners" or taking responsibility for any, simply because of some political issue, GITMO. Since I believe a majority of Muslim Men are terrorist at heart, I can't disapprove of the policy.

Look- I have been answering 'questions' about Obama since 2007- back when smear emails were being sent out to my friends and family. I know far more about Barack Obama than I have ever known about any other President and far more than I know about Mitt Romney. There is nothing I have seen that indicates that Obama is either ineligible or has committed any of the numerous criminal acts that are claimed or implied.

And I've been following politics from the 1950's, been asked a couple hundred times to run for some local office, never happened and became concerned with Obama during the 2004 DNC Convention and their Keynote Speaker, Barack Obama. Not because I thought he might run for the Presidency, but for the direction it appeared the Democratic Party was headed. If you have some time and this link has not been previously offered, IMO it reveals the mindset of a person, who your inferring is as American as any previous American President. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy into that.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/foxvideo.asp

If you bring up the same issues that have been brought up over and over by Birthers, then yes I will call you a Birther for raising the same issue again.

I can't help how others vent their frustration, but I can tell you when they do use in some manner Obama's heritage, it's rarely intended to be racist. In claiming these people are racist, bigots or themselves un-American does not serve any purpose and only amplifies the "race issue" which the people of and the Dem Party, that have played the card.

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

Andrew Jackson's place of birth was murky. The Kenyan was born in Hawaii and his place of birth isn't murky.

Both North Carolina and South Carolina claim that Andrew Jackson was a native son. Jackson's birth certificate was elusive, just like that of the Hawaii born Kenyan.

I first read about Jackson's alleged birth at sea in The Frontiersman by Allen Eckert. It's the story of Simon Kenton who had an encounter with Andrew Jackson as a young man. The encounter was recorded. Check it out:

"But historian and novelist Allen W. Eckert claims in a footnote in his book, The Frontiersman, to have uncovered evidence that Jackson was actually born on a ship at sea in 1755. The evidence comes in the form of a story about a bar fight between Jackson and the book’s protagonist, Simon Kenton, that Kenton recounted in interviews later in his life. According to Kenton, he and Jackson, whom he did not know at the time, were about the same age. There is also, according to Eckert, a secondhand account of a remark by Jackson who responded to a question from a man named Marshall Anderson about his place of birth with the answer, 'I was born at sea.'"

http://personalliberty.com/2012/03/1...murky-history/

Here's the book...check it out yourself:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Frontiersm.../dp/0945084919

The Kenyan...LOL....man everytime I see that I laugh I lmao..