The Hun is a (steady) Drip - Sam Sewell

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:08 pm

mari wrote:

You know, sometimes I think Mr. Mensa isn't too bright.... He's blogging agani.

Quote:

Recently, WND documented that Stanley Ann Dunham was in Seattle two weeks after Obama's alleged birth date. How did she get there with a newborn son – when airlines until 1972 prohibited travel by children less than 6 weeks old?

Ummm, if Stanley couldn't get little Barack from Hawaii to Seatlle because he was too young, how the heck did he get from Mombasa? Answer me that, brainiac!

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23539

[linkbtn]And the hits just keep on a comin',http://obamacrimes.us/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=1008&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=200[/linkbtn]

Quote:

by Delta on Today, 12:55
I have a strong suspicion that Obama Sr. impregnated Stanley Ann when she was still 17 and a minor. It is likely that he was forced to marry her in exchange for the cover-up of this statutory rape. When Barry was born, his birth was not reported to Hawaiian authorities accurately, but later as an Aug. 4 birth, a convenient 9 months after his mother's 18th birthday. Barry is probably 1 to 2 months older than claimed. Hence, the unusually "swift" arrival in Washington state on Aug. 19.

The big question: Was there a period during 1961 in which Sr. and Stanley Ann attempted to be a couple?

Maybe she was taken to Kenya to give birth as part of an obligation to Obama family custom and/or to obscure the timing of conception. During this time, Stanley realizes that she can't ever be part of a real marriage with Obama Sr. and separates to Washington in order to escape him. Later she obtains the divorce.

This leaves Obama Sr. able to continue attending school in America, Stanley Ann an "honest" woman, and Barry with a hopelessly screwed up birth record. The expensive private school starts to make sense if it means no one checks his documents closely. The records in Hawaii must be Kenyan or an obviously falsified certification that may date years later (say, kindergarden time?).

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:08 pm

realist wrote:

[linkbtn]And the hits just keep on a comin',http://obamacrimes.us/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=1008&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=200[/linkbtn]

Quote:

by Delta on Today, 12:55
I have a strong suspicion that Obama Sr. impregnated Stanley Ann when she was still 17 and a minor. It is likely that he was forced to marry her in exchange for the cover-up of this statutory rape. When Barry was born, his birth was not reported to Hawaiian authorities accurately, but later as an Aug. 4 birth, a convenient 9 months after his mother's 18th birthday. Barry is probably 1 to 2 months older than claimed. Hence, the unusually "swift" arrival in Washington state on Aug. 19.

The big question: Was there a period during 1961 in which Sr. and Stanley Ann attempted to be a couple?

Maybe she was taken to Kenya to give birth as part of an obligation to Obama family custom and/or to obscure the timing of conception. During this time, Stanley realizes that she can't ever be part of a real marriage with Obama Sr. and separates to Washington in order to escape him. Later she obtains the divorce.

This leaves Obama Sr. able to continue attending school in America, Stanley Ann an "honest" woman, and Barry with a hopelessly screwed up birth record. The expensive private school starts to make sense if it means no one checks his documents closely. The records in Hawaii must be Kenyan or an obviously falsified certification that may date years later (say, kindergarden time?).

The operative word in all of this is "Maybe."

elliewyatt · **Joined:** Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:31 pm **Posts:** 2675

mari wrote:

How did she get there with a newborn son – when airlines until 1972 prohibited travel by children less than 6 weeks old?

This is just bullshit like the "travel ban for Americans to Pakistan in 1981". This nonsense about infants not being able to fly in 1961 came out a couple of months ago and I researched it (it's posted here, but who knows where). The truth is that it was recommended that parents check with the baby's physician (for ear or breathing problems) before flying. No travel ban to Paskistan, no travel ban for babies.

Curious Blue · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:24 pm

realist wrote:

[linkbtn]And the hits just keep on a comin',http://obamacrimes.us/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=1008&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=200[/linkbtn]

Quote:

by Delta on Today, 12:55
I have a strong suspicion that Obama Sr. impregnated Stanley Ann when she was still 17 and a minor.

The age of consent in Hawaii in 1961 was 14. It was raised to 16 in 2001:

Quote:

Act 1, Second Special Session Laws 2001, amended §§707-730 and 707-732 to require, for the offenses of sexual assault in the first degree and sexual assault in the third degree, that the minor be at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old, and the defendant be at least five years older than the minor and not married to the minor. The legislature found that, in many cases, minors lacked the capacity to understand the responsibilities and ramifications of engaging in a sexual relationship with adults. Current law allowed adults to enter into consensual sexual relationships with minors as young as fourteen years old without penalty. The legislature believed that these minors were unfairly burdened with the presumption of knowing the consequences of engaging in sexual relations with an adult, and that the Act would protect Hawaii's children from harmful sexual relationships with adults. Conference Committee Report No. 66, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1394.

Act 62, Session Laws 2003, amended §§707-730 and 707-732 by removing the sunset provision of Act 1, Second Special Session Laws 2001, which raised the age at which a person can consent to sexual contact from fourteen to sixteen years of age in most cases. Act 62 made permanent the provisions that raised the age of consent to sixteen in most cases. House Standing Committee Report No. 568.

See: COMMENTARY ON §§707-730 TO 734 at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurren ... 7-0734.htm

Edit: Note: This can be filed under "Things any person with a functioning brain and access to Google can find out in 30 seconds."

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:33 pm

Curious Blue wrote:

realist wrote:

[linkbtn]And the hits just keep on a comin',http://obamacrimes.us/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=1008&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=200[/linkbtn]

Quote:

by Delta on Today, 12:55
I have a strong suspicion that Obama Sr. impregnated Stanley Ann when she was still 17 and a minor.

The age of consent in Hawaii in 1961 was 14. It was raised to 16 in 2001:

Quote:

Act 1, Second Special Session Laws 2001, amended §§707-730 and 707-732 to require, for the offenses of sexual assault in the first degree and sexual assault in the third degree, that the minor be at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old, and the defendant be at least five years older than the minor and not married to the minor. The legislature found that, in many cases, minors lacked the capacity to understand the responsibilities and ramifications of engaging in a sexual relationship with adults. Current law allowed adults to enter into consensual sexual relationships with minors as young as fourteen years old without penalty. The legislature believed that these minors were unfairly burdened with the presumption of knowing the consequences of engaging in sexual relations with an adult, and that the Act would protect Hawaii's children from harmful sexual relationships with adults. Conference Committee Report No. 66, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1394.

Act 62, Session Laws 2003, amended §§707-730 and 707-732 by removing the sunset provision of Act 1, Second Special Session Laws 2001, which raised the age at which a person can consent to sexual contact from fourteen to sixteen years of age in most cases. Act 62 made permanent the provisions that raised the age of consent to sixteen in most cases. House Standing Committee Report No. 568.

See: COMMENTARY ON §§707-730 TO 734 at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurren ... 7-0734.htm

Edit: Note: This can be filed under "Things any person with a functioning brain and access to Google can find out in 30 seconds."

Stop assuming they have functional brains.

PatGund · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:38 pm

Curious Blue wrote:

Edit: Note: This can be filed under "Things any person with a functioning brain and access to Google can find out in 30 seconds."

The problem being:

1) Lack of functional brains, and

2) Every birther knows that Google is biased against them

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:56 pm

Quote:

The age of consent in Hawaii in 1961 was 14. It was raised to 16 in 2001:

Actually it was 16 in 1961 the 14 only came in in 1974. See page 5 of http://hawaii.gov/ag/main/publications/reports/legislative_reports/regular_sess_03/rpt_age_of_consent_tf.pdf

wavey davey · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:10 pm

PatGund wrote:

Curious Blue wrote:

Edit: Note: This can be filed under "Things any person with a functioning brain and access to Google can find out in 30 seconds."

The problem being:

1) Lack of functional brains, and

2) Every birther knows that Google is biased against them

Yes, everyone knows that Google is an Obama company.

Remember that Sat. morning several months ago when someone at Google screwed up and tagged EVERY web site on the internet as an attack site? At the OC and at Orly's place they only noticed that their own sites were tagged as such and it was proof that Google was in the tank for Obama.

Of course, the thing I wondered at the time was why did they have to do a Google search to find their little nut-houses every time they go there? You would think that they would have long since added it to their "Favorites" list. But, oh yeah, but there I go assuming that Birfers are able to act rationally.

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:20 pm

wavey davey wrote:

Of course, the thing I wondered at the time was why did they have to do a Google search to find their little nut-houses every time they go there? You would think that they would have long since added it to their "Favorites" list. But, oh yeah, but there I go assuming that Birfers are able to act rationally.

Are you sure that Internet Explorer 3.0 on Windows 95 has a "Favorites" button? I assume that many of the elderly Birfers are working with that level of technology.

iangould · **Joined:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:10 am **Posts:** 728

TollandRCR wrote:

wavey davey wrote:

Of course, the thing I wondered at the time was why did they have to do a Google search to find their little nut-houses every time they go there? You would think that they would have long since added it to their "Favorites" list. But, oh yeah, but there I go assuming that Birfers are able to act rationally.

Are you sure that Internet Explorer 3.0 on Windows 95 has a "Favorites" button? I assume that many of the elderly Birfers are working with that level of technology.

This raises the possibility of a whole substrata of Birthers so dumb they can't get on the net at all.

The people we're seeing are the intellectual elite of Birtherdom.

June bug · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:47 pm

iangould wrote:

TollandRCR wrote:

wavey davey wrote:

Of course, the thing I wondered at the time was why did they have to do a Google search to find their little nut-houses every time they go there? You would think that they would have long since added it to their "Favorites" list. But, oh yeah, but there I go assuming that Birfers are able to act rationally.

Are you sure that Internet Explorer 3.0 on Windows 95 has a "Favorites" button? I assume that many of the elderly Birfers are working with that level of technology.

This raises the possibility of a whole substrata of Birthers so dumb they can't get on the net at all.

The people we're seeing are the intellectual elite of Birtherdom.

OMFG

what a concept!

LM K · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:37 pm

I Visited the Hun's a few days ago, but found it to be more foul than usual.

That man must have some kind of cognitive disorder going on.

PatGund · **Posted:** Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:02 pm

TollandRCR wrote:

wavey davey wrote:

Of course, the thing I wondered at the time was why did they have to do a Google search to find their little nut-houses every time they go there? You would think that they would have long since added it to their "Favorites" list. But, oh yeah, but there I go assuming that Birfers are able to act rationally.

Are you sure that Internet Explorer 3.0 on Windows 95 has a "Favorites" button? I assume that many of the elderly Birfers are working with that level of technology.

Sure it's not "WebTV"??

lyssandri · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:53 am

jsnbase wrote:

I don't understand people like this. A high IQ - as with athletic or artistic ability - isn't proof of anything; it's something you have to live up to.

And Mensa may be the single most useless organization on the planet. You'd think a society that restricts by intelligence might actually accomplish something once in a while. I could apparently join by sending in a copy of my SAT scores, but I'd only be doing it to mock people like Ari. It seems a little petty.

It doesn't help that the first Mensa member I actually met did something criminally awful to someone very dear to me. If you're an actual grown-up and you're trumpeting your IQ and Mensa membership, well, you're doing it wrong.

I was a member when I was *much* younger, but found that most of the other members were too boring or too self-absorbed for me to want to actually spend much time around them, so I let my membership lapse after that first year.)

The reason Mensa never "accomplishes" anything, though, is because that's not it's purpose - it's just a social organization.

PatGund · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:37 am

thorswitch wrote:

I was a member when I was *much* younger, but found that most of the other members were too boring or too self-absorbed for me to want to actually spend much time around them, so I let my membership lapse after that first year.)

Same here. Joined in my late teens / early 20's, attended a few meetings, checked out some SIGs, and decided I'd rather watch paint dry.

lyssandri · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:04 pm

mari wrote:

Quote:

I think we should classify people by what their favorite music is, personally

Perfect Patricia! From now on I'm "80s pop with a touch of techno". So much more decsriptive of me than "Caucasian"

Hmmmm. If I wanted to be really specific, then, I'd be a "Rush-an" or on a somewhat larger scale, a "Rush & Pink Floyd, with a bit of emo, lilith fair and orchestral soundtrack thrown in for good measure"

iangould · **Joined:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:10 am **Posts:** 728

As I've said before, "I'm Johnny Cash" would be rather confusing coming from a short, fat bearded man with an Australian accent.

Jez · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:15 pm

thorswitch wrote:

mari wrote:

Quote:

I think we should classify people by what their favorite music is, personally

Perfect Patricia! From now on I'm "80s pop with a touch of techno". So much more decsriptive of me than "Caucasian"

Hmmmm. If I wanted to be really specific, then, I'd be a "Rush-an" or on a somewhat larger scale, a "Rush & Pink Floyd, with a bit of emo, lilith fair and orchestral soundtrack thrown in for good measure"

Let's see: Eclectic. It's easier to day then Classical-Big-Band-Crooners-Early-Jazz-70s-80s-90s-Metal-Anger-Rock-Weirdo-Alternative-Punk-Emo-Goth-Trance enthusiast. :hug:

lyssandri · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 12:32 pm

mari wrote:

You know, sometimes I think Mr. Mensa isn't too bright.... He's blogging again

Quote:

Recently, WND documented that Stanley Ann Dunham was in Seattle two weeks after Obama's alleged birth date. How did she get there with a newborn son – when airlines until 1972 prohibited travel by children less than 6 weeks old?

Ummm, if Stanley couldn't get little Barack from Hawaii to Seatlle because he was too young, how the heck did he get from Mombasa? Answer me that, brainiac!

Oh, those crazy birfers! I love it when one of their new pet theories crashes into one of their older pet theories. It makes for such a pretty little explosion of ... well, I'd have said brains, but they have to have those in order for them to get all blowded up...

Litlebritdifrnt2 · **Posted:** Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:07 pm

"Oh, those crazy birfers! I love it when one of their new pet theories crashes into one of their older pet theories. It makes for such a pretty little explosion of ... well, I'd have said brains, but they have to have those in order for them to get all blowded up..."

You know I used to read Texas Darlin's blog for a giggle. It was hilarious the way her commenters would come up with a new theory and they would chase it around for days, adding more and more layers to it until one of them would say "no wait but that would mean he was born in Hawaii" or something then there would be a collective sigh before they all ran like dogs after a ball after the next theory. It was hilarious. Same with this theory, and the Frank Davis or Malcolm X being the daddy, "no wait that would mean he was an NBC no matter where he was born" *sigh* and off they go chasing after that ball again, ears akimbo and tails a wagging.

LM K · **Posted:** Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:44 pm

mari wrote:

My favourite brilliant ignoramus is blogging again. He has posted an article about the swine flu that includes...

Quote:

Let’s all take a breather and recall some history. The first mass U.S. vaccination in 1976 was a total fiasco. Some 40 million took shots against a pandemic that never materialized. At least 25 died as a result of the vaccinations and 500 developed paralyzing Guillain-Barre syndrome

Does he not realize that 25 out of 40 million is .000000625? Thats pretty f-ing good considering it was given to the elderly, sick and infirm!! But, he has some Shaklee he will sell you instead. =))

And is selling a self-published book about firing your doctors!

meson · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:45 pm **Posts:** 377

I cleaned up my birther bookmarks....the Hun was first to go! :roll:

Youtube-said-so · **Posted:** Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:43 pm

mari wrote:

My favourite brilliant ignoramus is blogging again. He has posted an article about the swine flu that includes...

Quote:

Let’s all take a breather and recall some history. The first mass U.S. vaccination in 1976 was a total fiasco. Some 40 million took shots against a pandemic that never materialized. At least 25 died as a result of the vaccinations and 500 developed paralyzing Guillain-Barre syndrome

Does he not realize that 25 out of 40 million is .000000625? Thats pretty f-ing good considering it was given to the elderly, sick and infirm!! But, he has some Shaklee he will sell you instead. =))

You would think Mr Mensa would of learned by now when it comes to possible pandemic, its better to err on the side of over-reaction than under-reaction.

wavey davey · **Posted:** Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:03 pm

meson wrote:

I cleaned up my birther bookmarks....the Hun was first to go! :roll:

I haven't been paying much attention to the Hunster lately. Is he still boasting that his heavy hitter lawyers are promising a clear win straight up to SCOTUS?

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

The Hun is a (steady) Drip - Sam Sewell

Who is online