Obama Treason Charges Advance In Tennessee Grand Jury

It will turn out exactly how all the other birther nonsense has turned out. With absolutely no merit.

Simplistic Reality, while we don't agree on most things, I've always appreciated your contributions around the vine. I've seen you put the fringe on the left in their rightful places when they spit out agregious mis-truths. I was just hoping to see you do the same when it came to those on the fringe of the right. Or do you really believe there is credence to all the birther stuff?

I'll come out against birthers when libs come out against truthers. There are nuts on both sides of the fence. Unfortunately, the leftie nuts (Van Jones) get appointed to the Obama administration.

Americans don't have the "legal standing" to waste the courts time with a non-issue. I can't believe there are still so many people grasping at this rediculous assertion that Obama is not a citizen. Don't you think if it were true that he was inelegible the first people to call him on it would have been the GOP leadership?

And FYI, I am far from a lemming sir. And I most certainly don't have a messiah. Obama or otherwise.

lol

Spirit, you're absolutely right there are crazies on both sides. And I agree we should call all of them on it. I surely don't support the truthers.

Or do you really believe there is credence to all the birther stuff?

I actually don't believe the birther conspiracy crap. I don't think a cover up of that scale would of / could of actually happened. I did my own research and came to my own conclusions.

I really wish the Far Right and Far Lefts would just go away. Obama is a natural citizen the FBI does a full background check on every candidate. I remember some guy posting in 2008 that Al Qaeda planned this all back in the 60s and that Obama is a Manchurian Candidate. This is much worse than the neoliberals claiming McCain was a traitor and also not a natural citizen.

As for his birth certificate.

The document meets the U.S. State Department’s requirements for proving U.S. citizenship. That, along with a 1961 newspaper announcement of his birth and statements last year by state officials in Hawaii, remove any doubt that Obama is indeed a natural-born citizen.

American President bowing to a Saudi King?

Guilty as charged

American President holding hands with and kissing Saudi King? Definitely guilty as charged.

Freemason, I just thought I'd add some more to your post since you decided to take that route.

Do you understand that claiming that American citizens have "no legal standing" to question the president is both unconstitutional and dangerous? Perhaps as a leftist lemming that doesn't concern you, because it questions your Messiah.

I thought the term "no legal standing" in court refers to the fact that their argument is baseless, nonsubstantial, and demanding of no further court action. No need to suggest there is any "unrealistic" worship of Obama by referring to him as a Messiah. It is the rightwing that call him Messiah, obviously out of jealousy for his being popular.

But since Obama has never lied us into war, sold out to Big Pharma, Big Oil or Big Health Insurance, and also never given huge tax cuts to the rich with borrowed money, then at least he insn't in the running for Antri-Christ material.

So there is no threat to democracy to say there is no "legal standing", and regardless of all facts, no reason to call those who disagree with you "lemming". Basically, what you've done is insult every leftist on here by calling them partisan (without proof) and religious nuts (again, without proof), and even suggest that all leftists are "dangerous" traitors for not being "concerned" with the constitution (nice insult, but again no proof).

And all those insults were delivered while at the same time, proven yourself to be either too partisan to listen to reason, or woefully ill prepared for understanding simple legal jargon.

Thank you Mylo, that's what I meant to say, only way better. Friend request sent.

Every time a birther is shown a web link to, or hard copy of Obama's official birth certificate (you know, the one that is recognized by the federal government when applying for a passport), they pull the equivalent of a 9-year old covering his ears and shouting "nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you!"

You can lead right wingers to the truth, but you cannot make them embrace it.

Each state has its own standard for an official record of birth.

I wish he would just produce the stupid thing and put this behind everyone. It is a waste of valuable energy and focus for everyone.

As I understand, there is a difference in a "Birth Certificate" and a Certificate of "Live Birth". I just assumed that the GOP already THOURGHELY and RIGGERSLY checked all this out prior to his election. Wouldn’t you think???????? He just needs to produce what the conspiracy theorist want and end this BS!! As I understand, all other Presidents and President Elects have ALWAYS produced "THE" actual Birth Certificate. Is this not true?

American President holding hands with and kissing Saudi King? Definitely guilty as charged.

That was protocol. The bowing to the Saudi King was not. The King's subjects do not even do that. Besides... it got Obama's Grandmother a personal invite to attend Hajj for the Muslim pilgrimage as his personal guest this year.

Even you should be able to understand that every US citizen has a stake in the outcome, and connection to, the action challenged

Yes...The NeoCon Wingnuts have given the average citizen a nice tool to have in the box of tricks. You think the Obama years are bad, Wait till a GOPer gets elected to the Whitehouse. I'll file a suit everyday from Jan 20th till he leaves office...

What's good for the goose...

This meeting of the Loyal & Protective Order of the Pointy Hats will now come to order.

All in favor of calling the Commander in Chief a treasonous infidel will speak.

Free Mason-1490678

American President bowing to a Saudi King?

Guilty as charged

It could have been worse: He could have been holding hands and french-kissing that King.

P.S.
With or without tongue action, that kiss did not look kosher.

I'll end this silly debate right here and now.

Obama is an American citizen, he is George Bush and Dick Cheney's cousin.

Anyone who thinks a treason case will go anywhere when brought by the grand jury of a state court is just deluding themselves. Even assuming that any grand jury could bring treason charges against a sitting president (itself unlikely; the Constitutional remedy to try and convict a sitting president is the impeachment process), it would necessarily need to be a federal court.

More conservative/Republican anger manifesting itself in stupidity, inflammation of the American public, slander of an American and waste of taxpayer dollars.

From the article:

The road to justice has been bumpy, to say the least. Commander Fitzpatrick has been ridiculed, blocked in court house halls, threatened, accused of mutiny and labeled a “crackpot” by Obama supporters who see no need for a standard background check for the most powerful office in the world.

Do people in this country believe that anyone could become president without someone ensuring that said individual meets the requirements to be eligible for this office? Talk about conspiracy theorists... I thought that was a leftie trait.

Now, this places the Tennessee Grand Jury squarely in the middle of the biggest Constitutional Crisis in U.S.

And who was questioned the constitutionality of Bush's Patriot Act? That piece of legislation is one of the worst infringements of civil rights we've seen in postmodern times.

If Article II – Section I – Clause V of the U.S. Constitution means nothing -- then no part of the Constitution means anything today.

Hello!!!! Legalized torture? Illegal wiretapping? An illegal war? Where were these people then?

But with each passing day, the stakes get higher and higher in the case over who Obama/Soetoro really is and whom he really serves.

"Except the sun, on these three strangers, is all of a sudden way the hell brighter than usual and I can see the...seams where they’re put together. And, almost, see the apparatus inside them take the words I just said and try to fit the words in here and there, this place and that, and when they find the words don’t have any place ready-made where they’ll fit, the machinery disposes of the words like they weren’t even spoken."

Yet ten months after inauguration, Obama’s entire past remains a mystery under lock and key.

Nope, we don't know anything about Obama, do we? Wow, it's just not weird enough...

As a site administrator at the History Commons, I fend off 9/11 truthers and their bag of conspiracy theories on a regular and frequent basis. I find nothing in their rants to indicate that they're particularly leftist (or right-wing, either). It's an issue that seems to trump left-right ideological dissent.

And the right wing slowly sinks further into insanity.

"Don't you think if it were true that he was inelegible the first people to call him on it would have been the GOP leadership?"

In a word, no. That would only be true is there was a significant difference between republicans and democrats running our country. There isn't. Their policies and rhetoric may differ slightly, but their goal is the same. They all want to stay in power as long as possible while telling everyone they preside over what to do in every aspect of their lives. If you can grasp that simple concept, then again, the short answer to the question you posed would be no.

Marcv, you understand wrong. There is no difference whatsoever between a birth certificate and a certificate of live birth, and there is no such thing in this country as a "long form birth certificate" that is somehow different from the type of document Obama has already produced. Why doesn't Obama produce what the birthers are asking for? Because he already did, and they claim it's not valid. You can't win with these people. They'd claim that any documentation he showed them was forged, and since he has better things to do than waste his time constantly supplying more evidence to people who will refuse to believe it anyway, he rightly refuses to do any more than he has already done, which was present all legal documentation necessary to prove that he is a natural born citizen.

I know a couple of "Truthers" They were Republican voters & not all the Truthers are "Nuts" most just want another investigation into 9/11 because of Errors & Contradiction's in the 9/11 commission reports. Some of them were given the label just because they want a new investigation conducted.

Then you have the Alex Jones NWA/Truther believers who believe that the Government covered up 9/11 cause it was all a plan to bring in a one world Government, They have no party affiliation because they know both parties are controlled by the Elite Bankers that run the Federal Reserve & believe in small Government. Charlie Sheen is NWO/TRUTHER & he appears to be Liberal.

So as you can see conspiracy theories are Beliefs like Religion, At the end of the day RIGHT OR LEFT don't matter. Rather what you choose to believe.

For myself I believe in neither party & I believe Obama is a Citizen, I had faith he would bring change to the way business is done in Washington but I believe he is the same as the old boss & if you open your eyes you will see that he is FAR FROM A SOCIALIST. He continues most of Bush's Policies with a Different Pitch & people it up eat it up easier, continues to give out Corporate Giveaways. He is a Corporate Welfare whore like every Republican & Every Democrat before him, Both parties are the same cut from the same cloth. They love their Masters of industry & the Lobbyist who line their pocket. The Corporate Welfare State is still thriving under Obama & will continue to thrive after him, it is the natural order of our Political System "CORPORATISM"

He is a Corporate Welfare whore like every Republican & Every Democrat before him

Corporations have become like the creatures in "Alien," they cannot be easily killed or removed.

It will take more than four years to extract their claws from our economy.

As I understand, there is a difference in a "Birth Certificate" and a Certificate of "Live Birth"

You understand wrong. My birth certificate - the only one I've ever had - says CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH. It was issued by the State of Utah, where I was born. It allowed me to get a driver's license and a passport.

This is a tired ass argument. He has proven his citizenship, end of story.

Another exercise in stupidity.

Unfortunately, i have to agree with the libs on this. This is stupid. He showed a certificate of live birth that was confirmed from the Hawaii govt.

As I understand, there is a difference in a "Birth Certificate" and a Certificate of "Live Birth". I just assumed that the GOP already THOURGHELY and RIGGERSLY checked all this out prior to his election. Wouldn’t you think????????

:-)))) oh my, thank you so much for such a big laugh tonight! everything is so serious here on the NV sometimes, your comment really lightened it up!

I'm still laughing......

Simplistic Reality

Lol. I wonder how this is going to turn out.

Simplistic Reality I went back to the Samson Alabama news paper and read the story and it did not mention anything about the army from Fort Rucker are any other Federal agency, some body please tell me (WTF) this man is talking about, the courts should fine those a hefty fee for takeing up the courts time, can these people hate so strong as to try and bring the country down, Hillary and Bill did everything they could to see if what was going around as to his birth, the CIA the Nsa the FBI AND EVERY OTHER AGENCY IN WASHINGTON CHECKED THIS MAN OUT.

Just a couple of thoughts:

My birth certificate from the hospital I was born in has never been accepted as my 'official' birth certificate. I have had to get a copy of the one filed with the state. Which one is Obama using?

This would never have become an issue if Obama had not gone to such great lengths to seal all of his other records. Is that even allowable under the Sunshine laws?

Just curious.

R. Donald Snyder

And the right wing slowly sinks further into insanity.

And another left-wing Viner farts out content-free more bigotry.

good one.

I don't care one speck about the birth right of Obama, but I do care about our Constitution to which he swore an oath to uphold against any enemy foreign or domestic. So far, I haven't seen much of his upholding our Constitution. He and most political occupants of this administration seem to ignore the legality of what they want to do. This is my complaint. No-one is above the law....not even the president. I say, this should be heard in court and we all will be watching to see if this court will uphold the Constitution or be swayed by politics.

I'm not trained in the law so I can't comment with authority about the constitutionality of the president's actions and policies. On the subjects of morality and fiscal responsibility though he's given us plenty to chew on before his first six months in office were behind him.

"And it's working."

So, the auto bailout kept them from going bankrupt?

The stimulus created(or saved) 3 million jobs?

Unemployment hasn't gone over 8%?

Our allies haven't denied barry's requests for help?

Our enemies haven't continued to act against the interests of not only the U.S. but the world?

I don't know what positive steps you are talking about, and I have even less of an idea of which of those steps are working. Unless your definition of "working" differs from mine, they aren't working at all.

Our enemies haven't continued to act against the interests of not only the U.S. but the world?

Oh man, that is comical!

lmao!

Dennis P. McCann

As for the things you mentioned in your comment...well, I'm not going to address them here because they aren't the topic of this thread.

Actually you did address them:

He inherited an awful mess, and he's taken positive steps to turn it around.

What you term "positive steps" others among us see as epic fiscal bungling by a man who (A) knows nothing about our capitalist economy, and (B) has no sense whatsoever how to manage a catastrophe of this magnitude. His entire approach is to dream up ideas and then toss hundreds of billions of dollars at them in the woefully sorry hope that something will stick. As for health care, the feds are the kiss of death.

But back to the topic. I doubt highly that any constitutional challenge to Obama's presidency will come to anything. SCOTUS already kicked the argument about his birth certificate to the curb. I'm no legal eagle, but my spider sense says the Tennessee case doesn't have any legs either.

All of which means little anyway. Career federal politicians are like a hydra; lop off one head and two grow in its place. Even if somehow Obama were removed from office, next in line is the vice president. Nothing would improve beyond foolish and reckless business as usual.

Keep it up your proving my point.

The liberals on newsvine have set forth a strategy from Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. They use name calling, deletion, collapsing and many other methods in an attempt to discourage and silience those who disagree with them.

It is clear they love to pile-on when-ever possible or use thread drive-by tactics. This will continue on newsvine until they believe in monitoring in a fair and balanced effort to allow all ideas to be stated.

Regardless of what happens here, the rules for radicals will not rule this country, because the constitution will prevail in the end.

Chief -

Are you advocating a return of the Fairness Doctrine?

This will continue on newsvine until they believe in monitoring in a fair and balanced effort to allow all ideas to be stated.

I hate to break it to you Chief, but there are radicals on both sides of the fence that are equally guilty.

LadySaidy: Your question came straight out of the book, Always challenge with a question.

I hate to break it to you Chief, but there are radicals on both sides of the fence that are equally guilty.

I have to agree. I've seen just as many liberal points of view collapsed on conservative threads as the other way around. I do think people are too quick to quash dissent rather than actual offensive comments, though - on both sides of the fence.

VerbalBarb: I agree with you comment, what I see and am refering to is the organized tactics to collapse a comment they don't agree with. It does happen on both sides on different articles.

LadySaidy: Your question came straight out of the book, Always challenge with a question.

Chief - I have never read Saul Alinsky's book.

I ask questions to better understand what a person is stating, not to challenge someone. I also found it curious that you are advocating for all sides to be heard in a "fair and balanced" way. That was the premise of the Fairness Doctrine.

So I asked what could be considered a very germaine question: Are you advocating a return of the Fairness Doctrine?

Just trying to understand.

You are playing the circle question game. Newsvine has NOTHING to do with the "Fairness Doctrine". The Fairness Doctrine is media, this is not and they are apples and cresent wrenches in comparison. I won't bite on your tactic, and you are not curious, your purposeful. Read it or not, you play the game.

What I find compelling about this article is the site it is on. Down at the bottom, there is an ad that states "Palin 2012" and a "Thank you George Bush" right next to it. Now that is something to be proud of. Consider the source....

Are you advocating a return of the Fairness Doctrine?

No, because nothing is preventing liberals from having their own radio programs (other than lack of listeners, of course)

Tyler:

Would you mind explaining your reasoning with regard to 2.1 and 2.2? Is posting vulgarity, in this case a reference to the author "jerking himself off", not a violation of the Conduct Policy in the User Agreement? Is insulting another viner, in this case calling him immature and his comment dumb, not a violation of the Code of Honor? In what way are either of these comments "relative contributions" to the discussion?

If I'm wrong in my positions on this issue, so be it, but it would be nice to know the logic behind your decision.

Me too, Tyler!!!

Yeah, I'm with 1.58 on this. That seems to be the definition of "no value." For your convenience:

that just about sums it up...this is the dumbest article I have ever read...it sounds like the author was jerking himself off as he wrote it...pretty frickin pathetic

And so it goes.

the CoH tells us what to do about violations, and only gross violations should be deleted. A masturbatory reference is hardly a gross or unusual violation when it comes to public message boards.

Well thanks James and Jarandhel for giving me a more vast knowledge of the CoH and user agreement. The argument was drawn out a little too much haha but it's all good.

In regards to my comment to netprophet:
Sorry for further inflaming the situation if that's what I've done. But the part calling his comment the dumbest comment i've ever read, was in regards to him saying " this is the dumbest article i have ever read" and i wasn't technically calling HIM immature, just his one comment i saw as highly immature.
just thought i'd clarify on why i said what i said.

Though, i am still pretty new to this place. I'm still learning the ropes and what not, but at least i understand the code and agreement completely now. LOL.

In regards to my comment to netprophet:

I thought your response was appropriate in content and context, i.e., following a provocative post. Extreme statements are bound to draw a response.

the CoH tells us what to do about violations, and only gross violations should be deleted.

Nothing was deleted. Why do you keep ignoring that fact and referring to what an author shoud do about deleting something, when the comment in question was the community collapsing a vulgar comment?

Nothing was deleted.

Yes, I understand the distinction.

The thing is collapsing a comment is part of the deletion process. I believe it is still the case that after a certain number, the article or post is automatically deleted.

Yeah, I'm with 1.58 on this. That seems to be the definition of "no value."

I'm with you all on this. What the HELL is the value in someone saying that this is a dumb article, with or without the jerking off part?

Bad call, Tyler.

It's all about context. This is a loosely moderated column. The rules are not as strict. So far, only the grossest violations will be moderated.

The owner sets the tone.

that just about sums it up...this is the dumbest article I have ever read...it sounds like the author was jerking himself off as he wrote it...pretty frickin pathetic

it sounds like the author was jerking himself off as he wrote it

you would know the sound eh? Real mature of you.

This is the dumbest comment i have ever read on the vine.

2.1 No value

why did my post get collapsed? wow

Your post got collapsed bringer because the vine is a breading ground for people that are of netprophets mindset. And since you disagreed, you got collapsed. Many posters on NV get collapsed or even deleted by the moderators for absolutely no CoH infraction at all. The irony is, deleting a post not violating the CoH is in itself a CoH violation.

Neither of those comments should have been reported. That sort of reporting is counter-productive.

Um, you don't think talking about the author of the seed jerking off is report worthy? That seems odd.

Oh man, thanks for explaining this to me bert! I especially love when people try to discredit everything you say, like 800lb gorilla has been doing LOL. And talking about the author jerking off is productive James? hmmm.... interesting...

The collapsing of comments can occur when enough people click the [!] button and select an option. If enough people choose say "No Value", the comment will collapse.

I don't think the author can collapse a comment, but they can delete.

you don't think talking about the author of the seed jerking off is report worthy?

There's no rule against being vulgar.

It would appear to violate CoH 1-

Above all else, respect others. Address issues and arguments and refrain from making personal attacks. If you see something disrespectful or inappropriate, report it - rather than further inflaming the situation. More +

1. Adding a personal attack to an otherwise valuable comment or article serves only to render that contribution invalid in its entirety. Such content is subject to moderation.
2. Harassment and/or intimidation of others on Newsvine will not be tolerated, and patterns of such behavior may result in account cancelation.

And CoH 5-

Acts that run contrary to the spirit and purpose of Newsvine, including attempts to circumvent the Code of Honor & User Agreement, are not allowed. More +

1. A user's participation at Newsvine is judged as a whole. Recurring counterproductive behavior or negative contributions - even if not specifically addressed in the Code of Honor or the User Agreement - may still warrant removal of that person from the Newsvine Community.

That refers to behavior towards other viners. Netprophet was making a reference to the article itself.

Cursing, vulgarity, or being impolite are not reasons to report someone, unless that behavior serves to stoke a flame war.

Oh man, thanks for explaining this to me bert! I especially love when people try to discredit everything you say, like 800lb gorilla has been doing LOL. And talking about the author jerking off is productive James? hmmm.... interesting...

Maybe it's because you repeated part of the post that originally got collapsed? I thought 2.1 was of no value, but your comment seemed ok.

The first four comments on this thread are technically no value. The owner of the column let them stand.

Members of the community (wrongly) reported the second and third comments. Neither is a CoH violation.

Thanks for pointing that out out james. For now on, I will begin any posts I make on articles seeded I disagree with by suggesting the author masturbated while creating it, since in your NV world that's an acceptable post.

That would reflect poorly upon you.

I didn't make the rules. You wish to harass people, go right ahead. You can be banned for improper reporting.

The owner of the column let them stand.

The owner doesn't have anything to do with collapsing comments, that's done by people who read the comments. Obviously, enough thought the post was of no value to collapse it. Not much you can do about it.

Once again you allow condesending comments to be made about Conservatives and collapse the comments of conservatives. The term "wing-nuts" is allowed as a term that would not be allowed if it was used with "Left-Wing".

The liberals on newsvine have set forth a strategy from Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. They use name calling, deletion, collapsing and many other methods in an attempt to discourage and silience those who disagree with them.

It is clear they love to pile-on when-ever possible or use thread drive-by tactics. This will continue on newsvine until they believe in monitoring in a fair and balanced effort to allow all ideas to be stated.

Regardless of what happens here, the rules for radicals will not rule this country, because the constitution will prevail in the end.

Once again you allow condesending comments to be made about Liberals and collapse the comments of Liberals.

The liberals on newsvine have set forth a strategy from Limbaugh Rules for Radicals. They use name calling, deletion, collapsing and many other methods in an attempt to discourage and silience those who disagree with them.

It is clear they love to pile-on when-ever possible or use thread drive-by tactics. This will continue on newsvine until they believe in monitoring in a fair and balanced effort to allow all ideas to be stated.

Regardless of what happens here, the rules for radicals will not rule this country, because the constitution will prevail in the end.

This is what is done by viners like Bill "Suckling at the Government Tit" Harrison and Pat N.

Not much you can do about it.

Oh brother. I will try tis one more time for those that actually care about facts and truth:

1. The collapsed posts on this thread were by two people from opposite ideologies. Neither is a CoH violation. While reporting may be ideologically motivated, clearly it comes from both sides. Neither is right.

2. This has nothing to do directly with me, and I have no desire to 'do' anything about it. My sole purpose is to provide readers with accurate information about the CoH and violations reporting. You choose to ignore it, that's up to you. No need to make this personal.

I will say, from the reactions here, a couple of you are headed towards being reported, and probably suspended. It is interesting that a person who has been here a couple months and another that has seeded one link feel comfortable admonishing someone who has been here over a year and has almost 400 articles and seeds.

Way to build community.

3. No, the owner of a column cannot collapse comments, only delete them. The point is, on this particular thread, the original post was 'no value' and was not deleted. This makes it de facto 'of value', and subsequent posts that continue in the same vein, regardless of manners or class, are within the CoH.

Now, anymore snide remarks?

Nastiness breeds nastiness, so do vulgarity and snarkiness. The 'citation please', and 'link please' crowd, too. People know stuff; agree or disagree, but suck it up! if you don't know it it is not someone's job to prove to you what they know- look it up! And it is CHRISTMAS TIME!!! Be nice

Ok I'm just going to let it go. No use arguing over the CoH.

I will say, from the reactions here, a couple of you are headed towards being reported, and probably suspended. It is interesting that a person who has been here a couple months and another that has seeded one link feel comfortable admonishing someone who has been here over a year and has almost 400 articles and seeds.

I'm confused on who you mean is admonishing the experienced one? Are you referring to me? Sorry, i thought that "jerking off" talk was highly inappropriate for a community. And frankly, the length of time someone has been here, does not change anything. I still think it's highly inappropriate and immature. But i will hold my tongue. You are right.

And it is CHRISTMAS TIME!!! Be nice

Tut, tut...please refer to it as Festivus. There are libs and moslems listening. lol

BoT I am not sure who said this, cuz alot of the above authors are on permignore. As I understand the rules it does not matter how long you have been here or how many articles or seeds or whatever you start. You are either following the CoH or you aren't. And as for the folks who have been here- I am not sure what they have to crow about- some of them are the worst ones- deleting comments on their seeds because they don't agree. It is really unseemly.

And frankly, the length of time someone has been here, does not change anything.

No, it does.

How many discussions have you been a part of here, where the Code of Honor was discussed? How many articles have you read on the subject? Are you aware that it has been revised, and what the reasons were for those revisions?

I am not trying to berate you, but the idea that experience doesn't matter is a dangerous one. And before anyone cracks about Obama or Palin, a lack of perception can be just as dangerous.

I still think it's highly inappropriate and immature. But i will hold my tongue. You are right.

And you are right about that. It is vulgar. But this is a public forum, where differing values are free to mix, and do.

And no, I wasn't referring to you.

The point is, on this particular thread, the original post was 'no value' and was not deleted.

And, I'm pointing out to you that the post about "jerking off" was found to be of no value by enough people to get it collapsed (not deleted, by the way - unless that was done since the last time I viewed it). Obviously, the post that you think of as "no value" did not get the same reaction as the collapsed post did. That's because different people see things different ways. It's very possible that people who thought the post was of no value, but wouldn't have done anything, were pushed to do something because they found the content offensive, as well as being of no value.

I'm not quite sure why you are taking all this so personally, and talking about people who are disagreeing with you being suspeded. For what, exactly? Finding the "jerking off" comment to be of no value?

If the person who had his/her comment collapsed has an issue with it, they can contact NV staff, and get it restored. But, surely, NV isn't going to get upset with some people who found that the comment made was offensive and of no value (not dissention or different views) and collapsed it.

Nope Tango- its Christmas time!! It may indeed also be festivus and Kwanzaa and Hanukah, but baby I wish you a Merry Christmas. LOL

I am not trying to berate you, but the idea that experience doesn't matter is a dangerous one.

Fine, I've been around on Newsvine two years longer than you have. I joined in February 2006, while you joined in February 2008. And I can say with some certainty that the statement made by netprophet was properly collapsed. It falls under Newsvine Code of Honor Article 4, Section b:

"If a comment contains a personal attack or other gross Code of Honor or User Agreement violation, it may be deleted - regardless of the quality or nature of the rest of the comment. Users are welcome to re-post moderated comments without the offending portion(s)."

The User Agreement, you'll note, specifically warns of the following prohibited content which users agree not to post:

"is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, known to be false and presented as truth, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;"

Since you've already stipulated this content was vulgar, and clearly many people objected to it enough to report it, I trust you can see why netprophet's comment was properly collapsed now?

For that matter, Bringer of Truth's comment was also properly collapsed, as he insulted netprophet by saying he was immature and that his comment was dumb. While netprophet probably deserved that for his post, Newsvine Code of Honor Article 1 is quite clear: "If you see something disrespectful or inappropriate, report it - rather than further inflaming the situation."

If the person who had his/her comment collapsed has an issue with it, they can contact NV staff, and get it restored. But, surely, NV isn't going to get upset with some people who found that the comment made was offensive (not dissention or different views, but offensive) and collapsed it.

Yes, absolutely.

Obviously, the post that you think of as "no value" did not get the same reaction as the collapsed post did. That's because different people see things different ways.

Yes. Exactly why people shouldn't report things just because they don't like them. That is why there is a code. Your sentiment is why 90% of the reporting here is wrong, and why (I believe) things are so poorly moderated.

As you may notice, if you read the CoH, no where is there an admonition against being offensive.

Do not delete comments based on disagreement; remove only comments that grossly violate the Code of Honor or the User Agreement.

I'm not quite sure why you are taking all this so personally, and talking about people who are disagreeing with you being suspeded. For what, exactly? Finding the "jerking off" comment to be of no value?

By creating an account here, you have become a member of a community. I am a member of that community. Your behavior and the behavior of others affects me.

Not to mention, I am tired of seeing this sort of neocon BS where someone in a position of knowledge attempts to convey that knowledge, and is met with snark and dismissiveness. It is willful ignorance, and frankly, I find it disgusting.

the post about "jerking off" was found to be of no value by enough people to get it collapsed

That does not make it correct, or a violation. In fact, this discussion clearly shows that many people have a weak understanding of how to apply the CoH.

As you may notice, if you read the CoH, no where is there an admonition against being offensive.

The Code of Honor is one of two foundational documents for Newsvine. The other is the User Agreement, referred to explicitly in the very section of the COH you have quoted. The User Agreement contains the admonition against vulgarity and being offensive.

Do not delete comments based on disagreement; remove only comments that grossly violate the Code of Honor or the User Agreement.

OK, I'm not trying to be dismissive here, but you are quoting from the directions to an author about deleting comments on his seed.

The comment in question was not deleted by the author, nor was it deleted at all. It was simply collapsed by the community and is still there for viewing.

Jarandhel- Thank you- I have JA on permignore- so I have no idea what he posted. But you are correct of course, I would just hope that we are all grown up caring people, and we shouldn't need a CoH or an agreement not to be nasty to each other.

Fine, I've been around on Newsvine two years longer than you have. I joined in February 2006, while you joined in February 2008.

OK. We'll keep things personal. I reiterate my question above: how much have you participated in discussions about the CoH? A quick search reveals none at all.

And I see that you have been here longer, but have contributed little more than 20% of the content I have. So you've had an account, but if time is measured by action, you haven't been here long at all.

I do appreciate the additional input into this discussion. However, you missed something. Directly above the your citation in the user agreement:

You understand that by using the Site, you may be exposed to User Content that may be offensive, indecent or objectionable.

That is why there is an agreement about behavior, and a code that tells us what to do about violations. Wild reporting is not one of the things to do.

Bringer of Truth's comment was also properly collapsed

Snark is not a reason to report. Dissing someone's comment isn't either.

OK, I'm not trying to be dismissive here, but you are quoting from the directions to an author about deleting comments on his seed.

The comment in question was not deleted by the author, nor was it deleted at all. It was simply collapsed by the community and is still there for viewing.

In this respect, James is actually right. Collapsing a comment was created as a compromise so that the community could help moderate columns by majority vote. Collapsing is supposed to be a "community deletion" rather than a moderator deletion, and is only supposed to be done for the same reasons that a moderator would delete. This is the reason that collapsed comments can't be deleted by moderators... it's considered to effectively be the same thing by the system. But because responsibility for the moderation is diffused they're just collapsed rather than being full-on removed like regular deleted comments.

Jarandhel- Thank you-

Yes, thank you. From me and everyone else who has an idea of "no value" and "vulgar" that may be different from others'.

Off topic: I can't remember where to find my ignore list, can someone remind me? I never had to look at it much before, but geeze, it's growing!! ;0)

OK, I'm not trying to be dismissive here

Not taken that way. Please don't take my dispassionate analysis as being offended. That isn't the case. I am just trying to clarify a subject that has been well debated here on newsvine. Discussion is always welcome.

you are quoting from the directions to an author about deleting comments on his seed.

Yes, I understand the distinction.

The thing is collapsing a comment is part of the deletion process. I believe it is still the case that after a certain number, the article or post is automatically deleted.

Now, in this discussion alone, nearly everyone has bemoaned abuse of reporting, yet nearly everyone thinks they are within their rights. Do you see the contradiction?

As I say above, the CoH tells us what to do about violations, and only gross violations should be deleted. A masturbatory reference is hardly a gross or unusual violation when it comes to public message boards.

**EDIT**

Collapsing is supposed to be a "community deletion" rather than a moderator deletion, and is only supposed to be done for the same reasons that a moderator would delete.

Yes.

Comments are leapfrogging. Will return after we sync back up.

Your ignore list is at your site-click on your name and it should go there. Click on the exclamation point and the last one is ignore author. I have so many people on ignore it isn't funny, but when I can predict what you say by your screen name I am not interested in conversing with you. I only want people who open my eyes, not make me wince!

OK. We'll keep things personal. I reiterate my question above: how much have you participated in discussions about the CoH? A quick search reveals none at all.

Generally, only when someone hasn't understood it, as you seem not to. I haven't felt the need to participate in discussion about altering it, I've just read the discussions and kept myself informed about the alterations and the reasons for them.

And I see that you have been here longer, but have contributed little more than 20% of the content I have. So you've had an account, but if time is measured by action, you haven't been here long at all.

Unfortunately for you, time and experience are not measured by "action" in the form of articles and seeds, they are measured by actual time and experience. I have been here twice as long as you have, and whether or not I have posted articles and seeds in that time I have participated in discussions here for that entire time, as my comment history will show. You are the one who brought up experience as a criteria in this discussion. Surely you aren't trying to change that criteria now that someone with more experience than you has joined the discussion?

I do appreciate the additional input into this discussion. However, you missed something. Directly above the your citation in the user agreement:

You understand that by using the Site, you may be exposed to User Content that may be offensive, indecent or objectionable.

I didn't miss it, actually. That is an acknowledgement that, as a user, you may be exposed to objectionable content on the site before it is dealt with by moderation or the community. It is not an acknowledgement that such objectionable content is acceptable for users to post.

That is why there is an agreement about behavior, and a code that tells us what to do about violations. Wild reporting is not one of the things to do.

I'm sorry, but your interpretation is wrong. The Code itself specifically directs users to moderate content which violates the User Agreement. Both are equally binding.

Bringer of Truth's comment was also properly collapsed

Snark is not a reason to report. Dissing someone's comment isn't either.

It was not reported for snark, it was reported for calling netprophet immature and saying his comment was dumb. And yes, dissing someone's comment in this way is a violation of the COH. It's considered an indirect personal attack. You might want to read the Recommended Guidelines for Newsvine members, specifically the third bullet point.

I agree with every point J But I warn you JA is one of those who just are not interested in mature conversatin. JA lives to call names and cause flame throwing. It seems futile to try to change that - just hit ignore.

doctorsteph and VerbalBarb:

You're both quite welcome. Glad I could help straighten things out. :)

ur ignore list is at your site-click on your name and it should go there.

I can't find it on my site. I don't know if I've gone partially blind, or what, because I KNOW I found it once. lol

If you click on your Friends page, below your list of Friends you can find the list of people you're ignoring.

The easiest method, if you really want to ignore someone, is to click on the exclamation mark on one of their comments (as if you were going to report them) and then select "Ignore This Author" from the bottom of the list. It's kind of a weird spot for it, but it is convenient.

Oh, wait, misunderstood the original question... doctorsteph is right about where to find the list of people you're ignoring. Sorry about that.

You are the one who brought up experience as a criteria in this discussion. Surely you aren't trying to change that criteria now that someone with more experience than you has joined the discussion?

No, I brought up experience not as a criteria, but as a reason to avoid dismissing the remarks of others.

I accept your assertions about your experience, and welcome your input.

The Code itself specifically directs users to moderate content which violates the User Agreement. Both are equally binding.

"Grossly" violates.

You might want to read the Recommended Guidelines for Newsvine members, specifically the third bullet point.

Do you see how we have gone from a 'code,' to an 'agreement,' to a set of 'guidelines?'

As we go, the scope gets broader, and the penalties weaker. In fact, the guidelines have no penalties mentioned.

The comments above tread on the guidelines and the agreement, but do not trigger the code.

I agree with every point J But I warn you JA is one of those who just are not interested in mature conversatin. JA lives to call names and cause flame throwing. It seems futile to try to change that - just hit ignore.

:(

No value, and a personal attack. Don't worry, I didn't report it.

You have made it clear with every post that you don't like me. Perhaps now we can let it go?

The Code itself specifically directs users to moderate content which violates the User Agreement. Both are equally binding.

"Grossly" violates.

Yes, grossly. In this context, grossly is an adjective meaning "glaringly obvious". And yes, comments about the author masturbating while writing the seeded article are a glaringly obvious or "gross" violation of the User Agreement's admonition against posting vulgarity, obscenity, or otherwise offensive content.

Do you see how we have gone from a 'code,' to an 'agreement,' to a set of 'guidelines?'

As we go, the scope gets broader, and the penalties weaker. In fact, the guidelines have no penalties mentioned.

Sorry, but no. The User Agreement is not "weaker" than the Code of Honor. In fact, the penalties for violating the Code of Honor fall under the provisions of the User Agreement, legally. That's why part of the User Agreement is the following statement:

"You agree to abide by Newsvine's Code of Honor which is a set of guidelines regarding your behavior on the Site. The Code of Honor is intended as a complement to the Conduct Policy, but if for any reason there is a conflict between the terms of the Conduct Policy and the Code of Honor, the Conduct Policy shall prevail. The Code of Honor is incorporated by reference into this User Agreement."

The guidelines that I pointed out were specific examples that Newsvine Staff have provided to help people abide by the rules of the site. Penalties for violations of those rules already fall under the terms of the User Agreement.

The comments above tread on the guidelines and the agreement, but do not trigger the code.

The code triggers the user agreement, not the other way around. The User Agreement is the legally binding document whose terms you agree to abide by to use this site. The Code is incorporated by reference into the User Agreement, but in all cases where there is a conflict between the two the language of the User Agreement prevails. Since you admit the comments violate the user agreement, they were properly collapsed. There's just no way around that fact.

The User Agreement is not "weaker" than the Code of Honor.

What I said was 'the penalties are weaker.' The code describes specific actions that will result from violations. The code of conduct describes prohibited behavior, and warns of repercussions. The guidelines describe responsible behavior.

The code can't trigger the agreement. The agreement has to be agreed to before you can even sign in. It comes first. Then the guidelines, then the code.

Again, neither the guidelines or the agreement dictate action, they only indicate that action may be taken.

Since you admit the comments violate the user agreement, they were properly collapsed. There's just no way around that fact.

If it were fact. Violating the agreement does not guarantee nor require deletion.

The other thing you are forgetting is that there are only four choices on the report button, and the comments above do not meet any of those criteria. There is no choice for "vulgar."

The point is, on this particular thread, the original post was 'no value' and was not deleted. This makes it de facto 'of value', and subsequent posts that continue in the same vein, regardless of manners or class, are within the CoH.

What I said was 'the penalties are weaker.'

Yes, that is what you said. And that is wrong. All of the penalties for infringing the Code of Honor come from the terms of the user agreement. Infringing the Code of Honor is considered, legally, to be an infringement of the User Agreement because of the language in the user agreement incorporating the Code of Honor into the User Agreement. Without that language, the Code of Honor all by itself would have no legal weight. And the User Agreement even describes the Code of Honor as a set of guidelines and states that the Conduct Policy, which is a section of the User Agreement, is of higher priority than the COH. Again: "but if for any reason there is a conflict between the terms of the Conduct Policy and the Code of Honor, the Conduct Policy shall prevail." That rather specifically defines the hierarchy of rules here: first, the User Agreement, having the same place with regard to Newsvine that the Constitution has for the US. Then the Code of Honor, having the analogous place of the Bill of Rights and other amendments to the Constitution.

The code describes specific actions that will result from violations. The code of conduct describes prohibited behavior, and warns of repercussions.

Actually, they warn of the same actions that will result from violations. If you read the User Agreement, it is quite specific: "ANY VIOLATION OF THIS POLICY MAY RESULT IN THE SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF YOUR ACCESS TO THE SITE OR USE OF OUR SERVICE AND SUCH ACTION AS WE DEEM APPROPRIATE."

That's the same penalty the Code warns about. And again, the User Agreement legally incorporates all of the language of the Code by reference. This is the legal equivalent of an include statement in programming.

The guidelines describe responsible behavior.

Yes, they do. Responsible in the sense that abiding by those guidelines will not violate the COH or User Agreement, while not abiding by them will.

The code can't trigger the agreement. The agreement has to be agreed to before you can even sign in. It comes first. Then the guidelines, then the code.

That order is exactly why the code CAN trigger the agreement. You have to agree to the agreement. It comes first. Part of the agreement is abiding by the Code of Honor. Failing to abide by the Code of Honor means you have failed to abide by that part of the agreement, and are therefor subject to the penalties specified in the agreement.

Again, neither the guidelines or the agreement dictate action, they only indicate that action may be taken.

The agreement dictates what actions may not be taken. One of them is the posting of prohibited content.

If it were fact. Violating the agreement does not guarantee nor require deletion.

Yes, it does, to exactly the same extent that violating the CoH does. From your own previous citation of the CoH: "Remove only comments that grossly violate the Code of Honor or the User Agreement."

The other thing you are forgetting is that there are only four choices on the report button, and the comments above do not meet any of those criteria. There is no choice for "vulgar."

Perhaps this is from before you really got involved with discussions here at Newsvine, but from a post by Emily (she was Newsvine Moderator after Calvin and before Tyler) in July 2008, we were specifically directed: "Please click the "!" button to flag content you feel violates Newsvine's Code of Honor or User Agreement." All content that violates the CoH or User Agreement, not just the limited options given. Generally, in the past, we've been directed to select the closest option or else just email one of the Moderators or admins directly about the abusive comment. We were even directed to use the "report a bug" tool to report particularly malicious users or spammers. So the lack of additional reporting options means far less than you might like it to.

The point is, on this particular thread, the original post was 'no value' and was not deleted. This makes it de facto 'of value', and subsequent posts that continue in the same vein, regardless of manners or class, are within the CoH.

Sorry, but that's just not correct. Whether or not the first post was of value, that doesn't give further posts that blatantly violate the other terms of the CoH and User Agreement a free pass. If you think the first post was of no value, report it as such, as others have done with subsequent posts. That's how the system works. There is no such thing as "de facto 'of value'".

Btw, I've sent a private message to Tyler asking him to weigh in on this if he has time. I don't know if he will or not, but I hope he does.

I hope so, I'm tired of the inanity of it all.

If the original post was of no value why did you stay with the thread?? But even if it were not collapsed, that only means there were not enough people who agreed it had no value. The no value posts are those that are name calling, nonsensical, garbage. Any comment meant to advance the conversation may have value, whether you personally agree or not. I hope Tyler does weigh in, but sometimes I think he is very biased in his decisions.

Perhaps this is from before you really got involved with discussions here at Newsvine, but from a post by Emily (she was Newsvine Moderator after Calvin and before Tyler) in July 2008, we were specifically directed: "Please click the "!" button to flag content you feel violates Newsvine's Code of Honor or User Agreement."

I was indeed ignorant of this. However, have there not been multiple clarifications and at least one revision since then?

Sorry, but that's just not correct. Whether or not the first post was of value, that doesn't give further posts that blatantly violate the other terms of the CoH and User Agreement a free pass.

I didn't say anything about a free pass. The point is, a pertinent reply to a post that has been let stand by the column owner cannot logically be called 'no value.'

The rest is just legal hairsplitting, more indicative of the vagueness of the moderation system here than the correctness of either of our positions.

The owner of the column should be the one to moderate disputes such as these. The problem is, the owner can't un-collapse comments, and admins are very slow to respond, if they respond at all.

Which is why I offered my two cents.

There has long been a sustained hue and cry around here about how everyone collapses each other willy-nilly. Although I agree that the above comments were no value and possibly inflammatory, it would be nice if it took more than a colloquial reference to masturbation to get people to censor others.

Btw, I've sent a private message to Tyler asking him to weigh in on this if he has time. I don't know if he will or not, but I hope he does.

Nice.

I hope so, I'm tired of the inanity of it all.

LOL. Yeah, I will check in to see if Tyler has anything to say. Other than that, I'm good.

Be well all.

doctorsteph. are you that hell bent on defeating Obama? To the point of insanity?

1.3 restored, kind of on topic. 1.37, 2.1, 2.2, 10.5 restored, relative contributions.

And there you go.

Kudos to Tyler for the quick response. He must be sick of the inanity as well.

:)

Not sure what you mean to the point of insanity. The only things I have had to say in this conversaton have been about the nastiness on the vine. So comitted to defeating Obama- not so much. If I don't see a better candidate I will work my tail off to see that he gets re elected. However, in my view so far you would not have to work hard to find a better candidate. Sorry to disappoint you, but I look at what is and try not to make sweeping generalizations.

But I ask you, are you hell bent on supporting Obama? To the point of insanity?

doctorsteph, you make a point but it is not recognised as universal sense. I have this problem with my elbow, it hurts when I try to turn right, can you fix it?

I am not trying to berate you, but the idea that experience doesn't matter is a dangerous one.

Of course experience matters. In things that matter. And yes very dangerous, (hence the reason i didn't vote for Obama the unexperienced). Being on a site longer (experienced in that sense) doesn't mean a damn thing though sorry to say.

And before anyone cracks about Obama or Palin, a lack of perception can be just as dangerous.

Can you explain what you mean by a lack of perception is dangerous?
Everyone percieves things differently obviously. But perception is not reality, as too many people these days would believe. Reality and perception are two different things.

And as for the folks who have been here- I am not sure what they have to crow about- some of them are the worst ones- deleting comments on their seeds because they don't agree. It is really unseemly.

This is true. I have seen it in action. On both sides, in the short amount of time i've been here.

the last part was mine, but not the other two!!! good post BoT!

Thanks steph! :)

Being on a site longer (experienced in that sense) doesn't mean a damn thing though sorry to say.

No, not in itself.

Can you explain what you mean by a lack of perception is dangerous?

Whoah. Maybe tomorrow. Good question.

Whoah. Maybe tomorrow. Good question.

are you being serious? hopefully. I would really like to hear the answer in specifics.

Can you explain what you mean by a lack of perception is dangerous? Everyone percieves things differently obviously. But perception is not reality, as too many people these days would believe. Reality and perception are two different things.

Hi Bringer of Truth.

Sorry, last night I had had my fill of the interwebs, and since that remark was tangential, I wanted to go back and make sure I gave you an accurate answer.

the idea that experience doesn't matter is a dangerous one. And before anyone cracks about Obama or Palin, a lack of perception can be just as dangerous.

OK. There are several schools of thought about this. A few: perception is reality, perception varies with individuals, perception is static and individual interpretations vary. I suppose I tend to believe the latter.

I was talking in the strict and limited sense of the word; to perceive, observe, or sense.

I was also implying a relationship between perception and experience. While experience means a great deal, if one fails to properly or accurately observe circumstances, experience matters little. Also, keen perception can, at times, meet or exceed the power of experience.

Additionally, I wanted to make the point that while I was touting my experience as an aspect of my authority on this issue, experience was not the only factor. It is important for people to perceive, or observe, the circumstances here on the 'vine, and how the rules are enforced. Without that effort, consistency and continuity suffer.

For the individual, perception can be reality. A lack of ability to make objective observations, or to perceive things without bias, can cause people to make poor decisions.

So, perhaps were I to rewrite that sentence, I would say something like "a lack of effort to make objective observations."

Really, that sentence is evidence of my frustration at a common problem: people are too quick to embrace or dismiss sources without properly qualifying them, or vetting their information. Ideology and personality do not determine facts.

Additionally, I wanted to make the point that while I was touting my experience as an aspect of my authority on this issue, experience was not the only factor. It is important for people to perceive, or observe, the circumstances here on the 'vine, and how the rules are enforced. Without that effort, consistency and continuity suffer.

Yes it is important. and I have seen the latter part of this happen on the vine plenty of times. I'm not saying i haven't joined in on discourse out of seeing something that upsets me. As most people do tend to get upset over things they don't like, I'm sure you've had your fair share of arguments and such between people on here, am i right?

For the individual, perception can be reality. A lack of ability to make objective observations, or to perceive things without bias, can cause people to make poor decisions.

Here's where i agree. Except perception can be reality, but it really should not be taken as reality. It is (on paper) what you view reality as. And yes I see what you mean by lack of unbias perception, causing people to make poor decisions. As no one is completely unbiased about certain things they have passion for, I am usually unbiased towards either side of the political spectrum, towards unbiased people or people who you can at least talk to, without them throwing out everything you say based on the fact that they believe their view is always right, and differing views aren't. Those people i cannot stand, and do get upset from time to time. And i am still learning to not let it get to me and follow the code fully. I think i've done much better than when i first joined this site.

So, perhaps were I to rewrite that sentence, I would say something like "a lack of effort to make objective observations."

Really, that sentence is evidence of my frustration at a common problem: people are too quick to embrace or dismiss sources without properly qualifying them, or vetting their information. Ideology and personality do not determine facts.

I totally agree with you on this James.

As most people do tend to get upset over things they don't like, I'm sure you've had your fair share of arguments and such between people on here, am i right?

Ohhh, yes. :)

Those people i cannot stand, and do get upset from time to time. And i am still learning to not let it get to me and follow the code fully. I think i've done much better than when i first joined this site.

I'm still working on it as well. It's one of the reasons I am here.

Frnd Rqst accepted.

Crazy.....thy name is conservative extremists!

What a bunch of outright wackos!

Yep! 195%! Maroons and ignoranimuses. LOL Sad is what they are, ignorant and insane. *sigh*

Right? Like they can cover up his birth certificate but they can't cover-up his drug-dealing, hut dwelling brother.

Well, I suppose it's this or thumb twiddling.

all out full court press to supress his life

Both your spelling and your grasp of reality are sadly lacking.

his drug-dealing, hut dwelling brother

Your application for membership in the Klan has been approved.

Your application for membership in the Klan has been approved.

Does that make you the Grand Wizard?

just the mailman.....

In this case, yes we are....but not the rest....this is a criminal case (and one for which the prosecuting attorneys should be disbarred), as opposed to Orly's civil matters where costs are paid by the plaintiff as part of the court sanctions for bringing frivolous cases.

Thanks for your addition....webslinger.....but then most of them are just crowding the courts and being throw out before any verdict is reached....or before a judge can impose sanctions....please correct me if I am wrong.

steven-791492

Thanks for your addition....webslinger.....but then most of them are just crowding the courts and being throw out before any verdict is reached....or before a judge can impose sanctions....please correct me if I am wrong

steven The republicans try and tell us that junk law suits are what is costing health care to explode, but they love the birthers.

steven The republicans try and tell us that junk law suits are what is costing health care to explode, but they love the birthers.

A) I have been a registered Democrat since 1976 so my stance on this issue has nothing to do with party affiliation.

B) The cost of malpractice insurance and the exorbitant amounts awarded is what is being referred to in the call for tort reform. I fully agree with that position. I have seen exceptional physcians retire from practice because they do want to break the financial backs of their patients by sending them for expensive tests for cya and to be compliant with their insurers. That is one of the reasons healthcare is so expensive.

steven,

In the case or Orly's suits, a verdict is not needed for sanctions to be imposed. Typically (and this is a broad explanation), if one brings a frivilous suit, the defense either files a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment as an answer to the pleading....if the judge agrees that on its face, the case has no merit, s/he will dismiss the case either without prejudice (allow the plaintiff to refile after fixing errors in the pleading), or with prejudice (basically, get the hell out of my courtroom and quit wasting my time). In those cases, the costs are assessed by the court onto the plaintiff and will often include attorneys' fees and to date, ALL have been thrown out. The futhest any one of them reached was an actual hearing on the motion to dismiss by the defense where the judge basically laughed Orly out of the courtroom and slapped her with a $20k fine.

If the court is REALLY pissed (as was recently the case with Orly), the court may assess an additional fine, jailtime, etc as a charge of contempt of court and also report the attorney to their state's Bar for additional sanction. We the taxpayers have not paid a dime for Orly's Birther nonsense, but as this particular case is a state action in Tennessee, the taxpayers of that district/county are footing the bill....but I guess crime is down so much in that region that the prosecutors have nothing better to do.

webslinger thanks for the information, as much as I keep telling everybody how smart I am, there are a few things I do not know..........

The cost of malpractice insurance and the exorbitant amounts awarded is what is being referred to in the call for tort reform. I fully agree with that position.

There's a lot to be said for this idea, but it's ironic that it keeps getting suggested by people who complain that Obama is in some way violating the Constitution. Since almost all malpractice claims are filed in state courts under state laws, the idea of any federal tort reform overriding those state laws is, you guessed it, unconstitutional.

No Dave, it is not unconstitutional if health care becomes a federal program. Also there could be a federal regulation that if you receive Medicare, Medicaid, VA Tri-care or IHS payment for your care, and if the physician practiced under best practices, there will be no tort. All of these are federal programs, some more than others, and could have already been covered. What is problematic is this senate/congress/president want to socialize medicine and pay doctors less but they want them to be sued like its the glory days.

No Dave, it is not unconstitutional if health care becomes a federal program.

Oh, but the people arguing hardest for tort reform are the same ones who oppose any and all forms of national health care. Kind of a catch-22 there. They don't want national healthcare, in any form, but want a legal relief that's unconstitutional under the current system.

I believe (could be wrong) that there are liability limits for government-provided health care such as the VA, or military care.

Basically all vet care, military care and IHS care along with Public health corp are suits against the government- doesn't mean you cannot sue, but it is pretty tough, and you are suing the government.

As for the other, actually I know of no one who is not pro some reform. However there are better ways to do it than this!!!

Exactly thatredneckchick!

As a conservative and self employed, I want this administration to succeed! Who would not? It is in the best interest of my family and employee's that we make it back from the brink of economic Armageddon. He just needs to produce the damn thing and stop making such a big deal out of it. I do not doubt that he was born in Hawaii! As I said above, his opponents (Democrats and Republicans alike) would have done all the due diligence on him in the very freaking beginning. I would have thought that even Hillary's smear machine would have used this against him. My God, politics is ugly! I wish we could fire ALL of them and start over, starting with Ms. Pelosi!!

I will say this, If Obama is sincere in the wasteful spending, and he would simply produce the damn thing and END all the legal fees that we the Taxpayers are paying for!

He has already shown it to the proper authorities. Do you want him to hop on Air Force One and personally come to your house and show you. Why don't you get all the birthers together in one place and I will have Obama come and show each one of you. Make it Leavenworth, front gate. You can see it on your way in. Or maybe Belleview Mental Hospital , it would be more appropriate.

P.S. Please have all your papers when you arrive.

Dave in Ma. post # 6.2

"Why don't you get all the birthers together in one place and I will have Obama come and show each one of you."

Makes no difference Dave, they would shut their eyes tight; stick their fingers in their ears and shout LA ...LA,LA,LA,LA...la,la,la,la.......la,la...

Birth-er Idiots....., = fools wasting tax payer monies.

The bottom line is that if there was anything there Hillary Clinton would have found it and used it. The silly thing is Obama could make this a non issue. Just put it out there and be done with it. This kind of grandstanding is typical of the famously famous- but it is unseemly in a President.

Just put it out there and be done with it.

The bottom line is he has put it out there. Birthers just refuse to accept it.

actually- no he hasn't, that is the issue. The birth certificate and the transcripts etc- I suspect the birth certificate either doesn't list a father or lists another father or something sensitive like that. The transcripts are probably just not as good as he would have liked- just like all of us.

But just put them out there- you are the president, they can't take it back.

Wait, that's what this is all about? You guys just want to see his birth certificate? Jeez, I had no idea it was that simple; here ya go!

http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg

Did I just kill the birther movement?

/sarcasm

The birth certificate is the document available for anyone to see on line. That is the OFFICIAL, LEGAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE issued by the State of Hawai'i, and I'm so terribly sorry if it doesn't confirm your suspicions that he's Malcolm X's love-child, born on the Planet Zort. But it does confirm that he is a natural born citizen, and you're going to have to accept that whether you want to or not.

Thanks for admitting, however, that this is really a fishing expedition for any embarrassing information you can dig up. Classy.

You nor anyone else has the right to anyone's transcripts. They are not public property even for a public figure.

Go figure.

thatredneckchick

This is going to be very interesting to see how it plays out!
I would like to know what they think he is hidding..... Dont think I am a fan of Mr Obama. I support him because he is my president, not because he was my choice for president, but I am fairly tired of all the hype about him. If he's really hidding something then lets see just what it is once and for all. Then these people can either shut up or try to fire him.

thatredneckchick Their is nothing for them to find, this man have been investigated from top to bottom, now not all white people are racist but you have those who believe that blacks are not their equal and that blacks are not smart enough to run a white country, they forget we are the UNITED STATES they think we are the UNITED WHITE STATES and if Fox does not tell them that we are the UNITED STATES they will continueto look down on blacks, if this judge in Tennessee would fine this clown for taking up the courts time.

Reread it. The case will be heard on the 1st.

Well said Mylo I'm enjoying reading your posts.

Well, she could be! She was born in Russia!

I can see Orly from my house!

LOL Cipher! :-)

If I could see her from my house...I'd move!

R. Donald Snyder

If I could see her from my house...I'd move!

R. Donald Snyder I went back and read the article that was written in the Samson Alabama news paper and their was no mention of any military people involved in investigating that shooting and if their was they was just doing their jobs, this man could have been a terrorist, and he said the president had committed treason, but he did not say a word when president Bush sent out citizen to war on a lie, was that not a treasonous act.

ScienceGuy

You hit the nail on the head. It's hatred. It never stops. They grasp at any straws or make things up.

Yes, this is a deadly mix of racism, partisan politics and religious prejudice. God, it doesn't get much more potent than that.

Oops, I forgot ethnicity. Oh, wait, that's right...Obama's father was of the Luo culture of Kenya. OK, let the perfect storm of hatred rage on.

I believe it is more Fear based, it is the only thing that fits, when seeing the wild eyed screaming going on. Fear of a President that looks different, fear of change. Little knowing that the world has already left them behind, way way behind.

VisionCoast their God white male and always on their side.

I'd expect their God to be the traditional sort, distorted to endorse and empower self-righteousness thereby clearing their path of any nagging morality obstacles.

Fear fits. Human beings are commonly afraid of things and people that are different, things they don't know anything about. Ignorance breeds fear. And it's amazing how even a little education can dispel fear.

how do the birthers explain how the birth announcement appeared in two newspapers.

Hypothetically that would be easy to explain. Anyone can put a "birth announcement" in any paper. It's not the like paper verifies it. Do they? They didn't when my kid's mother put our son in it.

SR - And "whoever" did it, knew that baby Barack Obama was going to run for president many years hence?!?!?

C'mon, even tho' I rarely ever agree with you, you at least try to make sense in your other posts. You are moving yourself closer to the edge of the earth pursuing this issue.

BTW - Most newspapers get their birth 'announcements' from the hospital. The mother 'puts it in' by checking a box on a form at the hospital. I don't know if that was the case in the 60's in Hawaii but I'm not going to bother to check. It's a moot point.

SR - And "whoever" did it, knew that baby Barack Obama was going to run for president many years hence?!?!?

Of course not. Lol. Yet his Mother would of wanted her son to have U.S. Citizenship though! Ya know?

Hey I don't buy into it either. You asked the question and I'm playing devils advocate like the birthers do. I understand what they think because I got a family member who is one of them. We argue about stuff all the time and I get to hear it all. lol.

The mother 'puts it in' by checking a box on a form at the hospital.

That's probably true. I got hella sick at the hospital once my son was born so I don't remember much of the paper work stuff she did for everything. I just signed on the lines when needed.

Sorry to go after you like that when you're doing the 'devils advocate' thing. . .

Ron Christman

Please, righties, if you ever want to be taken seriously, find a real issue to get worked up about!!!

LOL. Tell that to the Palin haters.

I actually have several real issues with our economic nitwit of a president, although I wouldn't describe myself as "worked up". Dismayed and appalled are better adjectives. Then there are the Democrats in Congress who've been bought and paid for by the suits in the health "care" industry. God help us if they enact that 2,000+ page turd they're calling "reform". The hot new job markets will be undertakers and gravediggers.

Ron Christman

SR - And "whoever" did it, knew that baby Barack Obama was going to run for president many years hence?!?!?

Haven't you seen the documentary Back To The Future? It can be done, man! all you need is a fast car. ë¿ë

True that, Karl............................or else a time machine! :-)

Hypothetically that would be easy to explain. Anyone can put a "birth announcement" in any paper. It's not the like paper verifies it. Do they? They didn't when my kid's mother put our son in it.

I had a baby two weeks ago, and the SL Tribune verified it.

Michelle that doesn't count these nutcases don't believe Hawaii is a state.

Rick, way to stay on topic.

In the case of Hawaii, the State does/did place one of those announcements as protocol, so regardless of what Pres. Obama's parents wanted, the hospital verified his birth, sent it to the Department of Health and they placed the announcement......this was verified months ago along with the COLB as the official state document issued by the state, verified by the custodian of records and attested to by the current governor...a REPUBLICAN.

By the by, Michelle-- congratulations!

Ron Christman

The wacky right wing nuts are out in full force this morning. . .

President Obama put this issue to bed early in his campaign and the state of Hawaii confirmed it (at least twice that I know of). Plus, how do the birthers explain how the birth announcement appeared in two newspapers.

Please, righties, if you ever want to be taken seriously, find a real issue to get worked up about!!!

Ron Christman You no the judge had to be from the south, and the republicans are loving it, they have fed the right wing conservatives the idea that they are not sure if he is a citizen, Bush left this country in a mess and the right wing expected him to clean it up in one year which took place over eight years.

Congrats, Michelle!

Yay, Michelle! Hope the little guy is doing well and you are getting some sleep!

april-1023405

If not - why wouldn't Barack Hussein Obama do it as the others have done

There's something he wants to keep under wraps. One can only guess at what that is.

Did every other president physically show an original copy of their ...birth certificate...(not certificate of live birth) to an independent third party and have it verified?

No. This is made up from whole cloth.

These birther people ought to be marched through the streets, mocked, pelted with filth, and shunned as the antisocial psychopathic @!$%#brains that they are.

If not - why wouldn't Barack Hussein Obama do it as the others have done

There's something he wants to keep under wraps. One can only guess at what that is.

The question was whether other presidents had to have birth certificates verified. The answer was no, so the "If not" doesn't apply.

How can someone have something they want to keep under wraps when there's nothing requiring them to give up anything? If a person comes up to your door without police or a warrant and wants into your house and you refuse them, does that mean you have something they don't want to see? Or does it mean they have no right to access your property?

Can we just get one thing straight for once and all? There is no difference between a "birth certificate" and a "certificate of live birth." Those two terms are synonyms. That means, children dear, that they mean exactly the same thing. There is no such thing in this country as a "long form birth certificate." Maybe you think that the paperwork that new parents fill out at the hospital is a "long form birth certificate," but it is not. It is not a legal document, and if you produced that instead of a birth certificate of the kind Obama did produce to try to get a passport, you'd be turned away. There is only one kind of birth certificate, and that's the one that Obama has put on display for the whole world to see.

April come on now from your comment everyone an see what you are.

As a conservative, i still have never understood why people keep saying the same things: "if he would just release it, it would be done with." He already showed a certificate of live birth. Let's drop this petty crap, he is doing plenty of other things wrong imo, things that aren't so petty. And a lot of the wingnuts are always making a fuss about stupid stuff like this. Just my opinion, carry on if you must.

Do people really think a fake birth certificate would have made it past the Secret Service and all other agencies in charge of vetting presidential candidates?

TheJonesGirl:
Apparently so, and i never thought i would be the one agreeing with the libs! :) Let's pleasee let this birther nonsense go!

I am no expert- but I think it is not just the birth certificate to some- the birthers I have no idea what up- but other people think this president is obfuscating with campaign records, transcripts etc- and by the way folks did the same damn thing with GWB with guard records, and transcripts etc. The only reason they didn't do it with the birth certificate was because it was obvious where he was born, there were only too many papers that heralded the news of his birth, and his father/mother weren't known to have been a citizen of another country. Please quit insinuating that its a black thing or a RWN thing- because it isn't.

Good point Steph

Thanx BoT!

NP ;)

LoL.

I agree James hahahahaah

Nice rant.

Welcome to Newsvine and to my ignore list

Did you stomp off after you posted that? Somehow, I don't think the poster is going to be upset about being on your ignore list.

Spartago....great post.

My belief is this is what the Birthers/Right-wingers are hoping to accomplish

That is it exactly. When I saw the picture of Palin with the Palin for President 2012, I suddenly saw the true reason why the world might actually end that year.

The right wing uses fear mongering and plays with the minds of people that are easily controlled and manipulated. They are accessing the racial hatred and prejudice of narrow minded people to gain back the dictatorial control they had with Bush. They care about their pocket books and their power/fame. Our country means diddly squat to them. We took it back in November, and they are not going to have it back. Period. Fortunately Obama has the intellect and presence to keep his mind on moving forward despite all the little gnats flying around his head. He is too strong morally, emotionally and intellectually for their hate games to fly far or stop his path.

Haha Rickace can you ignore me to please.

It's a mark of honor and a sign that you can use logic, if you are placed on rickace's ignore list. From their previous comments, it seems that they hate that!

It's also a mark of decency to place rickace on your ignore list.... (long since done)

They beat it, resurrected it, beat it again, resurrected it, etc....no matter how many times we go through explaining the legality, the stupidity and the impossibility of it all (and I personally have explained the legal outcome of Orly's cases 3 times), the Birthers do not want to accept it.

It's the "fart in the elevator and then flee down the stairs" style of debate.

I've been laughing so hard at rickace and some of the other that I forgot my original thought. How can a state grand jury have any authority to meet over a federal charge. I don't believe it can. So those local citizens have no authority to issue anything and if they did they might be on the wrong side of federal law.

Good point....however, even IF he wasn't, as the son of an American citizen, he would still be a citizen by birth......but then again, that opens up another argument of the Birthers, that he somehow renounced his citizenship when he was 14 or something stupid like that.

Actually webslinger, many think he did it when he was 6.

http://newcentrist.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/mixed-nuts.jpg

I hope you don't play the lottery, your predictions suck.

Kim a picture is worth a thousand words LOL

If he was born in Hawaii, which he has not proven, and if his father was not a US citizen, which is a fact, then how is he a "natural born citizen" by the US Constitution?

Um...yeah...that Hawaiian birth certificate/certificate of live birth...affirmed by Hawaiian officials isn't proof. Oh, and how about BECAUSE HIS MOTHER WAS A US CITIZEN???!!! Jesus people...get a flippin' life.

, which he has not proven, and if his father was not a US citizen, which is a fact, then how is he a "natural born citizen" by the US Constitution?

Let's take out of this the two most important parts and get rid of the rest which must be confusing the author of this sentence.

If he was born in Hawaii

how is he a "natural born citizen"

Basically you just asked, if he was born in the US then how is he a US citizen? Really I don't know how many smartass answers you could be given for this. After that you go into a rant that if he didn't legally change his name every document in his entire life is illegal. Nice.

Personally I feel that this guy has was checked out by every US agency we have when he became a senator and especially when he got on the ticket for president. I think our US agencies have a little more availibility for intelligence gathering than Orly. If there were any problems he would not have even been allowed to run.

The conservatives won't let there be a sitting Democratic President. Anything they can do, any little thing to waste that presidents time and energies and hopefully get him impeached they will jump on all teeth and nails. They follow the leader and accuse the free thinkers of being lemmings. Hell, liberals would probably have more criticism against him themselves if they weren't having to argue with embraced lies 24/7.

The conservatives won't let there be a sitting Democratic President.

Not if it's Obama, at any rate.

I saw it best summed up by a post by someone who said that they HAD to find something on Obama to get him out of office; that they HAD to keep looking.

And, that's all this crap is. Fishing expedition.

Not just Obama. If Clinton had been elected, we would be neck-deep in screaming conspiracy allegations from the Whitewater days, and nose-deep in nasty comments about gender, PMS, menstrual cycles, and so forth. Digital is absolutely correct: they will oppose any president who isn't one of their own. That makes them anti-American.

Not just Obama. If Clinton had been elected, we would be neck-deep in screaming conspiracy allegations from the Whitewater days, and nose-deep in nasty comments about gender, PMS, menstrual cycles, and so forth. Digital is absolutely correct: they will oppose any president who isn't one of their own. That makes them anti-American.

You know, you're absolutely right. I stand corrected.

PMS, menstrual cycles

I especially like those two arguments about why HRC wouldn't be suitable Presidential material.....after all, she is in her early 60"s......so MANY women that age are still having a menstrual cycle.

I bet it would be the same people crying "sexist!" any time Palin is questioned making PMS jokes about Hillary.

They are his cousins.

It's possible. After all, Strom Thurmond did impregnate his black maid -- totally denied the child of course.

@!$%#. May his soul eternally burn in hell.

Only when something is grossly misrepresented Bob.

This whole grand jury appearance has nothing to do with Obama. Just a disgruntled, court-martialed ex-Navy man who is pissed at the world.

I don't believe I insulted anyone.

Looks like everyone is in Obama lock step here. No answers, just insults

I am in no way in lockstep with Obama. Anyone with even the slightest grasp of reality recognizes that nonsense like this is nothing but a waste of the court's time, taxpayer's money and a distraction from the real issues.

This whole grand jury appearance has nothing to do with Obama. Just a disgruntled, court-martialed ex-Navy man who is pissed at the world.

Exactly.

Looks like everyone is in Obama lock step here.

You don't have to be in Obama's corner to recognize when something is just damned crazy, as is the whole "birther" business.

I didn't vote for Obama, but I believe he's proven he's a natural-born citizen. Why? Because I had to deal with Hawaiian Certificates of Life Birth to prove citizenship status under both the Patriot Act and in local Courts (estate/trust proceedings). So, as far as I'm concerned, proof has been produced. If a Hawaiian COLB is acceptable by the Feds and the Arizona Courts (not to mention the obsessive auditors and legal staff at my bank), they're good enough for me.

Mary, you're embarrassing yourself w/ this nonsense.

Get over it. It's a non-issue, and you proclaiming otherwise doesn't change a thing.

Mary, you're embarrassing yourself w/ this nonsense.

Get over it. It's a non-issue, and you proclaiming otherwise doesn't change a thing.

But, Mary's comment was there is no proof Obama spent any money on the supposed "fees" birthers keep talking about.

Opps there Republic

Oh yeah? Well Dobbs says he did, and Beck agreed so it must be true.

(Sorry, I was trying to imagine what it must be like to believe this Palin-esque moose sh*t. Need to go take a shower now.)

(Sorry, I was trying to imagine what it must be like to believe this Palin-esque moose sh*t. Need to go take a shower now.)

I can't imagine what it would be like, running around every day with your mind working (or, maybe NOT working), in the fashion of some of these Obama conspiracy folks. It's scary enough from out here!!

It's pretty sad when an American isn't even sure how to spell a state. Impressive.

How many times should he release it to suit you? Fifty? Hundreds? Should he fed ex it to your house or should he bring it himself? Would you like it served to you on a silver platter?

Texasguy01, post #26

"He can stop this at anytime by releasing these documents and in the process will make them the laughingstock of the world."

NEWS BULLETIN - Texas

The Presidents Birth place has already been prov-en, and they already are the laughingstock of the world.

:D

Hey, Texas guy.

We don't believe you actually exist. Even though you comment here, and you couldn't comment without actually BEING in the world, we still doubt you exist.

I think you should post your real name, address, social security number and place of employment, family member names, schools went to , etc., so we can see that you really are breathing air along with the rest of us.

Yes, your being here does prove that you exist, but we're going to have tantrums until you actually prove it by the means WE want to see.

I'm sure you'll be ok with that.

VerbalBarb post # 26.3

Hey, Texas guy.

"I think you should post your real name, address, social security number and place of employment, family member names, schools went to , etc., so we can see that you really are breathing air along with the rest of us."

Not good enough for me, I want to see DNA.

If I were to see the DNA proof,

I would not (in keeping with the birther tradition) belive it.

Why haven't you posted the information we asked for yet? It wouldn't cost you anything to post it. It's all easily obtainable information. What our you hiding? Why won't you prove you exist once and for all so we can move on?

I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm just asking questions. Like, why are you refusing to show us the records that will prove your existence. Do you really exist? I'm just asking.