Poll: Majority of Republicans are birthers.
By on Jul 31st, 2009 at 10:45 am
Poll: Majority of Republicans are birthers.
A new DailyKos/Research2000 poll reveals the shocking news that 58 percent of Republicans sympathize with the far-right birthers. Twenty-eight percent don’t believe that President Obama was born in the U.S., and another 30 percent aren’t sure. The birther sentiment was strongest amongst people older than 60 and people living in the South. Politico’s Glenn Thrush asks, “When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
Update In a Los Angeles Times op-ed, political satirist Bill Maher writes that “it's so important that we the few, the proud, the reality-based attack this stuff before it has a chance to fester and spread.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
” shocking news that 58 percent of Republicans sympathize with the far-right birthers”
which would explain why normal, rational people are fleeing from the repukelican party like it’s the plague.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:49 am“Poll: Majority of Republicans are birthers.”
Alternate poll: Majority of Republicans are idiots.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:50 amA new DailyKos/Research2000 poll reveals the shocking news that 58 percent of Republicans sympathize with the far-right birthers.
Politico’s Glenn Thrush asks, “When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
When it comes to race issues,it is starting to look like the good ol’ US of A isn’t nearly as evolved as some of us may have believed.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:51 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
O…M…G…
More evidence that insanity is contagious.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:53 am“When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
– - Sorry Glenn, but you can’t put ’serious’ and ‘Birther’ in the same thought.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:54 am“When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
This is the sole reason for the “Birther” idiocy. There can be no “serious dialog” about racism, however. The racists have absorbed their racism with their mother’s milk, and no dialog is possible.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:54 amStop the insanity
shaking my head, its a wonder
July 31st, 2009 at 10:55 amHere is a link to a blog discussion today in the Saint Petersburg Times in Florida, addressing the “birther” issue. The “birthers” are out in full force, displaying their monumental stupidity.
By the way, Lou Dobbs is a moron.
http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2009/07/birthers-put-posey-gop-in-awkward-spot.html#comments
July 31st, 2009 at 10:55 amHmmm,
These are also the same people Democrats are rolling over & playing dead for in the health care reform debacle.
Dems, what’s in it for you or us to even pretend the Birthers deserve bipartisanship consideration?
Hello?
Anyone?
Is this mike on…?
July 31st, 2009 at 10:57 amDoingNuance says:
“Why are you giving this idiotic story so much attention?”
when you have elected officials playing into this nonsense, ginning up hatred with their lunatic fringe and introducihg legislation (like they don’t have more important things to do) validating this nonsense then it deserves attention, wouldn’t you say?
July 31st, 2009 at 10:57 amPolitico’s Glenn Thrush asks, “When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
As soon as the media stops sensationalizing the story, and starts using the word “racist” instead of “birther.”
July 31st, 2009 at 10:58 amAll this talk about Obama who was born on US soil with proof yet not much said about the Republican Candidate Senator John McCain is clearly not born on US soil. Now you can talk water to idiots but they don’t have to drink it. This clearly shows how easy it was for Bush/Cheney to make fools of all the American citizens for 8 years and why it’s so hard for Americans with so since to accept an intelligent, educated President like Barack Obama. For 8 years we had an idiot and drunk as President with the Media/Press holding him up with excuses, while Cheney was behind close doors committing crimes.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:59 amDoingNuance says
July 31st, 2009 at 10:51 am
Why are you giving this idiotic story so much attention? They are intentionally antagonizing us, trying to push buttons. And you are playing right into their hands.
____________________________________________________________
I don’t feel antagonized in the slightest, nor do I feel my buttons are being pushed. My interest in the story is strictly from an amusement standpoint — as in, “wow — can you believe what idiots these people are?”
Let what’s left of the GOP be taken over by the whackos. They’ll go the way of the Whigs. And then, because we’re used to a two-party system, a new party will come in to fill the void. I’m thinking a new Progressive Party, formed by people who are sick to death of a lack of action on health care, winding down wars in the Middle East, and other issues we’re not being heard on. Just as the new Republican Party was formed in the mid-1800’s by people fed up with a lack of action on the slavery issue.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:59 amThey’re just upset because George W. Bush was never really President.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:02 amAll I can do is laugh at these ‘birthers’ and shake my head. And wish they would go and seek mental help.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:04 amThese people are even crazier than I thought. It wasn’t hard to foresee the racists frothing over the election of the first African American to the White House. Seeing them go beyond the normal level of bigotry into the realm of denial of his nationality is simply stunning. I didn’t think this crowd of paranoid knuckle-draggers could sink low enough to surprise me but sadly they have.
Orly Taitz was on Colbert a few nights ago by the way. Sweet Jeebus. . .
July 31st, 2009 at 11:05 ami think my district, IL 19 (LOOK at this jerryrigged mess!), i know my county, is at least 80% repug…
looking forward to rep.shitkus’ meeting when he gets here…
you know, the one who isn’t worried about global warming because god promised he wouldn’t destroy the world by flooding…
plenty of birthers here, i’m sure… i’ve been assured there are active kkk groups around… can’t have one without the other…
July 31st, 2009 at 11:07 amThe Birther movement is indeed a proxy for racism and the press needs to pound home that point. Agreed, there can be no serious dialog with true believing Birther’s. However those politicians and media who really don’t believe it but simply “fan the flames” should be constantly exposed.
The movement is being used to divert attention from Health Care and Energy legislation. However it is so potentially dangerous that it commands attention. We do not need another Abraham, Martin and John episode.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:07 amI’d like to see a related polling asking Republicans if they believe Hawaii is part of the United States. I bet the results would be nearly identical. ;-)
July 31st, 2009 at 11:08 amPolitico’s Glenn Thrush asks, “When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
And all of them will swear on a stack of bibles their not racist. Why should we give proxy to these ignorant “imbeciles” when it has already been articulated that Obama is a natural born US citizen?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:09 amWhat missmolly just said: ‘Let what’s left of the GOP be taken over by the whackos. They’ll go the way of the Whigs. And then, because we’re used to a two-party system, a new party will come in to fill the void. I’m thinking a new Progressive Party, formed by people who are sick to death of a lack of action on health care, winding down wars in the Middle East, and other issues we’re not being heard on. Just as the new Republican Party was formed in the mid-1800’s by people fed up with a lack of action on the slavery issue.’
Bingo!
Let’s make 2010 the ‘non-incumbent’ year, regardless of Party.
Do you realize that by doing this, the entire House of Representatives would roll over?
From Blue Dogs to Rabid Righties, America would see fresh ideas & new faces in D.C.
We need a Progressive Party now more than ever.
We need a Party that places individual’s citizenship above corporate citizenship.
We need a Party that encourages new ideas & open debate. Look at Baucaus with health care. He won’t even tell DEMOCRATS what he’s doing; just Republics.
NO INCUMBENTS IN 2010!
July 31st, 2009 at 11:11 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
PattyP A few years back I flew out of the San Fran airport on a busy morning. The check in line was out the terminal door and a skycap was directing people to the left for domestic flights and to the right for international. As I made it inside the terminal door I heard him say “yes ma’am Hawaii is a domestic flight.”
Didn’t think to ask the nice lady about her political beliefs but you are probably right.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:15 amPattyP says:
I’d like to see a related polling asking Republicans if they believe Hawaii is part of the United States. I bet the results would be nearly identical. ;-)
July 31st, 2009 at 11:08 am
But Hawaii is far far away and exotic…and terrifying!
**shudder**
July 31st, 2009 at 11:15 amHas any birther given an coherent (as opposed to nonsensical or raving) response to why a Certification of Live Birth isn’t sufficient to prove one’s date and place of birth when it’s the document the U.S. State Department accepts for passport applications, the U.S. government accepts for entrance into the military, local governments accept for driver’s license applications, and is the standard used for every instance where an American is asked to provide evidence of citizenship? Can any birther name ONE instance in our society where this document would not be considered sufficent proof of age and birthplace (other than for Obama being Presisident, that is)?
I suspect this has gone beyond “we think he lied about his citizenship” or “we believe he was born in Kenya”. This has become “we’re trying to get the POTUS to show us the ‘official’ archived document, just to see if we can make him say ‘uncle’.”
Once again, as has been stated many times, President Obama has provided proof he was born in Hawaii in 1961 — proof that has been found acceptable by every government entity charged with ensuring eligibility of the President.
Even if Obama caved to the birthers and requested Hawaii open up their archives to anybody who wanted access to them, it would set a precedent that would horrify the archive departments of most states, as this kind of demand would eventually become acceptable for all kinds of situations — making certified copies useless.
If the birthers want more, they’re going to have to come up with documentation proving Obama was born elsewhere.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:17 amI strongly object to that MISLEADING HEADLINE by Think Progress
Fixed
July 31st, 2009 at 11:19 ambackup@23,
obama has provided proof that he was born in this country, as did the newspapers in honolulu.
43 only appointed a 9-11 commission after the jersey girls clamored loud enough for it. then, no one in the bush administration would go under oath to testify about it. why is that do you think? unfortunately, you need to accept for the second time in our history, we were attacked and the president allowed it. the first time being pearl harbor.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:20 amI agree with Bill Maher in that we weren’t paying attention before because common sense reality sense things we thought were settled but the dumb racist crazies and their greedhead backers snuck in and we had the last 8 years.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:20 amMy, my! How… even-handed of you, b-cup.
“yes, birthers are crazy, but libs are just as bad!”
Thanks for your concern.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:20 amThe reason the birthers know that Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate is because he is, in fact, the anti-Christ. The video explains all:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:21 amhttp://www.youtube.com/v/Qf_1tEUodZU&color1
backup
The difference is one is a distinct if remote possibility, especially when all other matters are considered. ie, bush was a criminal and he is capable of such heinious crimes, therefore, credible possibility.
The other is just lying and racism. I see why you are so confused.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:21 amPlease stop the stoopid. My head hurts.
Not all Repiggies are birthers(MOST are)
July 31st, 2009 at 11:21 ambutt, all birthers are Repiggies
Not to my knowledge, missmolly. They simply say, “that’s not a birth certificate!” and figure that because they said it, it must be true.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:22 amIt`s some what good to know that the party only has 21% of the total voting people.
just wish the health care bill has mental health for these poor people. yes unfortunely most of the 21% live at the lower edge and need the help.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:25 amlet’s face it. these “birthers” are fueled by such blind hatred and vitriol for obama that if the baby jesus showed up with a copy of obama’s birth certificate, there’d be a sharp increase in buddhist in the repukelican party the next day.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:26 amSure, there’s probably a bit of racism fueling the inanity. But this birther movement has a lot more in common, to my mind, with the Whitewater crap the Republicans tried to make stick to Clinton sixteen years ago.
That was also a pathetic attempt to discredit a legitimately elected president that was patently ridiculous and got more ridiculous the deeper you looked into it, yet the right wing kept it alive through sheer force of will and the endless claim that “questions have not been answered”.
Only thing is, this time Obama is so clean they have to go back to his birth, and claim that his birth certificate is not really a birth certificate.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:27 amI disagree, Bozo. I think the wingnuts would smear the baby Jesus as a socialist and anti-Semite and then go to church to pray that some harm befalls the President.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:29 amThis is hardly surprising. Republicans are stupid.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:29 amZimzone says:
NO INCUMBENTS IN 2010!
i’m keeping DURBIN as long as he wants, thank you…
July 31st, 2009 at 11:31 amTim LaHaye, who wrote the the Left Behind series, has stated that Obama doesn’t meet the ‘anti-Christ’ criteria. I think because Obama’s black looking. lol
July 31st, 2009 at 11:32 ambackup Says:
Here’s from the Rasmussen poll about 9/11 truthers:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
First and foremost Rasmussen is a right-wing GOP poll.
Second,these are two different issues.
Please stop justifying the new KKK derivative, these “birther’s” should be watched.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:33 amChuck Feney says:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:21 am
Well, that’s 4 minutes and 13 seconds of my life I’ll never get back. :-D
Now I’m all confused. Was President Obama’s father the original antichrist, and now he’s antichrist junior? Or the second? Have there been any other people named “Barack Obama?” Cuz there might be a turf war brewing…
July 31st, 2009 at 11:34 amOh and that “Liberal” media is all over disproving the “birthers”….
….just don’t hold your breath for that to happen.
Fcuk the Republic Fascist Party
July 31st, 2009 at 11:34 am“A lie told often enough becomes truth” Vladimir Lenin
July 31st, 2009 at 11:35 amCan someone tell me just what these nuts intend to accomplish?
Would they prefer Biden take over ?
How about a special election so Hillary can clean Sarah’s clock.
A revolution so they can install gasbag ? WHAT?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:37 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Chuck Feney says:
The reason the birthers know that Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate is because he is, in fact, the anti-Christ.
Do you know how ignorant you sound?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:37 am… and the Republican Party has learned that lesson well.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:38 amKnowing Chuck’s contributions on TP, I suspect he’s being snarky with his comment.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:39 amTo be fair, this is a Kos poll. The numbers are probably tweaked by 4%.
Even still: 54% of surveyed Repubs are horribly delusional. Ya know, that really explains a lot…
Also, backup..
Dude. Seriously. Have you ever read an in-depth poll. Or conducted one? Do you have any idea how easily a question like that could be manipulated?
There is a great deal of unknown information surrounding 9/11 (and, no…i’m not a Truther. I don’t believe Bush et.al. planned the attacks. or knew the exact plan and failed to stop it. I DO believe he knew al-qaeda was planning something and just decided to run with it after 9/11). There is NO room for doubt re: Obama. It’s a damn Certificate of Live Birth. And a birth announcement in the local paper.
Birthers are are delusional as the Clinton Chroniclers and every bit as dangerous.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:40 amb-cup; I was one of the ones who voted down your post.
Just thought you’d like to know
Have a nice day
(:-D)
snark
July 31st, 2009 at 11:40 amWhat Laura Bush said the night of 911, and I paraphrase: We finally managed to get into bed after all the moving around…and just burst out laughing to each other.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:42 amraynman says:
I think it was Josef Goebbels, not Lenin who said that.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:43 amb-cup, I understand your point: you want to equate the silliness of the birther movement with the 9/11 truthers and so easily dismiss both as fringe elements.
Won’t happen, as long as birthers keep getting legitimate play in the media and keep attracting Republican Conresscritters to their side.
Of course, if you want to list all the left-wing talking heads who pushed the 9/11 Truther agenda, and all the Democratic Congresspeople who said that there were “questions that haven’t been answered” about the role of the Bush administration in 9/11, I’ll be glad to listen.
Of course, since there are only a handful of what could be called “left-wing talking heads” and there were essentially NO left-wing talking heads four years ago, you might have a tough time filling that bill.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:44 amIt’s so pathetic it’s almost comical. In the face of indisputable evidence, they’re clinging to this ridiculous notion that Obama can’t be president. They think this gives them a “legitimate” reason to be outraged that a black man is president. The poor,stupid Rethugs think the rest of us are a dumb as they are and we won’t see through the charade.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:44 amWell, bush has a history of secrecy and lyin? What makes them the same in that light?
I voted you down too backup. You are a waste of time and you contribute nothing despite your disingenuous stabs at the left.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:45 amHey, backup:
You are aware that we have proof that Bush knew we were going to be attacked before 9/11, don’t you? Yeah. He was told a month beforehand, and did nothing about it.
That doesn’t mean he was involved in the plotting, but it does, in fact, mean that he knew ahead of time, thus those you are trying to make look crazy actually look ahead of the game.
See, there’s your difference. For the Bush thing, we have proof that he knew, thus he knew. For the Obama thing, we have proof he was born in Hawaii, thus he was born in Hawaii.
Your pathetic attempt to equate people who have zero evidence and are running soley off of racism to people who have credible evidence from government agencies is utterly transparent and an incredibly poor attempt at swaying anyone to your side.
I would say nice try, but it wasn’t. It was completely half-assed, and you know it.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:45 ambackup The basis for the 9/11 truthers rests largely on (1)the documented delivery of the August 6 PDB advising Bush that bin laden intended to attack the US and Bush’s failure to read let alone order any preventative measures combined with (2) comments from certain PNAC signatories to the effect that America needed another Pearl Harbour. In retrospect it appears that Bush simply acted as incompetently with regard to protecting the country as he acted with regard to every other aspect of his presidency. After Katrina it is difficult to believe that the Bush administration could have pulled off 9/11. The planes would have ended up hitting a vacant lot in Newark.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:46 amI see b-cup is running his “everyone else is doing it, Mom!” argument today.
*sigh*
July 31st, 2009 at 11:48 am@EnnuiDivine
It’s not a Kos poll. It was conducted by Research 2000 for Daily Kos. They are a credible polling agency, and their methodologies are testable and verifiable, with margin of error information disclosed in the reports.
Check them out for yourself.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:48 amhttp://research2000.us/
I’m sorry, that’s the wrong link. I meant to use this one:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:48 amhttp://research2000.us/about/
This is just the latest manifestation of the Bush Sour Grapes Syndrome. They know Bush wasn’t elected, so they have to try to discredit Obama in this manner, for payback. I’d bet they don’t really believe it, but it’s the only game in town, so…
July 31st, 2009 at 11:50 amAs others have pointed out (thanks, smidget), given the PDB of Aug 6 2001, it’s entirely reasonable to say that Bush knew of the attacks beforehand. He certainly had been warned that an attack was brewing.
If asked that question, I would say that Bush knew an attack was coming.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:51 amNot surprising. Two points to keep in mind:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:54 am1) A very small percentage of Americans currently identify with the Republican Party
2) Most of these folks also believe that the earth is only 6000 years old.
After Katrina it is difficult to believe that the Bush administration could have pulled off 9/11. The planes would have ended up hitting a vacant lot in Newark.
I don’t think that’s equivalent.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:55 amWhich only goes to show that a majority of the remaining Republics have an IQ in the room temperature range.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:58 amWhat bullshit. This whole issue is not a matter of proof but of self imposed ignorance and racism. There is ample proof that Obama was born in Hawaii but the birthers have chosen not to accept it because they can’t stand the thought that America tossed Bush and his ilk out on their assess and chose a BLACK LIBERAL to run the country. This will stick in their craw longer than withdrawing from Vietnam.
It is sad beyond words that people as hateful and ignorant as the birthers actually exist in a “civilized” nation.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:58 amjohnny dol1ar says
July 31st, 2009 at 11:19 am
I strongly object to that MISLEADING HEADLINE by Think Progress
MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS ARE MORONS
Fixed
____________________________________________________________
Um…yeah, but is that news?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:59 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
backup says:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
Besides it being contrary to the progressive narrative being promoted in the thread, how are the two examples that different?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:37 am
________________
I think the key difference is that the September 11 attacks actually WERE a conspiracy. Whether or not you believe the conspiracy was between a bunch of pissed-off Saudis, or between Israeli and Chinese intelligence agents, or between Bush Administration officials and the Carlyle Group, the unequivocal fact is that it was a conspiracy among some group or groups of people to attack the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
Obama’s birth certificate is not a conspiracy and never was. It’s paperwork. It’s a manufactured conspiracy based on the willing suspension of belief of basic indisputable facts.
A more apt analogy would be moon landing hoaxers or young-Earth creationists, who simply refuse to believe verified facts out of pure pig-headed ignorance.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:03 pmEnnuiDivine says:
To be fair, this is a Kos poll. The numbers are probably tweaked by 4%.
It was not a KOS poll, it was a poll done by Research 2000 by KOS. And every poll they have done pretty much mirrors the more reputable polling outfits, so I have a lot of confidence in their polling methods. Unlike Rassmussen and Gallup, they don’t oversample Republics. And, they release their raw data which neither Gallup nor Rassmussen will do.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:03 pmTo poster #31. Dude, unless your post is a brilliant snark, you are seriously disturbed if you believe anything in that video. Sick, sick, sick.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:09 pmThe birther argument is a delusional means of questioning the legitimacy of the election. It is the rationalization that people use to alter their reality to conform to their beliefs. No amount of evidence to contrary will satisfy the birthers because that would require a change in their view of their world. The attacks on Obama will continue so long as he remains president unless there is an earth shattering event like 9/11. The longer the Republicans wait to distance themselves from the birthers, the more difficult it will be for Republicans to gain credibility with the middle of the road voters. The birthers as well as the other fringe parts of the conservatives may doom any chance for the Republicans to gain seats in Congress.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:10 pm“it seems harder to believe that a presidential administration (and all the people involved) could keep the idea that they new 9/11 before hand a secret for 8 years, than one man falsifying his place of birth.”
And this is your problem. It is much easier to believe that a presidential administration (which are generally in the business of keeping secrets anyway) could keep the idea that they knew about 9/11 before hand (which they did – they may not have known the specifics, but they were warned that the attack was imminent…what is your malfunction that prevents you from understanding that?) than it is that a man, the entire government of Hawaii, the Democratic National Party on state and national levels, the Kenyan government, and even two local Hawaiian newspapers were able to falsify a birth.
Your assertion that one is just as ridiculous as the other is, no offense intended here, just plain stupid.
Also, I just noticed this little gem that you desperately need corrected on:
“Here’s Annie from the second post:
“Poll: Majority of Republicans are birthers.”
Alternate poll: Majority of Republicans are idiots.
So, the narrative is this: Many republicans either believe that a ridiculous conspiracy is either true or they are not sure. So, the party as a whole is comprised of idiots.”
That isn’t what Annie said. “Majority” does not now, and never has meant “group as a whole.” Your disingenuous and transparent method of interpreting plain English is part of the reason your posts always get voted down. They are clearly misrepresenting the posts of others, making ludicrous claims, and, frankly, so chock full of bullshit it’s amazing there isn’t a price-per-ton going rate on them.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:11 pmbackup says:
I just provide the truther example to suggest that Republicans aren’t the only ones susceptible:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
How many times on this blog have you excused something that the Republics have done by your “the Democrats do it too” argument? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound.
There is no equivalency between the birther movement and the 911 conspiracy movement. There is ample proof that President Obama was born in Hawaii, the birther’s just choose not to believe it. There is ZERO proof that President Bush and his administration didn’t know that 911 was going to happen and plenty of unanswered questions that point to the fact that he did know (like why NORAD was told to stand down).
If you really want the people here to take you seriously (which it appears you do), you need to come up with cognizant arguments to make your point and stop falling back on your old standby “the Democrats did it too”.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:11 pmAs a person who is in the age range of those who believe this birther line of crap, I can only wonder if those who do believe this crap are like other repukes, such as Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh (also in the age range), who are yellow bellied cowards. Bush deserted, Cheney got 5 deferments, others had “better things to do”, and then Limbaugh who had a boil on his butt. Same people, same phony pukes.
These phony “patriotic I love my country and I am a Bible-believing Christian” person make me sick to my stomach.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:12 pmNo, Tracy_5, but Research 2000, who conducted the poll, is.
Try reading. I know it’s hard work for someone as stupid as you are, but honestly, if you can’t keep up, then don’t bother posting. We don’t have the time for morons like you.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:12 pmDoingNuance says:
“Why are you giving this idiotic story so much attention?”
Maybe because, as this thread suggests, a moajority of Republicans are birthers or at least willing to entertain the possibility that Obama is not a natural-born citizen. We can’t ignore such wide-spread nonsense. It must be actively hammered into oblivion.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:13 pmbackup says:
First, progressives are using them to make the party as a whole look more ridiculous.
_______________
And once again, you try to deliberately mislead.
We don’t need to make the birthers or the GOOP look ridiculous.
They’re doing a fine job on their own.
How could any SANE, THINKING, RATIONAL human being not find this whole tempest utterly absurd?
When you claim, “progressives” are using the issue, you reduce it to a partisan squabble, which it is NOT.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:14 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Are you seriously trying to say that we know all the secrets that bush and cheney were involved in?
Do you know what was in cheney’s “secret” energy policy?
Who killed JFK? Who was behind it? Who killed RFK and MLK and who was behind it? Of course criminals can keep secrets, they have a vested interest.
You are either a fool or an idiot. Maybe both.
The search for the truth surrounding acts that affected all Americans is a little different than a witch hunt(no offense witch1), which is what this is.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:16 pmmisscoleopteramolly says:
Has any birther given an coherent (as opposed to nonsensical or raving) response to why a Certification of Live Birth isn’t sufficient to prove one’s date and place of birth.
They say the document is a forgery because it lists Obama’s father’s race as “African” and they say that the sequence number (whatever that is) is out of order. I’m not sure how they get around the fact that the State of Hawaii has said they have observed his original birth certificate documentation (not on microfiche, and that it is legitimate.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:16 pmYou have to look at the motivations of the majority of the birthers to understand why they simply cannot “let go”. Fundamentally, it comes down to the following mindset: “I cannot accept THAT man in the White House because…. (fill in the blank).”
Just about ANY reason will do — any excuse that will legitimize their race-based outrage. If it wasn’t about a birth certificate, it would be about his middle name. (He’s a closet Muslim, you know.)
In addition, there are a handful of unscrupulous politicians and pundits who, although not necessarily racist themselves, have no problem capitalizing on the bigotry of others by fueling their fear and hatred of Obama in order to score political points or further a personal agenda.
The birther phenomenon is intended to damage the validity of the Obama Administration, but it will instead diminish the credibility of the conservative base so long as its members continue to give credence to the deluded fantasy that the POTUS was not born in Hawaii.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:17 pmbackup
Perhaps all caps will help. It probably won’t, but it will feel good at least.
WHY WILL YOU NOT F UCKING PAY ATTENTION????
BUSH GOT A MEMO WARNING OF AN IMMINENT ATTACK A MONTH BEFORE 9/11, YET YOU CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS ADMITTED, AND ON THE RECORD FACT.
WHAT THE F UCK IS WRONG WITH YOU, DUDE?
SECONDLY – THIS IS NOT A KOS POLL. IT WAS DONE BY RESEARCH 2000 FOR KOS.
STOP BEING A F UCKING IMBECILE.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:18 pmbackup says:
The same partisanship I see from Republican responses in the KOS poll.
____________
Just absolutely determined to push that false equivalency, aren’t you?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:20 pm“Progressives” like Lou Dobbs?
Or Bill Posey (R-FL)?
Or G. Gordon Liddy?
Those kind of “progressives”, b-cup?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:22 pmwhat smidget said
July 31st, 2009 at 12:22 pmbackup says:
At that time, just like in this KOS poll, the responses are very different between party. This thread chalks up Republican birther sympathy to ignorance. But, when I look at the Democrat response to the rasmussen poll, I don’t see ignorance, I see partisanship. The same partisanship I see from Republican responses in the KOS poll.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
_____________
Ok, but where’s the cause and effect? Are people more likely to believe that Obama is a natural-born citizen and/or Bush had advance information about 9/11 because they’re Democrats, or are people who are inclined to beleve Obama is a citizen and that Bush knew about 9/11 more likely to self-identify as Democrat?
It may sound like a semantic argument, but I happen to think reality is more nuanced than you’re making it out to be.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:26 pmsmidget. okay. Let’s say that in the sea of intel that Obama is currently getting, is intel that terrorists plan a chemical attack on the water supply of a major U.S. city.
And two years from now, a cell is able to breach some water plant in, let’s say Chicago, and contaminate the supply and kill a couple of thousand people.
If people were then asked in a poll if Obama knew it was going to happen, would you expect them to say ‘yes’?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:28 pmTechnically, backup is correct.
He uses proper grammar and punctuation in his posts.
Now, the content…
July 31st, 2009 at 12:28 pmFirst of all, b-cup, the adjectival form of “Democrat” is “Democratic”. Democratic response, not “Democrat response”. Are we clear on that now? Okay, let’s move on.
You see “partisanship”, sure. Republicans believe one way and Democrats believe another, in general terms. But you’re still trying to establish an equivalence that isn’t there.
The 9/11 poll question asks whether George W. Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks in advance. As I and others have pointed out, given the well-known Aug 6, 2001 PDB, it is entirely understandable that one would agree that the President knew of attack plans before they were implemented. Specifics? Highly doubtful. But it is proven and demonstrable that he was warned beforehand.
You’re trying desperately to equate that poll result with a good portion of Republicans who believe that the birth certificate that President Obama has produced and the state of Hawai’i has validated is false and that the two birth announcements placed in Honolulu newspapers were faked.
It doesn’t work. Your analytical mind has failed you once again in its search for a valid analogy.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:29 pmThank you Ralph. You are correct. I guess the snarky sarcasm didn’t come through clearly enough for many- I’ve never had negative votes before.
ralph the wonder llama says:
ranus69 says:
Chuck Feney says:
The reason the birthers know that Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate is because he is, in fact, the anti-Christ.
Do you know how ignorant you sound?
Knowing Chuck’s contributions on TP, I suspect he’s being snarky with his comment.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:31 pmThe racists are in a major melt down that a black guy is President. The birther cult supplies the cover for their racism.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:31 pmProgressives do not operate in secret. Republicans do because they are evil.
The bush admin has one thing to it’s credit in history. It has been the most secretive administration in the history of…..well, the world. Not even republicans can dispute that.
next.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:32 pmHey, b-cup’s gotta do what b-cup’s gotta do, TRoS.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:33 pm58 percent of republicans believe in a 6000 year old universe too.
We can only help that natural selection will spare our grandkids from this sort of embarrassment it the future.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:34 pmhelp=hope.
:D
July 31st, 2009 at 12:35 pmb-cup, your hypotheticals generally prove even lamer than your false equivalencies.
This one is no exception.
Not a good day for you, b-cup. Might wanna take the afternoon off, head to the beach or something. Go play golf. Mow your lawn. Do something useful.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:35 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Here’s a good birther cartoon:
Calling the “Point and Laugh” brigade
July 31st, 2009 at 12:36 pmAstounding- the drooling, oafish fools aren’t ashamed to be seen in public. And with their hands in their pants, too.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:37 pmLet me draw your attention to the standard wingnut phraseology, “Democrat” used as an adjective:
when I look at the Democrat response to the rasmussen poll, I don’t see ignorance, I see partisanship.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:38 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
OMG, b-cup, are you this obtuse?
Your disingenuous little thought exercise here overlooks one key element:
the evidence that the President was born in Hawai’i.
Without that one key little element, the question may be as you describe it, simply one of competing beliefs.
When you take into account that element, however, you see two groups of people: one whose belief is based on provable fact an the other whose belief is based on a willful ignorance of that provable fact.
Guess which group is the conservative one?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:42 pmralph the wonder llama says:
Hey, b-cup’s gotta do what b-cup’s gotta do, TRoS.
____________
Like a salmon swimming upstream, ralphie…
July 31st, 2009 at 12:45 pmbackup says
July 31st, 2009 at 12:28 pm
If people were then asked in a poll if Obama knew it was going to happen, would you expect them to say ‘yes’?
_____________________________________________________________
If it became known that President Obama had been told of the likelihood terrorists would contaminate a major city’s water supply (especially if told which city), and nothing was done to beef up security measures, and the attack happened, I’d be willing to bet a lot of people from both parties would say “yes”, Obama knew about it — and they’d be quite angry besides.
But what in the world does this have to do with Obama’s birth? Haven’t you strayed from the topic somewhat?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:45 pmOh, this is sweet. We now have strong evidence that the majority of repbulicans are Birthers. So collectively, the statement “Republicans are Birthers” is true and accurate.
It follows then, that the statement “Republicans are not grounded in reality” is also true and accurate.
Love it!!!
July 31st, 2009 at 12:46 pmThat, I’ll agree with.
It’s what makes these ridiculous right-wing farces effective. It’s why they keep doing it.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:46 pmI’m not sure this is the same b-cup as before.
Too many truly goofy spelling and grammar errors.
Is the RNC out-sourcing its trolling again?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:47 pmI have said before and I will say it again. President Obama is the “Jackie Robinson” of the Presidency. Our President in only six months has gone through so much. I fully support him and his administration. I pray for him and his wonderful family each and every day.I just read another article where two police officers in Atlanta ran a background check on him. One of these days our country will get beyond race. The irony here is that John McCain WAS born in Panama(and NOT on the naval base).
July 31st, 2009 at 12:47 pmIt’s another staging of the “b-cup waltz” missmolly.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:47 pmNo. We know President Obama was born in Hawaii.
There’s no belief involved.
Just because the dumber half of the country is running around spreading rumors doesn’t mean there’s an actual reason for doubt, or a need for “belief”.
It’s a matter of public record, and we don’t need to “believe” in a matter of public record.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:49 pmThis is a little to vague for b-cup. You will have to tell him specifically, otherwise he will twist it into being progressives whose belief is based on a willful ignorance of that provable fact.
It’s his MO.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:49 pmbackup says:
smidget. okay. Let’s say that in the sea of intel that Obama is currently getting, is intel that terrorists plan a chemical attack on the water supply of a major U.S. city.
And two years from now, a cell is able to breach some water plant in, let’s say Chicago, and contaminate the supply and kill a couple of thousand people.
If people were then asked in a poll if Obama knew it was going to happen, would you expect them to say ‘yes’?
If he did absolutely nothing to stop it from happening, then yes I would say that. The issue with Bush isn’t that he knew it was going to happen. The issue is that he ignored the intel and allowed it to happen. In the meantime very weird things happened like Ashcroft refusing to fly on a commercial airline before 911 and NORAD being told to stand down when an airplane was in the air heading for the Pentagon.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:52 pmOn my local Arkansas blog the weekly’s editor asked
“What’s wrong with the South?”
Wrong with the South?
There is nothing wrong with the South don’t you know there is a gods dam NEGRO in the WHITE HOUSE?
An uppity negro with his uppity negro wife and their uppity negro kids and hell he even moved in his uppity negro MIL and they are all looking down on all us white folks who could have been President instead if we had just not lost the war.
Just who the hell does he think he is?
Next thing you know all the darkies will be expecting to walk free on our sidewalks at night and allowed to break into their own homes and talk back to THE WHITE MAN without being harassed my the PO-LICE.
Seriously, these folks just cannot get past the fact that our President has dark skin AND is a Democrat. Rove promised them that they would have a conservative majority FOREVAH!!!
July 31st, 2009 at 1:00 pmDr. Hussein Matt says:
b-kup: I just provide the truther example to suggest that Republicans aren’t the only ones susceptible:
Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.
Once again the teabaggers make a terrible and obtuse analogy. The truthers never, EVER received the type of coverage that the birfers have received. Moreover, no one in the media actually supported the movement! Christ, are you really this f**king stupid?
Yes, he is that f**king stupid.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:02 pmI’ll concede to straying from the topic (it was a response to smidget).
This is what I think. Obama was born in Hawaii. He could probably make it more clear by producing whatever the birthers are clammering about, but he doesn’t, because he doesn’t want to dignify them with a response or he understands the value in letting them continue with the conspiracy theory.
I believe that birthers are doing Obama opponents a disservice. They are being used to taint all opposition as delusional. Additionally, to me they are signaling that they don’t have anything else substantive to say.
Additionally, Republicans will at some point have to regroup and figure out what they are. Chasing the birther conspiracy is only prolonging that necessary re-examination.
I’m out.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:03 pmNo need to read beyond that.
You have finally struck out for good, b-cup. You worked the pitcher, fouling off third strike after third strike, and finally you swung wildly at a pitch in the dirt.
Accept what Waynebro and others have said repeatedly:
it is not a matter of belief. The campaign produced his birth certificate. The state of Hawai’i confirmed its validity. End of story.
Either accept the evidence or explain why it is invalid. Don’t keep saying that you “believe” that the President is a citizen but you wonder why he hasn’t produced something that would satisfy the birthers. Nothing would satisfy the birthers, and you know it.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:14 pmbackup says:
I’ll concede to straying from the topic (it was a response to smidget).
This is what I think. Obama was born in Hawaii. He could probably make it more clear by producing whatever the birthers are clammering about, but he doesn’t, because he doesn’t want to dignify them with a response or he understands the value in letting them continue with the conspiracy theory.
Ok, that’s it. You just exposed yourself for who you really are. Of course you know that President Obama can’t produce what the birthers are demanding (an original copy of his birth certificate) because it doesn’t exist. It was destroyed by the State of Hawaii years ago when they went to electronic filing of birth certificates. It does exist on microfiche and has been attested to by officials in Hawaii.
The next conspiracy theory by the birthers will be that the State of Hawaii went from paper to electronic handling of birth certificates solely for the purpose of providing cover for President Obama.
So B-Cup, I’m through attempting to hold a discourse with you and back to hitting the Vote Down button every time I see a post of yours.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:24 pmdarn. so the short birth cert I have must be worthless as well since I can’t see the real one. Oh well, guess since I can’t see the long form I should stop driving, stop working, take back my tax money, and leave the country. Wait, was I even born?
July 31st, 2009 at 1:33 pmralph. Do get too excited. Here’s how it works:
I don’t understand your aversion to my belief that Obama was born in Hawaii. I don’t question whether Obama is a U.S. citizen or naturally born. I’m confident that it is so. But, just as in my belief that there is no God (or that 9/11 was not an inside job), it is possible that my belief that Obama was born in Hawaii, could be incorrect.
It’s an open mindedness that you seem to find offensive.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:34 pmOpenmindedness is ignoring facts and replacing said with belief’s. What constitutes a fact captain?
You’re not openminded. You’re a phony.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:39 pmFred. Are you telling me that it’s absolutely impossible that Obama was not born in Hawaii?
July 31st, 2009 at 1:41 pmb-cup, it’s not a “belief”. Well, maybe it is for you, but for the rest of us, it’s a judgment based on evidence.
E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E, b-cup.
Your insistence on casting it as a “belief” only serves your larger purpose of giving legitimacy to the birther movement as part of a “two sides to every story” kind of debate.
It’s a standard tactic for you, and one that squanders the credibility you occasionally build up when you comment reasonably here.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:42 pmdumbass, I’m saying that if a police officer accepts your drivers license as ID that Obama has provided his ID. Anything further is just trying to play politics and discredit a legitimate American and it’s offensive.
You seem to be arguing that the ID is invalid even though it has been run through the system and proven to be legitimate.
You are just using semantics to try to show that nothing is for real and so “it’s possible”
It’s called using plausible fallacy as an argument when you have lost it but want to continue to argue for political gain and nothing more.
It is typical and reprehensible behavior that belongs exclusivly to the right. You included.
Have a good day loser. I thought you were “out”
July 31st, 2009 at 1:48 pmI don’t mean to speak for Fred, but no, it’s not absolutely impossible that Obama was not born in Hawai’i. It is possible that evidence will turn up that shows he was born somewhere else.
But in the absence of any such evidence, and in the face of pretty solid evidence to the contrary, it makes sense to accept the latter.
It is also not absolutely impossible that physics as we understand it is wrong, and some condition of which we are unaware will shift, and airplanes will no longer fly but will instead burrow into the earth on takeoff.
In the absence of any evidence to support that theory, however, I think I will accept that an airplane can still fly me from Los Angeles to Tucson when I need to be there.
You are free to confuse the differing meanings of “belief” and pretend that belief in God is the same thing as belief in a conclusion based on a set of empirical findings, but it just continues to make you look foolish.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:50 pmThis poll is more evidence that America is doomed to failure because of it’s own ignorance. So sad.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:55 pmI couldn’t have said it better…..you can speak for me any time Ralph and I don’t give many people that much leeway but we are very likeminded and I know you wouldn’t try to make my sentiments mean something that I don’t want them to mean.
Can’t say the same for Capppy man though. He is notorious for doing just that…..ie, twisting peoples words.
He reminds me of some preachers these days who have twisted the words in their bibles to justify supporting war, etc.
It’s really just pathetic.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:57 pmralph. up until recently there was evidence that there were only 4 dimensions:
up and down, left and right, and forward and back; and time.
But, recently string theory makes is plausible that there could be as many as 11:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
40 years ago, it would probably be more of a stretch to say there could be 11 dimensions than that someone’s birthplace could be knowingly or unknowingly misrepresented.
40 years ago, it would have open minded to suggest that there could be more than the 4 dimensions than we are aware of. But, there would be plenty who would suggest that that open mindedness was disingenuous or delusional.
But, we are splitting hairs. It’s semantics and not important to the issue. We can agree to disagree on the semantics, but we agree that Obama is a naturally born, U.S. citizen.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:59 pmralph. maybe we’re there. I believe and accept that Obama was born in Hawaii.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:02 pm@backup
Yes, if a President is given information that there is an imminent terrorist attack, then they knew about it ahead of time. Their party is completely irrelevant.
The fact that you even asked such a stupid question proves the point that this article makes with gusto – those that buy into the birth certificate bullshit are IDIOTS.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:07 pmbackup says:
Fred. Are you telling me that it’s absolutely impossible that Obama was not born in Hawaii?
July 31st, 2009 at 1:41 pm
____________
Depends how existential you want to get. It’s certainly possible, however unlikely, that the Obama presidency is the end result of a 50-year conspiracy between a Kenyan economist, a Kansan development professional, various medical professionals in the state of Hawai’i, the Passport office of the U.S. Department of State, Harvard Law School, several Chicago neighborhoods, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, and the Democratic Party to put an African in the White House.
The chances are extremely remote, but nonetheless *possible*. However, all evidence points to the contrary.
And why stop there? The conspiracy could go much, much deeper. I’ve never been to Hawai’i. I’ve never met President Obama. It is certainly possible that neither of them exist. Even if I had been to Hawai’i or met the President, it’s entirely possible that both would have been merely illusions planted in my memory by nefarious forces. It’s even possible that our entire universe and everything in it is merely a simulation being run in a very ginormous computer by some alien being in another M-brane, as Brian Greene has theorized.
Unlikely, but nonetheless possible.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:11 pmNo we’re not, you haven’t admitted to being a purveyer of plausible fallacy as an arument that you had already lost but wanted to argue on behalf of anyway.
You still remind me of bart repeating “can we have a pool dad”? Knowing it was not going to happen.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:14 pmbackup says:
40 years ago, it would probably be more of a stretch to say there could be 11 dimensions than that someone’s birthplace could be knowingly or unknowingly misrepresented.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:59 pm
___________
Sorry, but I have a pending patent on the use of string theory to prove political arguments.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:15 pm“backup says:
Fred. Are you telling me that it’s absolutely impossible that Obama was not born in Hawaii?”
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE that Obama was not born in Hawaii.
You know how I know that? It’s called “evidence” and it’s available in abundance on ths particular issue.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:15 pmMaybe the birthers could start a movement to change the name of Hawaii to Kenya.
Admittedly a small victory…
July 31st, 2009 at 2:18 pmFred says:
You still remind me of bart repeating “can we have a pool dad”? Knowing it was not going to happen.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:14 pm
_____________
Perhaps not the best analogy to use. As I recall, Bart did get the pool.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:18 pmNo, b-cup “we” are not “splitting hairs”.
YOU are spinning like a Tilt-A-Whirl and making progressively less sense with each utterance you commit to cyberspace.
The emergence of string theory has no practical impact on the applications of Newtonian physics in our day-to-day experience. It is irrelevant to your argument, except for your desire to undercut the credibility of hard evidence by introducing potential uncertainty traceable to possible future discoveries. After all, something might come to light later on, so the birthers are justified in believing that the president was not born where his birth certificate says he was born, even though you “believe’ differently.
I guess if your agenda depends on undercutting or not acknowledging hard documentary evidence, introducing uncertainty, however weak it may be, can’t hurt, huh?
July 31st, 2009 at 2:18 pmFred, thanks for the kind words. I’m always happy to support your ideas.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:19 pm@chiroptera toasterhead
When I was a kid, I tried that on my dad, only for a dog instead of a pool. His response was that when I grew up and got my own house, I could get a dog, or any number of dogs, that I wanted. But until then, his house would remain dog free (note: my dad loves dogs, but he knew that all of us being gone during the day would not lend itself well to housebreaking a puppy…my parents now have a dog they rescued as an adult, and he’s already housebroken, and they are completely in love with him).
So, I recommend to backup and the other birthers that when they grow up and get their own country, they can make all the wild-ass claims that they want. Until then, facts will override wild-ass claims.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:25 pmralph. okay, we’re not splitting hairs.
I posted back around #122. Take another look at it. It’s a pretty much pro-Obama, anti-birther sentiment. I don’t see how objectionable it could be.
But, what did you key on? The idea that maybe Obama isn’t interested in addressing birthers and my use of the word ‘believe’.
Not a mention of anything else in the post. I think your scrutiny is selective and misses the broader point I was making in the post.
We are pretty much on the same page, but I think nothing could be repugnant to you, regardless of what position I take.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:31 pmnothing could be as repugnant to you…
July 31st, 2009 at 2:33 pmNo, b-cup, what I keyed on was your insistence that the birthers “belief” was comparable to the “belief” of the rest of us that the President’s birth certificate showed that he was born in Hawai’i.
Your suggestion that “maybe Obama isn’t interested in addressing birthers” was just the cherry on the top of the sundae.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:39 pmThe broader point you’ve been making this entire time is that you’re willing to entertain this nonsense.
That makes you just as bad as those idiots. Get used to the idea – those that tolerate rampant idiocy aren’t much better than those spouting rampant idiocy.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:40 pmYour mononic obsessive need to try to turn black into white and salt into pepper, etc. You pick the metaphor fool.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:40 pmralph the wonder llama says:
I guess if your agenda depends on undercutting or not acknowledging hard documentary evidence, introducing uncertainty, however weak it may be, can’t hurt, huh?
July 31st, 2009 at 2:18 pm
_______________
I’m not sure that’s what backup’s doing. I think he’s just pointing out the difference between the impossible and the merely extremely unlikely.
It’s not impossible that Obama was not born in Hawai’i. It’s not impossible that the moon landing was faked. It’s not impossible that there is a teapot orbiting Saturn. However, they’re all EXTREMELY unlikely.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:44 pmThe string theory comparison was over the top.
Let me use this (there are obviously other similar examples):
I did not believe that Clinton had been with a 19 year old intern in the oval office initially. It seemed to me unbelievable.
The same for when I first heard about the Edwards and Sanford affairs. It did not seem to me possible at the time that men in these positions would be so irresponsible. I did not believe it, before more evidence came in.
And with the 9/11 conspiracies. I do not believe them. But, I can honestly say, that I can conceive of the possibility that more information could arise that proves the Bush administration was somehow complicit or even more than complicit. I don’t believe it today, but it’s possible
I accept that Bush wasn’t complicit in 9/11. I accept that Obama was born in Hawaii. I accept that there is no God.
But, I leave open the possibility that my beliefs today could be mistaken. I do that by saying ‘I believe’ instead of stating something as fact.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:49 pmtoasterhead. That’s pretty much it. It’s a defense of my use of the word ‘believe’.
Some are using my use of the word ‘believe’ as argument that I support birther sentiment.
I do not.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:53 pmb-cup,
Take a hint and find a better word than “believe.” That word weakens every argument you ever make here — and your arguments are already weak enough.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:55 pmReally?
:|
You must not get laid much.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:00 pmbarf
July 31st, 2009 at 3:01 pmbackup says:
toasterhead. That’s pretty much it. It’s a defense of my use of the word ‘believe’.
Some are using my use of the word ‘believe’ as argument that I support birther sentiment.
I do not.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:53 pm
______________
Which is also understandable. The word “believe” has been a bit maligned lately – mainly through rampant misuse. As Jon Stewart has pointed out in a few segments, it’s often used to introduce reasonable – and often unreasonable – doubt into public discourse.
By saying “I don’t believe Obama is a Muslim” or “I don’t believe Obama was born in Kenya” or “I don’t believe there is a teapot orbiting Saturn,” one is still introducing the idea as a meme. The denial of the belief is a tacit recognition that the opposite belief also exists, and it almost begs the “objective” media to go quote the other side, even if that other side is totally crackpot.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:02 pmWe don’t need to agree that PRESIDENT Obama is a naturally born U.S. Citizen.
It’s a matter of public record.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:04 pmbackup
when I look at the Democrat response to the
If you are too stupid to know the name of the largest political party in America you are too stupid to have any kind of discussion about politics. Its just that simple
July 31st, 2009 at 3:06 pmPerhaps you are making that distinction, b-cup, but you are failing to then make the even more critical distinction between the “extremely unlikely” and the “possible”. You treat them as if they were the same thing, for the sake of your argument.
I don’t know if you believe the crap you spread on toast here, or if you’re just funnin’ us, but either way, it puts you in some weird rhetorical places, repeatedly.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:12 pmWhen Barack Obama became the Senator of Illinois, not one wingnut start a petition or rally on whether Obama was a U.S. citizen. Gramps McCain has been a Senator for many years and not one peep of birth talk from the wingnuts. Yet, Obama runs for President, wins, and make history to being the first black President of the United States and now all of sudden the same wingnuts question Obama’s birth?
And now you know why the Republican party is going up in flames. What would Abe Lincoln think of all of this?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:12 pmZooey. You’re probably right about ‘believe’. I’ll give it one more stab and then try to give it up.
Imagine if I were talking to conservatives and the issue was the war on terror. And during the discussion, I stated that ‘I believe we are in a war on terror’.
And the group is incensed because I said ‘I believe’ instead of ‘we are in a war on terror’.
I would basically be in agreement with the conservative view, but their sensibilities would be disturbed because I would be leaving open the possibility that we are not.
It does weaken the argument. But, where is the virtue? Being open minded to other possibilities or being so adamant in what you believe that you fight not just opposing views, but supporting views of less than absolute conviction?
That seems over the top to me.
But, you’re right. Even if I feel strongly about it, I am doing a very poor job of communicating it.
BTW, your blog is cool.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:13 pmMy bad. Democrat should have been Democratic.
But, cut me some slack. This is a Democratic party website and they have the web address, democrats.org.
My interchange was unintentional.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:18 pmNo slack.
Democrat is a noun, Democratic is an adjective.
Not knowing when a noun is used versus an adjective doesn’t excuse you. I’ll accept it if you claim it was a typo, but that is the only excuse you can get away with, and only if happens once and only once.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:26 pmSP Biloxi says:
When Barack Obama became the Senator of Illinois, not one wingnut start a petition or rally on whether Obama was a U.S. citizen. Gramps McCain has been a Senator for many years and not one peep of birth talk from the wingnuts. Yet, Obama runs for President, wins, and make history to being the first black President of the United States and now all of sudden the same wingnuts question Obama’s birth?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:12 pm
_____________
Well in fairness, you don’t have to be a natural-born citizen to be a Senator, so it wouldn’t have come up for either of their Senatorial campaigns.
And McCain is covered by the same Constitutional clause that allowed the framers of the Constitution to serve as President.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:29 pmWhich makes sense because he was there at the signing.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:31 pmbackup says:
Democrats is a proper usage to describe those members of the Democratic party and I wont cut you any slack. This is a concerted effort among the right to denigrate the Democratic party. Derisivly changing the name of the Democratic Party is petty and contemptuous. If you are doing it by mistake, which I accept flatly, fine. Stop. If you are buying into it shame on you. Dont think for one second this is overall accidental though. It isnt. It is insidious and needs to stop
July 31st, 2009 at 3:34 pmSeparate from birthers and Obama, does anyone question why it’s still important for a President to be born a U.S. citizen? (except the obvious Constitutional requirement)
If some future candidate were as qualified as Obama, but not born a U.S. citizen, should we not be allowed to consider him/her for the post?
Should the Constitution be changed on this matter?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:34 pmbackup says:
It isnt something I care enough about to have any hard and fast opinion. It would take a constitutional amendment to change and those are tough take a lot of resources but I WOULD be open to arguments others made for why it should be done and could easily be convinced to support such a change.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:37 pm“When do we start a serious dialog about the Birther movement being a proxy for racism that is unacceptable to articulate in more direct terms?”
July 31st, 2009 at 3:38 pmAre immigrants that attain U.S. citizenship any less citizens than those that were born U.S. citizens?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:38 pmchiroptera toasterhead says:
Exactly. There cant be any question whatsoever he is a citizen his mother was a citizen. It is the natural born thing which is not a requirement for Senator
July 31st, 2009 at 3:39 pmNaturalized citizens are citizens in every way that natural born citizens are and are denied no rights other than running for President which is hardly a huge burden or oppressive unfairness.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:42 pmRegarding 171 above:
July 31st, 2009 at 3:44 pmAccording to the US constitutional requirement for presidency, yes. The reasoning is that these naturalized citizens will have a more likely tendency to claim allegiance to more than one sovereignty. I think this is the reason the founding fathers included the clause “natural born” — and in this case, I’m content not to try to second guess their conclusions on the matter.
Okay, here’s a key point about b-cup’s “belief” that Obama was born in Hawai’i and why some of us find it disingenuous:
I haven’t gone through an exhaustive search of his posts in this thread, but I don’t recall any instance in which he qualified his belief with a reason. I don’t recall him once saying “I believe Obama was born in Hawai’i because he has released his birth certificate and the State of Hawai’i verified it.”
All he ever said was “I believe Obama was born in Hawai’i”, just as someone might say “I believe God made me in His image.” It was always stated as a simple belief, not as a logical conclusion based on the evidence that had been put forth.
For instance we have this statement in post #122:
This is what I think. Obama was born in Hawaii. He could probably make it more clear by producing whatever the birthers are clammering about, but he doesn’t, because he doesn’t want to dignify them with a response or he understands the value in letting them continue with the conspiracy theory.
Not only does b-cup fail to explain WHY he believes that Obama was born in Hawai’i, he even suggests that the evidence in the public sphere to support that belief has not been released.
b-cup can pretend that he’s being reasonable, that he’s “on the same side” as we are, but the evidence undermines that claim.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:47 pmWhen large numbers of men are unable to find work, unemployment results. — Calvin Coolidge
For those who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like. — Abraham Lincoln
That that is, is.
Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness? — Artemus Ward
Ah well, they say its not as bad as they say it is.
Oxymoron: Black Light
I’d give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
Oxymoron: Left Handed Screwdrivers.
Oxymoron: Straight hooks.
It was as bad as being up a creek in a barbed wire canoe.
Oxymoron: Compulsory volunteers
Oxymoron: College student
Oxymoron: Jumbo shrimp
That shoe fits him like a glove.
I wouldn’t be paranoid if everyone didn’t pick on me.
Oxymorons: Plastic lemons, rubber bones, bricked-up windows, artificial grass, plastic flowers, invisible ink.
People have one thing in common: they are all different.
It usually takes more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu speech. — Mark Twain
The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be. — Paul Valery
When one has good health it is not serious to be ill. — Francis Blanche
Is there life before death? — Belfast Graffito
Often it is fatal to live too long. — Racine
The first condition of immortality is death. — Stanislaw Lec
Oxymoron: As famous as the unknown soldier.
Anyone who isn’t confused here doesn’t really know what’s going on.
I must follow the people. Am I not their leader? — Benjamin Disraeli
The saddest moment in a person’s life comes but once.
A commercial traveller was passing through a small town when he came upon a huge funeral procession. “Who died?” he asked a nearby local. “I’m not sure,” replied the local, “but I think its the one in the coffin.”
The dumplings in a dream are not dumplings, only dreams.
He lived his life to the end.
You always find something in the last place you look.
A woman met a man walking along the street wearing only one shoe. “Just lost a shoe?” she asked. He answered, “Nope, just found one.”
Classified ad: For Sale: Man’s suit, perfect fit.
It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others. — John Andrew Holmes
Some painters transform the sun into a yellow spot; others transform a yellow spot into the sun. — Pablo Picasso
Beyond each corner new directions lie in wait. — Stanislaw Lec
My play was a complete success. The audience was a failure.
My life has a superb cast but I can’t figure out the plot. — Ashleigh Brilliant
A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants. — Arthur Schoperhauer
Brain: an apparatus with which we think we think. — Ambrose Bierce
You can observe a lot just by watchin’. — Yogi Berra
In these matters the only certainty is that nothing is certain. — Pliny the Elder
The English certainly and fiercely pride themselves in never praising themselves. — Wyndham Lewis
I have made mistakes, but have never made the mistake of claiming I never made one. — James G. Bennet
Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history. — George Bernard Shaw
Trapped, like a trap in a trap. — Dorothy Parker
I am not sincere, even when I say I am not. — Jules Renard
You’ve no idea of what a poor opinion I have of myself, and how little I deserve it. — W.S. Gilbert
July 31st, 2009 at 3:47 pmSomeone above brought up the Clinton Chronicles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Chronicles
These were conspiracy theories like the birther conspiracy.
You can make the argument that the birther conspiracy is really just a proxy for racism, but that discounts the history that the other presidents have also been subjected to similar conspiratorial charges.
It’s not racism. It’s mudslinging from partisans.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:48 pmA glaring issue which is widely skirted in this birther controversy is that, irrespective of the constitutionality of Obamas office, doesn’t he feel he has an ethical responsibility to open up his personal records to scrutiny of the citizens he serves? Many federal employees are subjected to lengthy background checks for various positions with security clearance, etc. I don’t think its too much to aske that the President produce documentation that would commonly be required for such a background check.
Many folks are quite content to condenm Americans for simply questioning the president on his background — and this is quite unsettling. Perhaps they have forgotten that the President is not a King — he serves the citizens, and it is reasonable that he should make a good faith effort to disclose some very basic documentation relating to his background. Are we now in a situation where Americans are no longer expected to question or doubt our leaders from time to time?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:51 pmFred. Take your pick:
6 of one, half gallon of the other.
By the way, I can’t stand guys that use clichés like they’re a dime a dozen.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:52 pmQ: If evidence that a president is not Constitionally eligible to hold office is discovered after he obtains office, what recourse do the American citizens have in order to bring the matter to light? Is it simply too late at that point, and we’d have to just live with it?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:55 pmPaulMorphy says:
he has. Just because you won’t accept it doesn’t mean that the supreme court among many other courts as well as the house and senate have accepted it and he has been sworn in.
Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make your whining legitimate.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:55 pmJust because it’s not inherently racist doesn’t mean the people doing it aren’t racist.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:56 pmTrue, but from that you can’t legitimately make the jump that the birther argument is not just partisan, but racist.
We have had partisan politics from before the signing. They continue today, not because Obama is black, but because that’s the nature of politics.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:02 pmPaul. What exactly is Obama failing to produce?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:04 pmFred,
He has what? I dont know of any records which have been released other than the re-issued COLB from HI.
You don’t answer the question about whether you think the Pres has an ethical obligation to release his medical records, college transcripts, etc… Obama doesn’t seem to be a big fan of transparency when it applies to his own background history.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:11 pmmore oxymorons captain? seriously, the racists are off the rail. They are being watched and are considered the most dangerous terroist threat to the US at present.
Furthermore they have thrown reason and diplomacy out the door in favor of dissent leading to violence and what they call the new rebellion. They are racists and they like to pretend that they are not, just like you.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/31/recess-harassment-memo/
July 31st, 2009 at 4:12 pmPaulMorphy
I’m not going to explain anything to you. You on the otherhand make baseless accusations that you cannot back up and then want to argue the point as if you had.
good day “my friend”
July 31st, 2009 at 4:13 pmI’m the Birther of Earl, and you can be my Birthess.
- with an apology to the late, great Frank Zappa.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:17 pmPaulMorphy says:
Your claim is ludicrous. He campaigned for a year and a half. His entire life was open to intense scrutiny. What more do you want?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:17 pmPaulMorphy says:
A Since he IS constitutionally eligible and that has been proven there is no reason to indulge your wetdream
July 31st, 2009 at 4:18 pmEugene,
I say YOUR claim is ludicrous. Did one of those intense scrutinizers happen to see any medical records, college transcripts, ORIGINAL birth certificate? If so, why haven’t they been made public. You seem to consider it important that he be scrutinized prior to taking office, no?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:20 pmAnother red herring from the concern troll.
The “war on terror” is a vague metaphor who’s meaning varies depending on who’s using it.
A birth certificate is not a metaphor.
:|
Anything else concern troll?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:20 pmPaul. Here’s the problem.
Someone can charge the birther argument to simply go on a fishing expedition.
Many here have made the reasonable claim that nothing will satisfy the birthers.
Obama should meet the expectations that every other candidate for president has had to meet. No less and no more.
We cannot allow partisans to exploit the premise of transparency to fish for any information that could be used to embarrass the President or try up our government’s resources and the new administrations agenda.
If you are saying that Obama has not been required to meet the standard that other candidates have had to meet, I would listen to your arguments as to why you feel he has not. But, if he has met the standard, birthers need to move on.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:24 pmEugene,
A president is not constitionally eligible just because you declare it so. He must meet the requirements set out in the law. If that documentation exists, and is presented, we could then verify your commment.
And once again, you are ignoring the question of whether the president of the united states has a ethical obligation to divulge records pertinent to his background. Considering he is CIC, Cheif Executive, and helps make law, — and because it is required of other similar governement, military and law enforcement officials, I would say yes.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:25 pmWhat other records does he need to release, and why?
He’s produced the same birth certificate that every other President before him has had to produce.
In fact, I don’t ever recall seeing Bush’s birth certificate, or anyone asking for it.
President Obama has produced the same birth certificate you or I or any American citizen is asked to produce to prove their citizenship.
Why should he have to produce more?
:|
Because you don’t like black people?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:25 pmPaulMorphy
hey dipshit, the entire house of represntatives just voted on a bill stating that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 (i think the year is correct). Either way, it’s just whining on your part and you look like an idiot.
Now if there was any, and I mean any grain of possible truth to your lies don’t you think that at least one republican would have voted against that? None did. He’s a legal president and you don’t like it…..tough shite.
But please don’t let what I think stop you from continuing to look like an idiot. In fact I insist.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:26 pmIf President Obama refuses to end our two imperial military occupations (the costs of which could easily pay for a robust public option health insurance program), then we should start a new political party to replace the failing GOP/Whig Party.
The Voter’s Internet Party: a modest proposal.
To the Editor:
We need to create a new Voter’s Internet Party. With every passing day in the 21st century, it is becoming painfully more obvious to all but the most fanatically partisan of us that the vast majority of the Senators and Representatives from both of the two major political parties are irrevocably corrupted by the unseemly influence of major corporations and the wealthy ruling elites. Therefore, we, the vast majority, who want clean honest open government need to form a new political party that will serve our interests, and not those of the ruling wealthy corporate elites. Therefore, may I suggest that we create a new Voter’s Internet Party to honor the ideal of a traditional count-all-the-votes democracy.
With widespread use of the Internet, we now have a relatively easy, inexpensive and efficient way to contact and organize the many millions of American voters that have been disenfranchised and disillusioned in the 21st century by the Bush & Co. theft of the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections. The brilliant example of the highly-effective grassroots campaigns of the Internet-based MoveOn.org in the 2004 Presidential campaign has shown that Internet-organizing can be a powerful tool for progressive social change.
Orange. Since orange has been clearly identified in the mass media as the color of protest of election fraud first in the Ukraine and later in the United States, let us use the color orange to help identify our new Internet Voter’s Party.
We need our new Internet Voter’s Party to help facilitate our country’s return to the exclusive use of traditional hand-counted paper ballots. We need to stage thousands of 21st century versions of the 1773 Boston Tea Party by dumping all of the computerized electronic voting machines and computerized electronic vote tabulating machines into the nearest body of water. As long as there are any computerized electronic voting machines and computerized electronic vote tabulating machines used in any voting precinct in the country, there will be Republican hackers, riggers and thugs who will find ways to rig, hack and steal future American elections. Just say no to the use of electronic computerized voting machines and electronic computerized vote tabulating machines in any future elections.
We need our new Internet Voter’s Party to demand that all future elections be administeredby professional non-partisan state civil servants, not by partisan political hacks such as the 2000 Republican Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and the 2004 Republican Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will be grass-roots based on small individual annual contributions not to exceed a maximum of $100 per year. Our new Voter’s Internet Party will thus avoid the corporate corruption which has long been the hallmark and the curse of the two large political parties.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor and preserve our natural environment.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor social security, labor laws and privacy laws.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor a woman’s right to choose.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor international law, international treaties and international obligations.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will not torture anyone under any circumstances. Our new Voter’s Internet Party will consider the Golden Rule regarding torture: If you don’t want it done to you when you are in legal custody, then we will not do it to anyone in American legal custody.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor the working people of American with good working conditions and a living wage for all.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor the public’s right to control public airwaves and to thus require public interest broadcasting on television and radio instead of the current arrangement of allow greedy private corporations to dominate our airwaves.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will honor the right to universal health care and universal single-payer health insurance.
Our new Voter’s Internet Party will return the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to its traditional watch-dog role of protecting the American consumer instead of its current practice of protecting and enlarging the obscene profits of greedy drug manufacturers.
Yours truly,
James K. Sayre
26 January 2006
July 31st, 2009 at 4:27 pmPaulMorphy says:
when you produce bush’s medical and military records we can talk. Until then all I can say to you is what the republics said to dems when they took control of congress:
We are in power now so you need to just sit down and shut up. It’s even more important now considering your astronical failure the last 8 years and the secrecy under which you operated OUR government.
You have nothing except that whiny sound that will turn into a screech and will predictably be followed by violence from your side and progressives will probably die, again.
You have nothing to offer or contribute.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:31 pmOnce more the concern troll “defends” him by leaving open the possibility that there’s truth to the birther nonsense.
This is a non issue and was out of the gate.
If any of you “reasonable” pinheads ever graduate from flipping burgers at McDonalds and apply for a real job somewhere where you are asked to apply for a secret clearance, then you’ll find out what’s involved in just a standard clearance process. Just at the lowest levels, a clearance investigation is unbelievably thorough. FBI agents showing up at your old places of employment, your old schools, your high school best friends house.
Every inch of your life is examined in depth.
At the higher levels, well, you don’t want to know.
So for there to be any credibility to what you chuckleheads are allowing for, we’d have to believe the US secret service and the FBI forgot to check if he was born here.
:|
The level of stupidity required here boggles the mind.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:31 pmFred — I’m sorry but I can’t beleive that people who share you political ideology would consider you last comment reasonable or worthy of comment. It is simple preposterous.
Bush is irrelevant, other than to say if you feel Bush should have released his documentation, then you therefore support my position that Obama should.
Regarding your baseless tripe at the end of your last comment, in the USA, citizens and legislators are allowed (even encouraged) to dissent from the majority. If you feel like we should be living in an Oligarchy or dictatorship, all I can say is you don’t understand the governmental history of your own country.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:35 pmWaynebro,
Thats all well and good, but I’d rather see public docuementation, rather than just to “assume someone checked him out”. It scary that your so willing to assume it — ask yourself if you’d feel the same way with someone who doesn’t appear to agree with your political ideology.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:38 pmFirst, quit talking to yourself.
Second, President Obama has produced his birth certificate.
So your “position” is based on a lie.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:38 pmPerhaps this post has already been dealt with but…
what part of releasing his birth certificate don’t you understand?
Wrong. It not “simply questioning the president on his background” that is condemned. It is refusing to accept or even acknowledge that the question has been addressed by the President. As you have just done.
Questioning the President is one thing. Ginning up phony controversies in the face of conclusive evidence to the contrary is quite another.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:38 pmHe has shown public documentation moron.
His birth certificate is plastered all over the web.
Something he had to do to shut up idiots like you.
Something no other President has had to do.
And as for the assumption? We’re talking about the US Secret Service and the FBI performing a security clearance moron.
You don’t need to “assume” anything.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:41 pm1) President Obama is aware that literally MILLIONS of citizens whom he serves are demanding that he release his ORIGINAL birth certificate, medical records, college transcripts, and other similar documents.
2) President Obama doesn’t care and will not release the documentation.
3) Is this ok? If so, what other matters will he declare unworthy of action when the citizenry speaks up? How high of a percentage of people, how many politicians, courts, military men are necessary for the president to take action on this or similar matters?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:44 pmI don’t have to assume anything.
When the US Secret Service and the FBI perform a background investigation for a security clearance, you don’t have to assume they confirmed his citizenship.
You know they did.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:45 pmPaulMorphy says:
July 31st, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Your birther aka racist routine is not dissent, it’s conspiracy-driven racism.
Deal with it.
Fred’s right. You have nothing to contribute.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:46 pmWhat “phony controversies” have I “ginned up”? I’m not declaring that the president is eligible or not. I’m not declaring I know about his medical history, or college career. All I’m saying is WE DON’T KNOW?
Perhaps he could be a nice guy and release a few basic documents?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pmYeah, like yelling fire in a theater is free speech. You have to have a legitimate complaint. You don’t. Stop pretending, this aint kindergarden.
In addition, where were you when dems were being beaten and arrested for just speaking out or having anti-bush bumper stickers.
Where was their encouragment? You’re efforts to make a controversy where none exists just makes dissent look bad so stop being an idiot.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pmHe has released a copy of his original birth certificate.
What you are calling the “original” is the long form that is stored at the Dept of Health in the state you are born in.
You don’t have your long form certificate. Neither do I. Neither do most Americans, because most states store the LONG FORM at the Dept of Health. The short form, which is the “original birth certificate” given to everyone is what we all have.
Time for you to stop lying now.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:48 pmPaulMorphy says:
Sure you would say that you are a MORON. I dont know or care about his medical records. He released what is normally released or there would have been huge stories about why he didnt. He was born in Hawaii. He released what is released when a birth certificate is asked for. Just because you are an idiot does not obligate Obama to jump through hoops to show you anymore documentation than every president does. Grow up. Obama was born in Hawaii. Reality is not dependent on your belief to be, you know, REALITY
July 31st, 2009 at 4:50 pmPaulMorphy says:
July 31st, 2009 at 4:44 pm
1) Literally millions? You do have proof of that?
2) President Obama doesn’t have the authority to release his “original” birth certificate.
3) Yeah, it’s ok. Because literally every person on this planet has more functioning brain cells than you teabaggers.
BTW, Hillary Clinton would have ferreted out a “Kenyan” Barack Obama long before the primaries.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:51 pmPaulMorphy says:
He met them he is over 35 was nominated and won and was born in Hawaii. Just because you are too stupid to accept factual reality that doesnt CHANGE factual reality. We dont CARE that you wont accept plain facts the world will just move on without you
July 31st, 2009 at 4:52 pmYou seem to be living in a pre-2008 election loop. You lost, we don’t have to kiss your azz anymore.
The people who needed to document Obama’s legitimacy have done so.
This is the phony controversy and you know it. You may cry now.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:53 pmPaulMorphy says:
No you wouldnt. You are a liar. If that was what you wanted you would check out his COLB which IS PUBLIC DOCUMANTATION and all the proof anyone is required to show to prove you were born in Hawaii. No YOU want Obama to jump through hoops to legitimize your stupidity and obsession. If all you really wanted was evidence there is already plenty that has been produced. We both know that no matter WHAT proof he produced it would NEVER be good enough for you
July 31st, 2009 at 4:55 pmPaulMorphy says:
Perhaps he could be a nice guy and release a few basic documents?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
It’s already done.
Of course, if there were a video of Obama’s mother giving birth on the beach in Hawaii, with Diamond Head in the background, and the court clerk standing by to notarize the sworn affidavit of the OB/GYN doing the delivery, and it would be declared a fake by the likes of you.
Do take time to deal with your racism.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:55 pmReally? You don’t know he was the editor of the Harvard Law Review?
Or are you just trying to push the already debunked neocon lie about him applying for a Fulbright scholarship?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:55 pmPaulMorphy says: 209
Except we DO know if by we it is meant those with a functioning cerebral cortex. Yeah we have all heard the I am not saying…tactic from you wingnuts to try to lessen the FACT you are nuts. Yeah, we know. If you accept fact at all we know. It has been proven. Feel free to just deny reality. Reality doesnt change and wishing wont make it so. Neither will you constant repititons of this idiocy. The evidence has been shown. Get over it or just admit you dont CARE what the facts are you will glom onto ANYTHING to attack Obama
July 31st, 2009 at 4:58 pmMedical records are released when there’s a question about the President’s health.
There is no question here about President Obama’s health.
College transcripts would prove nothing about his citizenship.
And his birth certificate has already been made freely available to the public, something no other president has ever done or had to do.
So all we have left is a neocon troll trying to sell neocon lies.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:00 pmTrying to respond to all of these last few posts. Mainly the arguments seem to have digressed into partisan attacks.
First of all, the argument in non-partisan and not racist — any arguments to the contrary are illogical and not worth refuting.
Mainly my assertion is — The president should be obligated to demonstrate records pertaining to his background. Regardless of the party or color of his skin. So far he has produced a short form copy of his BC — a not very good start — and that’s it so far.
Personally, I’m not happy to just “trust” that someone else has investigated him somewhere along the line. It is not too much to ask of the Pres to produce a bundle of documents pertinent to his background. He seemed to think it was important to release the short-form, why stop there? It wasn’t hard to request and have someone produce the documentation for the world to see very quickly. This should be done with the Original BC, Medical records, etc. It is not too much for Americans to ask him to do that.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:21 pmPaulMorphy says:
Trying to respond to non sane birthers is like trying to beat Qtips into anvils. HE HAS SHOWN HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. The only one that matters the one you GET when you ask for one that PROVES where you were born in this case Honolulu. The one that you CANT get if you WERENT born in Honolulu. Dont tell us about that law passed in 1982 which wouldnt be relevant to anyone born in 1961 and would show where he was born anyway. Our time has been wasted enough with that red herring. Anouncements of his birth contemporaneous TO his birth have been produced. What you ask for has been given. It is obvious NOTHING would be good enough for you and no matter how hard you try to PRETEND you are being reasonable YOU. ARE. NOT. What needs to be shown has BEEN shown. Move on or admit that the FACTS of the matter mean NOTHING to you and you are just using ANY weak and stupid excuse to attack Obama
July 31st, 2009 at 5:30 pmThat’s what happens when you spread partisan lies.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:35 pmNon-partisan? Are you serious?
How many Democrats are out there claiming the President’s birth certificate is a fake?
What else do you require? The State of Hawai’i has confirmed multiple times that the President was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961 and that the birth certificate he has released is genuine. Why is that not sufficient for you?
What is the reason you demand that he release medical records or college transcripts? Are either of those things required for his position?
Interesting. Were you comfortable to just “trust” the former President when he said that he was only wiretapping actual terrorists without a warrant and not regular Americans? Or that the people he ordered held at Guantanamo were definitely bad guys, even though almost none of them actually were afforded a trial of any kind? Or did you demand the same level of accountability for that President’s actions as president as you demand of this President’s past?
July 31st, 2009 at 5:36 pmNo EugeneDebs, most of your comments are simply false.
The COLB the Obama released is not sufficient proof of place of birth. It is very possible that people who were not born in HI could have the exact same document sent to them by the state of HI (Its too much to discuss the statutes in HI which support this, but you can easily find this if you do a bit of research). YES, I am saying that people who were not born in HI could receive the document that Obama has released — check HI law.
It is not “obvious” that nothing would satisfy me — I will state it here again clearly. Original Long Form BC, Medical Records, Grade School and college transcripts, immigration/passport records would good enough for me.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:38 pmYour main ASSertion is a lie.
The president HAS produced his birth certificate for the general public to see.
No other president has ever had to do that.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:39 pmLiar.
The “COLB” as you call it is a BIRTH CERTIFICATE and is the same certificate your mom got for you when she crapped you out onto the planet.
It’s a birth certificate and is valid for identification in any state in the country.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:41 pmGrade school records don’t prove anything about citizenship and no other president has ever produced his. Medical records don’t prove citzenship beyond the BIRTH CERTIFICATE, which is already plastered all over the internet.
And immigration records are for IMMIGRANTS stupid.
Not people who are born here.
And as for what will satisfy you?
You must be under the mistaken impression that someone gives a rats ass about what will satisfy you.
You’re as impotent as we all wish your father had been.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:47 pmSince you don’t think this is partisan, where are any and I mean any democrats asking the question you want answered?
From that we can deduce that you are also racist.
any arguments from you to the contrary are illogical and not worth refuting.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:48 pmPaulMorphy says:
No EugeneDebs, most of your comments are simply false.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
No they are NOT false. You are just a brainwashed moron. A COLB IS proof of birth in Hawaii. It is what you GET when you are born in Hawaii and ask them for proof OF your birth in Hawaii. I dont know how much more I can dumb it down for you.
I cant BELIEVE that even though I TOLD you not to waste our time with your stupid citing of a 1982 law you did it anyway. NO. IT is plain stupid. First the law in question which YOU ought to chech was pass in 1982 thus irrelevant to Obama. Second with THOSE birth certificates the PLACE of birth is still ON the birth certificate like it is on Obamas that says Honolulu. You dont know what you are talking about. This is what comes from regurgitating what rightwing screechmonkesy TOLD you to think instead of having any dim idea of your own.
I dont believe you. No ONE shows their long form BC so Obama is under no obligation to jump through the hoops for nutbags like YOU. His college transcripts are irrelevant to his citizenship or really anything else. He was editor of Harvard law review. None of that is relevant to his eligibility to be president. He HAS a passport and is under no obligation to show it to YOU. He has provided everything any reasonable person would need to show he was born in Honolulu. You nutbag birthers can take a hike. You arent reasonable. I dont believe ANYTHING would satisfy you
July 31st, 2009 at 5:50 pm‘Paul Morphy’ said:
The reasoning is that these naturalized citizens will have a more likely tendency to claim allegiance to more than one sovereignty.
Are you concerned that Obama will favor the interests of Kenya over the interests of the U.S.?
Let’s get down to the nitty gritty why don’t we.
How will Kenya benefit from, as you put it, Obama being “more likely to claim allegiance” to Kenya? And why would that scare you so much?
Is Kenya waiting for Obama to pour money into it so it can take over the region? Did Obama suddenly get the power to do whatever he pleases? Do you even realize how silly you sound?
July 31st, 2009 at 5:53 pmPresident Obama has presented a birth certificate that is sufficient proof to get a passport, get a top security clearance, and have access to the codes that could destroy the known world (i.e. the “football”).
It’s now up to the “birthers” aka racists to prove President Obama is not a United States citizen.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:59 pmMary Lacewing,
In the specific case of Obama, he was born w British citizenship, later Kenyan (when they became independent) and also may have or have held Indonesian citizenship. There is no way we can predict what sort of international circumstances we find ourselves in at some future point. It is best that the President not have to decide between American interests and those of his other allegiances.
This ofcourse doesnt apply only to Obama, but any other future presidents…
Zooey, — an important piece of evidence which would be the best “proof” so far of where OBama was born, will be on his original long form birth certificate. This would show the name of the doctor, hospital, and have been signed by witnesses, He has made no effort to release the document. The available short form could , under HI law, be indicative of a person born outside of the US and subsequently issued a certificate in HI (you’ll have to research the statutes yourself). There is sworn testimony from Obamas grandmother that she witnessed his birth in Kenya. That is a bit evidence. Releasing the original BC with complete info, witnesses, Dr name, etc would quickly put the matter to rest for Obama if he was born in HI.
July 31st, 2009 at 6:37 pmI get how the birther charges can be a partisan fishing attempt or an effort to distract from the new administrations agenda.
But, how do you make the leap to racism?
July 31st, 2009 at 6:44 pmPaul. What if Obama’s family lost this original that you pursue and the state of Hawaii no longer has copies? And the best anyone can do is the COLB.
Should Obama be disqualified because of misplaced or destroyed documents?
July 31st, 2009 at 6:48 pmBackup,
The what if is irrelevant — HI official has come out with made a statement saying she has reviewed the documents on file. The state is responsible for maintaining original birth records. Would be interesting if they somehow misplaced it or inadvertantly destroyed it. I think this “might” help protect him legally, but it certainly wouldn’t do much to dispel the doubters.
July 31st, 2009 at 6:55 pm@227 . Personal insults aside, You just don’t seem to understand that the short form issued in HI does not necessarily PROVE his birthplace was HI. If you would take time to research HI law statutes, you will find that there are at least 2 ways by which a person not birthed in HI, could acquire the COLB which Obama released.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:03 pmOkay, Paul. I can get a copy of my original birth certificate, why can’t Obama get a copy of his?
July 31st, 2009 at 7:03 pmThe question is why WON’T he release a copy of it. HI has legal rocedures on file for requesting copies of the original birth cert. Many folks have shown theirs from the same year. In fact, one person recently release an original from the DAY AFTER Obama was born!
July 31st, 2009 at 7:09 pmPaulMorphy says:
Many federal employees are subjected to lengthy background checks for various positions with security clearance, etc. I don’t think its too much to aske that the President produce documentation that would commonly be required for such a background check.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:51 pm
_________________
Background checks are performed by highly qualified individuals who are able to obtain access to private, personal records for the purpose of the background check. That information is secure but unclassified, and can NOT be released publicly.
The President, as a private citizen, is entitled to that same privacy. He was elected to do a job, and we do have a right to hold him to the promises he made during the campaign.
However, we do not OWN him. We do not have a right to his private and personal information. If he doesn’t want to release his birth certificate, he doesn’t have to.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:24 pmPaulMorphy says:
The question is why WON’T he release a copy of it. HI has legal rocedures on file for requesting copies of the original birth cert. Many folks have shown theirs from the same year. In fact, one person recently release an original from the DAY AFTER Obama was born!
July 31st, 2009 at 7:09 pm
____________________
Post yours. Scan it, post it, link it. Don’t talk the talk if you can’t walk the walk, jackass.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:25 pmPaulMorphy says:
Zooey, — an important piece of evidence which would be the best “proof” so far of where OBama was born…
July 31st, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Asked and answered, Paul. Proof has been provided.
Move on, and deal with your racism.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:26 pmIt’s now up to the “birthers” aka racists to prove President Obama is not a citizen.
Knock yourselves out.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:27 pmbackup says:
I get how the birther charges can be a partisan fishing attempt or an effort to distract from the new administrations agenda.
But, how do you make the leap to racism?
July 31st, 2009 at 6:44 pm
It dovetails nicely with the white nativist movement, which believes the 14th Amendment is illegal and that all people who were granted citizenship by the Amendment are not true citizens.
And – surprise! – many of the people behind the birther movement are also white nativists.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:29 pmPaulMorphy says:
@227 . Personal insults aside, You just don’t seem to understand that the short form issued in HI does not necessarily PROVE his birthplace was HI.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:03 pm
______________
Dickhead,
Personal insults included, YOU just don’t seem to understand that President Obama doesn’t have to prove TO YOU anything. The only people he had to prove this to are election officials in each of the 57 states and territories in which he was on the ballot. Unless you are one of these officials, you have no business seeing his original birth certificate.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:31 pmtoasterhead. I believe this, but I took some grief for this statement I made above:
Don’t you agree that although Obama has the right to not produce his birth certificate, that he could dispel the birther charges if he did?
July 31st, 2009 at 7:40 pmPaulMorphy says:
In the specific case of Obama, he was born w British citizenship, later Kenyan (when they became independent) and also may have or have held Indonesian citizenship. There is no way we can predict what sort of international circumstances we find ourselves in at some future point. It is best that the President not have to decide between American interests and those of his other allegiances.
July 31st, 2009 at 6:37 pm
___________________
If in the next three years we find ourselves at war with the United Kingdom, Kenya, and Indonesia, the “allegiances” of the President will be the least of our concerns.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:40 pmbackup says:
Don’t you agree that although Obama has the right to not produce his birth certificate, that he could dispel the birther charges if he did?
July 31st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
No, since he HAS produced his birth certificate and the “birthers” aka racists are still not satisfied.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:43 pmZooey. Walk me through the link to racism.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:44 pmPaul claims that the COLB is not definitive on place of birth. Is that not true?
July 31st, 2009 at 7:50 pmb-cup, if you can’t figure it out, then I’m not wasting my time.
Here’s the birth certificate AGAIN. You decide.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:56 pmYou cannot discuss a topic on a rational level if the person is irrational.Nothing that you offer as proof of an event will be deemed sufficient.Another denial will be forthcoming. Those who deny the Holocaust, for example , will never accept ANY evidence .Save your time,energy and sanity.Remember,there will always be 20-30% who are in the lunatic fringe.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:56 pmhttp://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
It’s been posted many times before I’m sure and Paul will not accept it this time, either. Nevertheless… the issue has been looked into and resolved, sorry.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:58 pmFukino said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
July 31st, 2009 at 7:59 pmbackup says:
Don’t you agree that although Obama has the right to not produce his birth certificate, that he could dispel the birther charges if he did?
July 31st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
_______________
I honestly don’t. The birthers have shown themselves to be unpersuaded by fact and logic. It would only make them more rabid, and they’d start demanding DNA testing or some other form of proof.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:13 pmPaul. What about the announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser.
How do birthers explain that someone had the foresight to place an ad in that newspaper as future false evidence of Obama’s Hawaiian birth?
That’s crazy.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:16 pmI would like some information.I live in MD. Can you obtain an original birth certificate in other states or does a person get a COPY of the original certificate like I did when I applied for a US passport?
July 31st, 2009 at 8:19 pmEasy.
Only white republicans are questioning it.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:27 pmIn fact, it’s not a leap at all.
:|
Not even a stretch.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:27 pmIf that’s how you come to racism, you probably shouldn’t question the reasoning ability of birthers. Maybe start closer to home.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:35 pmInteresting. The quasi-birther acknowledges that the STATE is responsible for maintaining original birth records, not the family.
The STATE has verified that the President’s birth certificate is genuine and that the President was born in Honolulu.
Yet the quasi-birther STILL insists that it is the President’s responsibility to release some further documentation in order to satisfy his qualms about the President’s potential divided loyalties due to the circumstances of his birth and his suspicions regarding the President’s constitutional eligibility yo hold the office.
I find that quite odd.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:45 pmI’m afraid b-cup will need a little more hand-holding than that. I mean, he can’t even see the in-your-face racism of Limbaugh.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:47 pmHE DID RELEASE HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
Jeezus Christmas, you’re dense.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:50 pmralph. birthers clammer for the long form. Apparently, Obama could produce it. But, he doesn’t.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:51 pmralph. the fact check stuff is good enough for me.
This is for Paul (or any other birther) what is all the drama with the long form? Why isn’t the COLB good enough?
Why isn’t the factcheck data sufficient?
What is it exactly that would suffice?
And, you can’t use the issue to fish for Obama info or to distract the administration from it’s agenda.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:57 pmExplain how he could produce it. The State of Hawai’i seems to believe that it is their responsibility, not the President’s.
But it’s pretty clear that the insistence on the “long form” is nothing but a dodge, since the State of Hawai’i has verified the President’s birth certificate as genuine and it has verified that the President was in fact born in Honolulu. So it’s not simply Obama they are questioning; it is the State of Hawai’i as well.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:30 pmThank you. You ask good questions, finally.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:31 pmEverytime one of you say “apparently Obama could produce it”, or “why doesn’t he produce it”, you’re lying.
You’re perpetuating a lie.
You know it. I know it.
And the Hawaii dept of health knows it.
The govt does not sit there every time someone requests their birth certificate, send someone into a vault with a camera and a flashlight to take pictures with a pocket camera of a fragile, half century old document stacked with millions of other old fragile documents, print the photo, then mail it to you.
They look up the record of birth in an index, grab the id number, print out a standard certificate of birth form, slap a signature on it and mail it to you.
What you are talking about would require some sort of court order to physically go down into the vault and search through millions of fragile old documents to find one single document amidst millions, so they can take a picture of it so as to satisfy a bunch of conspiracy kooks who think half a century ago the entire state govt of Hawaii along with local newspapers conspired together to help get a new born infant made President a half century in the future.
:|
Are we learning yet?
July 31st, 2009 at 9:32 pmThe long form argument is a lie.
And a stupid one at that.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:39 pmThe current generation of Repugnicans were weaned on the Atwater-Rove school of political decorum. The smart ones are liars and the rest are the low information voters who lack the capacity to recognize there own best interest.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:05 pmralph. (and pretty much everybody else). My apologies.
The more I looked at it, the more the birther arguments look weak.
And I get the problem with me saying ‘I believe Obama was born in Hawaii’. It comes off as way to sympathetic to the possibility of birther charges that are too weak to be credible.
My bad. Thanks. Good night.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:19 pmTo PaulM,
I am not going to point out for you that an adequate birth certificate has already been produced by Obama, as you won’t accept what others have already told you.
However, as a Columbia U. alumna, I can say that his name and address, then as an Illinios state senator, appear in a book of graduates, which I purchased about 12 years ago. The forms to fill out for listing in the book were sent only to graduates, which means some people I knew at Columbia are not in it because they dropped out or transferred to another university/college. The fact that Obama is listed means that he definitely graduated from Columbia College. Why do you need his transcripts? Do you really need to know if he got any C’s?
As for Point #2. why should he care about the endless and ridiculous demands of a bunch of sour grape racists when he has better things to do, such as cleaning up the mess Bush and company left the nation in?
And since you demand proof, why don’t you prove to us that “literally MILLIONS of citizens” are birthers like you? While you’re at it, please also supply proof that John McCain was born on a US base in Panama and not in a local hospital.
PaulMorphy says:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:23 pm1) President Obama is aware that literally MILLIONS of citizens whom he serves are demanding that he release his ORIGINAL birth certificate, medical records, college transcripts, and other similar documents.
2) President Obama doesn’t care and will not release the documentation.
I love zany goofballs…
July 31st, 2009 at 11:30 pmbackup,
Not only is the Birthers’ evidence weak, it has been mis-represented. They claim that they have an “affidavit” from Obama’s step-grandmother that she “was in the room in Kenya when he was born.” This is not correct. What they have is a transcipt of a telephone conversation with Obama’s step-grandmother in which she says she was present in the room when they got the phone call that Obama had been born. This, I understand, is their strongest piece of evidence, and even this is wrong.
The rest of their “evidence” seems to consist of them denying that every piece of evidence supporting Obama’s Hawaiian birth is forged. They are simply not credible, backup, and do not deserve to be taken seriously.
My hope is that you understand this. If you do, then you are beginning to see the way the right wing operates in this country. And it is not to the benefit of all Americans.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:31 pm2) President Obama doesn’t care and will not release the documentation.
Sounds like another president we once had. Bush had all his gubernatorial records, as well as his ANG records, locked up in his father’s presidential library. And Dick Cheney refused to reveal to the American peopel just how sick he really is. There are indications that the various medications Cheney is on may account for his abnormal behavior and psychotic attitude toward humanity.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:34 pmThere was some sort of statement from Obama’s stepgrandmother made through an interpreter, which was promptly corrected after a mistake was realized, as Wayne Schneider has just pointed out.
I didn’t even know my stepgrandmother, a nice woman BTW, until I was about 9 or 10, and I doubt if she knew in what hospital I was born.
PaulMorbid says:
July 31st, 2009 at 11:43 pmThere is sworn testimony from Obamas(SIC) grandmother that she witnessed his birth in Kenya.
209. PaulMorphy says: What “phony controversies” have I “ginned up”? I’m not declaring that the president is eligible or not. I’m not declaring I know about his medical history, or college career. All I’m saying is WE DON’T KNOW?
In the immortal words of Tonto, “Whadda ya mean WE, white man”?
August 1st, 2009 at 2:05 am“Well in fairness, you don’t have to be a natural-born citizen to be a Senator, so it wouldn’t have come up for either of their Senatorial campaigns.
And McCain is covered by the same Constitutional clause that allowed the framers of the Constitution to serve as President.”
That’s true but no one quetioned Obama’s first and last name of his heritage. But, the state of Illnois welcome the new freshman to the Senate while most folks including I didn’t know about Barack Obama until he gave a speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention for Kerry’s run for President.
As far as McCain and his birth, remember, his birth was challenged along with Obama in a lawsuit from a person which got rejected in the Supreme Court. But, Obama’s birth is only becoming a frenzy to the wingnuts because alot of wingnuts are simply afraid of this President is bringing change to this country which is badly needed to move forward.
August 1st, 2009 at 3:43 pmPaulMorphy
You are a liar and a MORON. You are brainwashed and repeating idiotic nonsense. Obama was born in Hawaii thust to Hawaiian citizenship. Cowboy up and smell the reality.
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:38 amPaulMorphy says:
My GOD you are so stupid it is actually funny. I have twice already smacked down your stupidity about how he could have gotten a BC if born outside Hawaii. You are still such a moron you not only ignore it you keep repeating it. No. He. COULDNT, you petulant fool. We get you have been programmed to think this as a loyal member of the Limborg but it is false and frankly STUPID and YOU are the one that needs to reaserach it. Look at WHEN that law was passed WHEN Obama was born and note that the birth place will STILL be on the BC like Honolulu is on Obamas. My GOD you are stupid. Either that or a troll just jerking us around while you KNOW you are lying
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:42 amPaulMorphy says:
Your personal stupidity aside NO there isnt any way Obama could have gotten a COLD stating he was born in Honolulu without him being born in, you know, HONOLULU. I cant belive you drug out that many times debunked idiocy about Obamas grandmother having a sworn statement he was born in Kenya. That proves you are nothing but a brainwashed moron. No there is NO SUCH SWORN STATEMENT. It doesnt exist. All by itself this shows you get all your information spoonfed you by rightwing screechmonkeys and have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about.
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:46 ambackup says:
Okay, Paul. I can get a copy of my original birth certificate, why can’t Obama get a copy of his?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<,
Stop it he did. The same kind YOU would get if you got yours
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:47 amPaulMorphy says:
The question is why WON’T he release a copy of it.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
He HAS you are a moron
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:50 ambackup says:
Paul claims that the COLB is not definitive on place of birth. Is that not true?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes that is NOT true. It states directly ON his COLB he was born IN HONOLULU
August 2nd, 2009 at 6:54 amLet me preface my statement by saying that I do believe President Obama was born in this country. But I would like to know how the “Where is your birth certificate?” question makes anyone who asks it a RACIST? I think it has been blown way out of proportion by both sides of the debate and needs to end. There is a bigger problem we need to address. This policy of the left to throw around the word “Racist” any chance they get is hurting this country’s ability to have vigorous debate about real issues that effect all of us. The result – Because Barack Obama is black, nobody can challenge any of his ideas or policies due to fear of being called a racist. Last time I checked, a country without debate and transparency will be a country defeated.
August 3rd, 2009 at 10:23 am