Birthers ..... it's over.

[cbfalcon 824]

I work for a living, but I get where you're coming from. You right wing conservative dooshbags get confused at that notion that someone can believe that hard work is the way to get ahead in life as well as believe that some who are less fortunate than themselves might benefit from a helping hand.

 

 

This is the answer.

[jerryskids 5,409]

From a logical perspective, I don't think that race is a necessary factor in questioning his legitimacy -- as has been pointed out, McCain's citizenship was questioned as well, and he makes Opie look like a brutha. Similarly, I don't think that Colin Powell or Jesse Jackson would be going through this. That being said, if you are already a racist, this would be an easy issue to glom onto.

 

Look, as much as some of you don't like it, the reality is that the question was a valid one. If he had the certificate all of the time (which I believe is the current story?) he is culpable in letting it get to this point. The "he has better things to do" argument is horseshiot; it takes 5 seconds to tell an aid "hey release my BC mkay thanks bye."

 

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass. I'd have been fine if he said "look, all I've got is this short form, that's all they gave me and it has been good enough to get my DL and every other legal document I've needed to date, whether you like it or don't like it learn to love it."

[congressmanreality 1]

Lotta birthers in here.

[5-Points 2,795]

He didn't play the race card, the birthers are doing it for him.

 

Isn't it interesting that in the thread about "Why won't Obama releas his birth certificate?" thread, Mensa brings up the hair-brained idea of property ownership as a pre-requisite to voting. Think that would disproportionately effect blacks? Mensa's idea has nothing to do with the thread topic, other than it shows his true racist colors.

 

 

The only comments I see about Obama's race keep coming from the left. Why do you feel the need to inject race into a discussion that has nothing to do with it? You are the true racists. hth

 

The idea of only property owners having the right to vote goes back a long way. It was a way of making sure that the people who were responsible for choosing the country's leaders had something at stake. There were also people who thought that people on the dole shouldn't be allowed to vote because they would just keep voting for people that would allow them to stay on the dole. I happen to agree with that sentiment.

[parrot 789]

Look, as much as some of you don't like it, the reality is that the question was a valid one. If he had the certificate all of the time (which I believe is the current story?)

 

He didn't have it the whole time, the Whitehouse site includes scans of the correspondence between Obama's lawyers and Hawaiian officials requesting that they release the original.

[The Next Generation 10]

 

The only comments I see about Obama's race keep coming from the left. Why do you feel the need to inject race into a discussion that has nothing to do with it? You are the true racists. hth

 

Like racists, especially in this day and age, would just announce themselves as racists.

[JackARoot 2]

 

The only comments I see about Obama's race keep coming from the left. Why do you feel the need to inject race into a discussion that has nothing to do with it? You are the true racists. hth

 

The idea of only property owners having the right to vote goes back a long way. It was a way of making sure that the people who were responsble for choosing the country's leaders had something at stake. There were also people who thought that people on the dole shouldn't be allowed to vote because they would just keep voting for people that would allow them to stay on the dole. I happen to agree with that sentiment.

 

 

Doesn't surprise me that you would agree with this sentiment.

 

So what kind of property ownership would be required to vote? Will a PS3 do, or do you have to own real estate? If it's real estate, is it enough for the seven members of a family with more tatoos than teeth own their 30k home jointly? Or will there be a dollar value of ownership required?

 

I'm glad this will never be implemented. Its a short road to dictatorship. What happens when wealthy investors and corporations buy-up all of the real estate as it becomes available and will only offer it for rent?

[MDC 5,967]

you are a liberal because you are poor and see it as an angle to secure more resouces, or you are rich and feel bad that you are better off and you want to force your opinion on others... So either a beggar or an apologist.

 

Do you actually believe this bullsh1t? That's like saying you're a Republican because you're either a racist or you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

 

How am I trying to force my opinions on others? All I do is vote, just like you. You seem to have a real persecution complex.

[JackARoot 2]

From a logical perspective, I don't think that race is a necessary factor in questioning his legitimacy -- as has been pointed out, McCain's citizenship was questioned as well, and he makes Opie look like a brutha. Similarly, I don't think that Colin Powell or Jesse Jackson would be going through this. That being said, if you are already a racist, this would be an easy issue to glom onto.

 

Look, as much as some of you don't like it, the reality is that the question was a valid one. If he had the certificate all of the time (which I believe is the current story?) he is culpable in letting it get to this point. The "he has better things to do" argument is horseshiot; it takes 5 seconds to tell an aid "hey release my BC mkay thanks bye."

 

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass. I'd have been fine if he said "look, all I've got is this short form, that's all they gave me and it has been good enough to get my DL and every other legal document I've needed to date, whether you like it or don't like it learn to love it."

 

I agree with you Jerry that it doesn't have to be about race to want to proof of citizenship. But there was alot of proof out there already, governer's certifications, independent records from newspapers, the short form etc.

 

The fact that there is still disbelief in his citizenship among the birthers after releasing the long form is telling though.

[JackARoot 2]

Do you actually believe this bullsh1t? That's like saying you're a Republican because you're either a racist or you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

 

How am I trying to force my opinions on others? All I do is vote, just like you. You seem to have a real persecution complex.

 

Actually, as I've explained already, Republicans are created by faulty early toilet training. See, DankNuggs got a turd stuck crosswise when his mommy hurried him on the potty. That's why he hates America.

[jerryskids 5,409]

He didn't have it the whole time, the Whitehouse site includes scans of the correspondence between Obama's lawyers and Hawaiian officials requesting that they release the original.

 

Fair enough. I'd still argue that it was 5 seconds of Obama's time, albeit a little more work for his staff.

[MDC 5,967]

Fair enough. I'd still argue that it was 5 seconds of Obama's time, albeit a little more work for his staff.

 

My question is why he should've released the long form in the first place?

 

This isn't a regular expectation or requirement of presidents. And it's going to do nothing to stop the nonstop "scandals." You've already got birthers disputing the authenticity of the long form and questioning whether he's a natural born citizen. The next step is for Trump and his goons to start looking into his grades to make the case that he was an affirmative action admission at Harvard. Assuming his grades are consistent with what you'd expect, you know the next step is tracking down people who went to college with Obama to dig up supposedly radical beliefs, looking at his teachers to see if they were lefties, etc. These people can't be satisfied because they are nuts.

 

At what point does the President decide that it's not worth trying to placate these mouthbreathers? I don't think he should've bothered to release the long-form at all. You're just inviting them to invent up another scandal.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

I work for a living, but I get where you're coming from. You right wing conservative dooshbags get confused at that notion that someone can believe that hard work is the way to get ahead in life as well as believe that some who are less fortunate than themselves might benefit from a helping hand.

 

Conservatives donate far more to charity than libs do. Conservatives are generous to those needing a helping hand with there own money. Liberals are generous using someone elses money.

 

HTH

[Recliner Pilot 61]

My question is why he should've released the long form in the first place?

 

This isn't a regular expectation or requirement of presidents. And it's going to do nothing to stop the nonstop "scandals." You've already got birthers disputing the authenticity of the long form and questioning whether he's a natural born citizen. The next step is for Trump and his goons to start looking into his grades to make the case that he was an affirmative action admission at Harvard. Assuming his grades are consistent with what you'd expect, you know the next step is tracking down people who went to college with Obama to dig up supposedly radical beliefs, looking at his teachers to see if they were lefties, etc. These people can't be satisfied because they are nuts.

 

At what point does the President decide that it's not worth trying to placate these mouthbreathers? I don't think he should've bothered to release the long-form at all. You're just inviting them to invent up another scandal.

 

In a speech to the NAACP Obama said he benefitted from affirmative action. I don't recall if he specified how, but admitting unqualified students is the most used method of AA.

[Frank M 181]

Conservatives donate far more to charity than libs do. Conservatives are generous to those needing a helping hand with there own money. Liberals are generous using someone elses money.

 

HTH

 

That's nice. Thanks for the random thought.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Conservatives donate far more to charity than libs do. Conservatives are generous to those needing a helping hand with there own money. Liberals are generous using someone elses money.

 

HTH

The real question isn't who gives the most to charity, but can charity alone support government "welfare" programs?

[jerryskids 5,409]

My question is why he should've released the long form in the first place?

 

This isn't a regular expectation or requirement of presidents. And it's going to do nothing to stop the nonstop "scandals." You've already got birthers disputing the authenticity of the long form and questioning whether he's a natural born citizen. The next step is for Trump and his goons to start looking into his grades to make the case that he was an affirmative action admission at Harvard. Assuming his grades are consistent with what you'd expect, you know the next step is tracking down people who went to college with Obama to dig up supposedly radical beliefs, looking at his teachers to see if they were lefties, etc. These people can't be satisfied because they are nuts.

 

At what point does the President decide that it's not worth trying to placate these mouthbreathers? I don't think he should've bothered to release the long-form at all. You're just inviting them to invent up another scandal.

It isn't "regular" because it hasn't been a concern. Frankly I think we've learned that part of the process should be producing a document for every candidate. Funny, AZ tried to pass such a law but it came off like a bunch of birther whackjobs, so I'm glad Brewer vetoed it. On a federal level though, I don't see a problem with it and it avoids such distractions in the future.

 

Anyway, if his strategy was to do as you described -- keep a group of people distracted so they couldn't dig for more stuff -- that's fine, we could argue the merits, but I'll concede that it is a valid strategy. I would still argue that he is culpable for letting it get to this point.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Saw this on Facebook: The afterbirthers are now demanding to see Obama's Placenta

 

This thing is gaining steam among independent thinkers. Come to think of it, have you ever seen Obama's belly button?

Afterbirthers Demand To See Obama's Placenta

 

WASHINGTON–In the continuing controversy surrounding the president's U.S. citizenship, a new fringe group informally known as "Afterbirthers" demanded Monday the authentication of Barack Obama's placenta from his time inside his mother's womb. "All we are asking is that the president produce a sample of his fetal membranes and vessels—preferably along with a photo of the crowning and delivery—and this will all be over," said former presidential candidate and Afterbirthers spokesman Alan Keyes, later adding that his organization would be willing to settle for a half-liter of maternal cord plasma. "To this day, the American people have not seen a cervical mucus plug, let alone one that has been signed and notarized by a state-certified Hawaiian health official. If the president was indeed born in the manner in which he claims, then where is his gestation sac?" Keyes said that if Obama did not soon produce at least a bloody bedsheet from his conception, Afterbirthers would push forward with efforts to exhume the president's deceased mother and inspect the corpse's pelvic bone and birth canal.

[FeelingMN 273]

 

Doesn't surprise me that you would agree with this sentiment.

 

So what kind of property ownership would be required to vote? Will a PS3 do, or do you have to own real estate? If it's real estate, is it enough for the seven members of a family with more tatoos than teeth own their 30k home jointly? Or will there be a dollar value of ownership required?

 

I'm glad this will never be implemented. Its a short road to dictatorship. What happens when wealthy investors and corporations buy-up all of the real estate as it becomes available and will only offer it for rent?

 

 

I'm absolutely appalled that there's a faction who advocate limiting an American citizen's right to vote.

 

So life isn't perfect....and freedom can be messy. Deal with it. Don't take away people's rights. Pretty scary really.

[MDC 5,967]

It isn't "regular" because it hasn't been a concern. Frankly I think we've learned that part of the process should be producing a document for every candidate. Funny, AZ tried to pass such a law but it came off like a bunch of birther whackjobs, so I'm glad Brewer vetoed it. On a federal level though, I don't see a problem with it and it avoids such distractions in the future.

 

So why did this because a "concern" right now, when actually having a long form birth certificate released to the public was never even a question in the past? No other president has ever been asked to release this info. Why is Obama held to a higher level of disclosure? I never saw Clinton or Bush's long-form birth certificates and they served two terms.

 

Anyway, if his strategy was to do as you described -- keep a group of people distracted so they couldn't dig for more stuff -- that's fine, we could argue the merits, but I'll concede that it is a valid strategy. I would still argue that he is culpable for letting it get to this point.

 

I don't think that was his strategy at all. I think Obama worried that releasing the long form would encourage the right wing to come up with further and further loony conspiracy theories, demanding more and more rings for him to jump through. When in fact these people are just crackpots and deserve to be ignored.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

That's nice. Thanks for the random thought.

 

 

Not a random thought, Sport. It's a fact. Libs aren't nearly as generous to the needy as Conservatives. I know that flies in the face of your daily Pelosi talking points, but it's true nonetheless.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

The real question isn't who gives the most to charity, but can charity alone support government "welfare" programs?

Libs always like to downplay who gives more to the needy cuz it exposes their rhetoric about them fighting for the little guy. And this huge safety net, that's turned into a hammock, didn't show up until the 1960's. The country got along just fine til then.

[FeelingMN 273]

Libs always like to downplay who gives more to the needy cuz it exposes their rhetoric about them fighting for the little guy. And this huge safety net, that's turned into a hammock, didn't show up until the 1960's. The country got along just fine til then.

 

Meh....so conservatives throw money at a problem to try and fix it.

 

Who donates more of their time in actually trying to help folks?

 

[5-Points 2,795]

 

Doesn't surprise me that you would agree with this sentiment.

 

So what kind of property ownership would be required to vote? Will a PS3 do, or do you have to own real estate? If it's real estate, is it enough for the seven members of a family with more tatoos than teeth own their 30k home jointly? Or will there be a dollar value of ownership required?

 

I'm glad this will never be implemented. Its a short road to dictatorship. What happens when wealthy investors and corporations buy-up all of the real estate as it becomes available and will only offer it for rent?

 

I said I agree with the sentiment that people on the dole will vote for people who allow them to stay on the dole. I didn't say I thought only land owners should be allowed to vote or that people on government assistance should not be allowed to vote. I simply stated that the idea originated long ago.

[DankNuggs 305]

Actually, as I've explained already, Republicans are created by faulty early toilet training. See, DankNuggs got a turd stuck crosswise when his mommy hurried him on the potty. That's why he hates America.

You think its the right of the lazy degenerate class to deplete the resources of this country and the quality of life until the country isn't competitve anymore... Liberals hate america. They hate that hard work and personal responsibility generates wealth and they blame 3rd party external factors for their lot in life...

 

Charity is voluntary... the reason progressive libs want it mandatory is bc no one would support their bloasted wasteful pipedreams... Just like Obamacare...

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

 

I'm absolutely appalled that there's a faction who advocate limiting an American citizen's right to vote.

 

So life isn't perfect....and freedom can be messy. Deal with it. Don't take away people's rights. Pretty scary really.

 

Actually, this would merely be returning to the original setup in the constitution, when only property owners could vote.

 

Of course, back then, the government wasn't fond of sending the unpropertied across the globe to die for no reason, some times involuntarily.

[Frank M 181]

Not a random thought, Sport. It's a fact. Libs aren't nearly as generous to the needy as Conservatives. I know that flies in the face of your daily Pelosi talking points, but it's true nonetheless.

 

 

Nancy Pelosi is not my representative. I don't live in California. I didn't vote for her. Not really sure why you bring her name up or why you bring up donations to charity when I was just talking about the fact that my philosophy doesn't jive with extreme right wing views of liberalism.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Libs always like to downplay who gives more to the needy cuz it exposes their rhetoric about them fighting for the little guy. And this huge safety net, that's turned into a hammock, didn't show up until the 1960's. The country got along just fine til then.

I wasn't trying to downplay your statement, but genuinely curious what you (and those of your ilk) think about the topic. A lot has changed since 1960 - life expectancy has gone up ~10 years, our population has grown 2/3 and some costs, most notably healthcare and long term care, have far outpaced the standard of living. Meanwhile the middle class is shrinking while those at the income extremes are growing. Personally I don't think charity alone can pay for the basic needs of those who cannot provide for themselves. Are there abuses of the system and waste in its design? Sure, but not enough to scrap programs like Medicare altogether, or radically remodel it without considering ways to contain the costs a la Ryan's plan (I know, take it to the other thread).

 

I think the reason conservatives give more $ is their stronger religious affiliation - and it is something I respect about two groups with whom I otherwise find little common ground.

[parrot 789]

Meh....so conservatives throw money at a problem to try and fix it.

 

Who donates more of their time in actually trying to help folks?

 

 

Also, any money given to churches is considered a charitable gift, that doesn't mean it goes to the needy. A lot of it is burned through right there at the church to pay expenses.

[TheNewGirl 1,066]

Conservatives donate far more to charity than libs do. Conservatives are generous to those needing a helping hand with there own money. Liberals are generous using someone elses money.

 

HTH

 

Just in my own experience, this is true. The Conservatives that I know donate both money and time to charities, schools, and other organizations. They might also donate clothing to places like Goodwill, etc.

 

The Liberals I know do not donate any kind of money to any charities, do not donate to schools ("I pay taxes! That's enough!"), and they hold garage sales to see how much cash they can rake in instead of merely donating their items.

 

Again, this is just in my own personal life that I see this stuff.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Also, any money given to churches is considered a charitable gift, that doesn't mean it goes to the needy. Most of it is burned through right there at the church.

 

Right. It is mostly used to build an enormous, tax free rec center for the glory of Jeebus. My wife was watching Joel Osteen preaching to the Astrodome the other day... what an asshat.

[Frank M 181]

Just in my own experience, this is true. The Conservatives that I know donate both money and time to charities, schools, and other organizations. They might also donate clothing to places like Goodwill, etc.

 

The Liberals I know do not donate any kind of money to any charities, do not donate to schools ("I pay taxes! That's enough!"), and they hold garage sales to see how much cash they can rake in instead of merely donating their items.

 

Again, this is just in my own personal life that I see this stuff.

 

The conservatives I know don't really donate anything, they b1tch about liberals ruining the country, and they burn their old clothes in the backyard. The liberals I know donate their time helping the schools and the needy and they think of others instead of money.

 

See? My post is just as relevant as yours.

[DankNuggs 305]

Just in my own experience, this is true. The Conservatives that I know donate both money and time to charities, schools, and other organizations. They might also donate clothing to places like Goodwill, etc.

 

The Liberals I know do not donate any kind of money to any charities, do not donate to schools ("I pay taxes! That's enough!"), and they hold garage sales to see how much cash they can rake in instead of merely donating their items.

 

Again, this is just in my own personal life that I see this stuff.

yep, its the great con of libs... take hippies for an example, talk about a disgusting selfish group of leeches...

[parrot 789]

I know liberals and conservatives who donate both time and money. And I know liberals and conservatives who don't do sht!t. There are plenty of good people, and plenty of asshats, in either camp.

[jerryskids 5,409]

So why did this because a "concern" right now, when actually having a long form birth certificate released to the public was never even a question in the past? No other president has ever been asked to release this info. Why is Obama held to a higher level of disclosure? I never saw Clinton or Bush's long-form birth certificates and they served two terms.

I'm not sure what you want me to do, reconstruct the 7890177342301 individual events which led us here? All I can say is that his background led people to have questions, as they did with McCain, which they would not have with Powell or Jackson, as they did not with Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan...

I don't think that was his strategy at all. I think Obama worried that releasing the long form would encourage the right wing to come up with further and further loony conspiracy theories, demanding more and more rings for him to jump through. When in fact these people are just crackpots and deserve to be ignored.

You are making no sense. You say that wasn't his strategy, then explain how it is his strategy.

[DankNuggs 305]

The conservatives I know don't really donate anything, they b1tch about liberals ruining the country, and they burn their old clothes in the backyard. The liberals I know donate their time helping the schools and the needy and they think of others instead of money.

 

See? My post is just as relevant as yours.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2005/11/generosity_inde.html

 

except for the fact her example highlighted the truth, and yours was just another liberal smokescreen,.

[penultimatestraw 473]

You are making no sense. You say that wasn't his strategy, then explain how it is his strategy.

I think he is saying Obama wasn't withholding the info to make the republicans/birthers look bad (or distract them), but rather trying not to validate their silly claims, which likely will continue. He caved because this nonsense had become a bigger distraction of late.

[JackARoot 2]

You think its the right of the lazy degenerate class to deplete the resources of this country and the quality of life until the country isn't competitve anymore... Liberals hate america. They hate that hard work and personal responsibility generates wealth and they blame 3rd party external factors for their lot in life...

 

Charity is voluntary... the reason progressive libs want it mandatory is bc no one would support their bloasted wasteful pipedreams... Just like Obamacare...

 

Relax and take a deep breath ... it will come out eventually

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Also, any money given to churches is considered a charitable gift, that doesn't mean it goes to the needy. A lot of it is burned through right there at the church to pay expenses.

 

The church in which I'm a member has several mission trips at any given time. All my kids have participated in yearly mission trips since they were old enough to go. This is all done on a volunteer basis, with money donated by the church and expenses paid by the parents.

 

Things actually get done on these trips

 

The liberal's answer to these problems was The Great Society and it's War On Poverty, which has p!ssed away trillions of dollars. The result? Poverty rates are virtually the same.

[TheNewGirl 1,066]

I think the reason conservatives give more $ is their stronger religious affiliation - and it is something I respect about two groups with whom I otherwise find little common ground.

 

I would have to disagree with you on that one. No religious affiliation here. At all.