The Birther Conspiracy Thread (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

As if they wouldn't go onto some other crazy accusatory tirade. And everyone knows it.

That is a pretty lame argument which is often used.

It's already happened. Birthers demanded to see Obama's birth certificate to prove he was born in America. He produced that. Now they want to see a different birth certificate to know which specific hospital he was born in, as though that has any relevance. If he produced that, there's a nearly infinite supply of inconsequential facts about the man (WHO WAS OBAMA'S DATE TO THE SENIOR PROM?!? WHY IS HE COVERING THIS UP?!?) that birthers could demand.I mean, if you were perfectly honest with yourself, you'd see that your position here is not based in reason, but emotion. You want Obama to look bad. You want him to be hiding something. Even though on some level, you know that he isn't.

Why would Obama's date to the prom be relevant to whether he was naturally-born?Personally, I want to see DNA evidence that he's not some character from Plan 9 from Outer Space. After all, he does have the support of the zombie element here on earth!

Zombies are not aliens. Come on, haven't you ever seen a Zombie movie?

 

[Parrothead]

As if they wouldn't go onto some other crazy accusatory tirade. And everyone knows it.

That is a pretty lame argument which is often used.

It's already happened. Birthers demanded to see Obama's birth certificate to prove he was born in America. He produced that. Now they want to see a different birth certificate to know which specific hospital he was born in, as though that has any relevance. If he produced that, there's a nearly infinite supply of inconsequential facts about the man (WHO WAS OBAMA'S DATE TO THE SENIOR PROM?!? WHY IS HE COVERING THIS UP?!?) that birthers could demand.I mean, if you were perfectly honest with yourself, you'd see that your position here is not based in reason, but emotion. You want Obama to look bad. You want him to be hiding something. Even though on some level, you know that he isn't.

Why would Obama's date to the prom be relevant to whether he was naturally-born?Personally, I want to see DNA evidence that he's not some character from Plan 9 from Outer Space. After all, he does have the support of the zombie element here on earth!

Zombies are not aliens. Come on, haven't you ever seen a Zombie movie?

how would you truly know without seeing a birth certificate?? You have the sack to ask a zombie to provide a birth certificate??

 

[Jewell]

Obama could have been born on the steps of the Washington Monument with birthers watching three feet away as he popped out of his mamma's womb and they'd point to the marble step, scream "It was cut from a quarry in Italy!" and question whether he was American.

Totally not true.

Totally untrue. The marble came from Texas and Massachusetts!

Reminds me of a humorous story....John Mellencamp went to Italy and ordered a limestone fireplace mantle and surround and paid a small fortune to have it shipped overseas for his new house. Got it delivered, and noticed the tag on the bottom. Made in Bedford, IN. Less than 15 miles from his house.

And he just believed the tag, no questions asked? Why didn't he ask for shipping records? Maybe signed pay sheets of the Bedford, IN employees who were responsible for the limestone fireplace mantle? I mean, what's to say that the limestone fireplace mantle wasn't built in Kenya or Indonesia or some other place, and then someone just put a Bedford, IN tag on it to fool those silly Americans?

Or it could actually be true considering Bedford is known as the limestone capital of the world.

Sure, it could be true. But I believe this was darker variety of limestone, and when I see darker limestone I getvery suspicious about its origins. It's not that I don't believe it came from Bedford, and I know that the tag tells me that the product meets all the requirements for domestic production that is required by law. It's just that I'd really like to see every single document related to the production of this limestone, you know, just because I'm skeptical. Again, I'm 99.99% sure it's from Indiana- but what it is it hiding?

classic

Well played.

 

[timschochet]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

 

[bueno]

As if they wouldn't go onto some other crazy accusatory tirade. And everyone knows it.

That is a pretty lame argument which is often used.

It's already happened. Birthers demanded to see Obama's birth certificate to prove he was born in America. He produced that. Now they want to see a different birth certificate to know which specific hospital he was born in, as though that has any relevance. If he produced that, there's a nearly infinite supply of inconsequential facts about the man (WHO WAS OBAMA'S DATE TO THE SENIOR PROM?!? WHY IS HE COVERING THIS UP?!?) that birthers could demand.I mean, if you were perfectly honest with yourself, you'd see that your position here is not based in reason, but emotion. You want Obama to look bad. You want him to be hiding something. Even though on some level, you know that he isn't.

Why would Obama's date to the prom be relevant to whether he was naturally-born?Personally, I want to see DNA evidence that he's not some character from Plan 9 from Outer Space. After all, he does have the support of the zombie element here on earth!

Zombies are not aliens. Come on, haven't you ever seen a Zombie movie?

Obviously, you haven't seen arguably the worst B movie ever made, even though you have been living it since Obama was elected.

 

[bueno]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

Tim, I'm sorry you aren't nuanced enough to get either argument.The birth certificate issue to me has illuminated an oversight in the FEC process. Let's get it fixed.

And let's get the government out of the love business.

It isn't that hard a concept. You are being very disingenuous. If MacArtist got married, I'd be at the wedding. So your argument is blown away right there.

 

[TobiasFunke]

As if they wouldn't go onto some other crazy accusatory tirade. And everyone knows it.

That is a pretty lame argument which is often used.

It's already happened. Birthers demanded to see Obama's birth certificate to prove he was born in America. He produced that. Now they want to see a different birth certificate to know which specific hospital he was born in, as though that has any relevance. If he produced that, there's a nearly infinite supply of inconsequential facts about the man (WHO WAS OBAMA'S DATE TO THE SENIOR PROM?!? WHY IS HE COVERING THIS UP?!?) that birthers could demand.I mean, if you were perfectly honest with yourself, you'd see that your position here is not based in reason, but emotion. You want Obama to look bad. You want him to be hiding something. Even though on some level, you know that he isn't.

Why would Obama's date to the prom be relevant to whether he was naturally-born?Personally, I want to see DNA evidence that he's not some character from Plan 9 from Outer Space. After all, he does have the support of the zombie element here on earth!

Zombies are not aliens. Come on, haven't you ever seen a Zombie movie?

Obviously, you haven't seen arguably the worst B movie ever made, even though you have been living it since Obama was elected.

Whoa. Just Googled Plan 9- I know of it, but didn't realize the zombie/outer space connection it reveals.Mind=blown.

 

[Road Dogg]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

Tim, I'm sorry you aren't nuanced enough to get either argument.The birth certificate issue to me has illuminated an oversight in the FEC process. Let's get it fixed.

And let's get the government out of the love business.

It isn't that hard a concept. You are being very disingenuous. If MacArtist got married, I'd be at the wedding. So your argument is blown away right there.

Alaska says the short form is sufficient for them to establish he was born there. Why are you attacking their sovereignty? Why do you want to remove from the states their right to establish who was born within their borders as they see fit? What are you next going to strip from the states to pump in to your bloated ineffective federal machine?

It is almost as if all those brave states rights defenders in the civil war died for nothing!

 

[timschochet]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

Tim, I'm sorry you aren't nuanced enough to get either argument.The birth certificate issue to me has illuminated an oversight in the FEC process. Let's get it fixed.

And let's get the government out of the love business.

It isn't that hard a concept. You are being very disingenuous. If MacArtist got married, I'd be at the wedding. So your argument is blown away right there.

On the contrary. The fact that you are willing to make an exception for a friend puts your position, IMO, in a worse light, not a better one. You're willing to attend MacArtist's wedding but you're not willing to see the rights she wants for herself granted to all homosexuals on the basis of a principle which you know will never be upheld.As far as the business of this thread, what oversight are you talking about? There is no oversight as far as I can see. It's not a matter of nuance, it's a matter of the creation of conspiracies where there are none.

Given your high intelligence and your useful and thoughtful commentary on a whole host of issues, your position here is frankly disappointing.

 

[bueno]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

Tim, I'm sorry you aren't nuanced enough to get either argument.The birth certificate issue to me has illuminated an oversight in the FEC process. Let's get it fixed.

And let's get the government out of the love business.

It isn't that hard a concept. You are being very disingenuous. If MacArtist got married, I'd be at the wedding. So your argument is blown away right there.

Alaska says the short form is sufficient for them to establish he was born there. Why are you attacking their sovereignty? Why do you want to remove from the states their right to establish who was born within their borders as they see fit? What are you next going to strip from the states to pump in to your bloated ineffective federal machine?

It is almost as if all those brave states rights defenders in the civil war died for nothing!

And if Obama were running for governor of Alaska, I'm sure Palin would have beaten him. I never argued that the short form was insufficient. I argued that there is a hole in FEC procedures where they do not define what is acceptable proof of natural citizenship. It needs to be fixed. But because this hole existed at the time, the way to make the issue go away is to provide proof via the long form. Problem solved. I mean really, if Obama can't solve this problem, how can he possibly be competent to solve the larger issues facing the nation. It's just silly that he didn't do it.

 

[bueno]

Unfortunately we have no real birthers in this thread, or so far as I know, in this forum. Not one person is willing to come in here and post, "I believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya!" The closest we have ever gotten is this sort of thing, from several posters:

I think he was probably born here, but why won't he release his birth certificate and end all the speculation? He's obviously hiding SOMETHING.

This is a disappointing cop-out. It allows you to hang on to a pretense of sanity on this issue (a pretense is all it is) while still being sympathetic to the crazies at WorldNetDaily. It reminds me of the people on the gay marriage issue who argue that they're against the government recognizing ANY marriages, which allows them to be opposed without being opposed, if you see what I mean. Sure enough, it's some of the same people making both arguments! Fancy that.

Tim, I'm sorry you aren't nuanced enough to get either argument.The birth certificate issue to me has illuminated an oversight in the FEC process. Let's get it fixed.

And let's get the government out of the love business.

It isn't that hard a concept. You are being very disingenuous. If MacArtist got married, I'd be at the wedding. So your argument is blown away right there.

On the contrary. The fact that you are willing to make an exception for a friend puts your position, IMO, in a worse light, not a better one. You're willing to attend MacArtist's wedding but you're not willing to see the rights she wants for herself granted to all homosexuals on the basis of a principle which you know will never be upheld.As far as the business of this thread, what oversight are you talking about? There is no oversight as far as I can see. It's not a matter of nuance, it's a matter of the creation of conspiracies where there are none.

Given your high intelligence and your useful and thoughtful commentary on a whole host of issues, your position here is frankly disappointing.

No, I am willing to give all gays, lesbians and transgenders the contractual rights of a relationship. It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.There are too many social conservatives in this nation that will never recognize the lifestyle as one that the government should recognize. Legislatively, this won't happen. In even the most liberal of states, gays can't win this issue at the ballot box.

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

 

[bigbottom]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

 

[bueno]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

I still have some of my ideals. Sorry you lost yours.

 

[bigbottom]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

I still have some of my ideals. Sorry you lost yours.

Pragmatism was the clear theme of your post.

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.

And what's with the personal shot?

 

[flufhed]

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining,

In less than a sentence you pretty much summarized why the federal judge, apparently correctly, declared the ban on gay marriages unconstitutional. Well done.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Speaking of FEC oversight, the only peopel who have reviewed the document provided by the Obama campaign are bloggers/webistes and a few selected journalists.

This is the greatest country in earth, surely we can do better than that.

I wish he had the balls to send a copy to WorldNutDaily, but, alas, he does not.

 

[matuski]

Speaking of FEC oversight, the only peopel who have reviewed the document provided by the Obama campaign are bloggers/webistes and a few selected journalists. This is the greatest country in earth, surely we can do better than that.I wish he had the balls to send a copy to WorldNutDaily, but, alas, he does not.

Yes, I'm sure the only people that have done background checks of the President of The United States of America are bloggers/websites and hand picked journalists.Certainly not any of the other agencies, institutions, parties, or individuals along the way.A better way to handle WND or the like would be to sit down with them on national TV with his BC folded up in his hand for all to see. Then refuse to open it. That would be awesome.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Speaking of FEC oversight, the only peopel who have reviewed the document provided by the Obama campaign are bloggers/webistes and a few selected journalists. This is the greatest country in earth, surely we can do better than that.I wish he had the balls to send a copy to WorldNutDaily, but, alas, he does not.

Yes, I'm sure the only people that have done background checks of the President of The United States of America are bloggers/websites and hand picked journalists.

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.This is like when McCain "released" his medical records by allowing a select group of journalists to look at them for three hours with all sorts of preconditionswhat a joke

 

[matuski]

Speaking of FEC oversight, the only peopel who have reviewed the document provided by the Obama campaign are bloggers/webistes and a few selected journalists. This is the greatest country in earth, surely we can do better than that.I wish he had the balls to send a copy to WorldNutDaily, but, alas, he does not.

Yes, I'm sure the only people that have done background checks of the President of The United States of America are bloggers/websites and hand picked journalists.

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.This is like when McCain "released" his medical records by allowing a select group of journalists to look at them for three hours with all sorts of preconditionswhat a joke

Nah - better to watch you get twisted.It is far more entertaining to watch people like you convince themselves that anyone could get where he is without satisfactorily answering/metting the most basic requirements. Like I've said before.. you guys couldn't help Obama more, nor hurt yourselves any more, if you tried. This is pure political gold for Obama. A gift.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Nah - better to watch you get twisted.It is far more entertaining to watch people like you convince themselves that anyone could get where he is without satisfactorily answering/metting the most basic requirements. Like I've said before.. you guys couldn't help Obama more, nor hurt yourselves any more, if you tried. This is pure political gold for Obama. A gift.

I don't think it helps him at all. I think it hurts him. I think it makes him look very nontransparent, and kind of a ####.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Nah - better to watch you get twisted.It is far more entertaining to watch people like you convince themselves that anyone could get where he is without satisfactorily answering/metting the most basic requirements. Like I've said before.. you guys couldn't help Obama more, nor hurt yourselves any more, if you tried. This is pure political gold for Obama. A gift.

I don't think it helps him at all. I think it hurts him. I think it makes him look very nontransparent, and kind of a ####.

Love it.

 

[mcintyre1]

HI-larious:



Springs man's claim to have Obama records starts buzz

It is unknown if the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Denver is investigating Hollister’s use of the data bases and obtaining Obama’s draft records.Hollister denied breaking any laws.

“I was very meticulous and made sure everything I did was compliant with the law,” Hollister said, noting that he sent Obama an 1099 tax form.

A 1099 is an IRS income reporting form for independent contractors and free-lancers. Hollister did not explain how sending that to Obama complies with federal laws on the use of Social Security data.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Springs man's claim to have Obama records starts buzz

Holy moly you birther people are crazy. And possibly dangerous.

 

[Bring The Stink]

Nah - better to watch you get twisted.It is far more entertaining to watch people like you convince themselves that anyone could get where he is without satisfactorily answering/metting the most basic requirements. Like I've said before.. you guys couldn't help Obama more, nor hurt yourselves any more, if you tried. This is pure political gold for Obama. A gift.

I don't think it helps him at all. I think it hurts him. I think it makes him look very nontransparent, and kind of a ####.

Love it.

Poor Sam Q

 

[jon_mx]

Obama could have been born on the steps of the Washington Monument with birthers watching three feet away as he popped out of his mamma's womb and they'd point to the marble step, scream "It was cut from a quarry in Italy!" and question whether he was American.

Totally not true.

Totally untrue. The marble came from Texas and Massachusetts!

Reminds me of a humorous story....John Mellencamp went to Italy and ordered a limestone fireplace mantle and surround and paid a small fortune to have it shipped overseas for his new house. Got it delivered, and noticed the tag on the bottom. Made in Bedford, IN. Less than 15 miles from his house.

And he just believed the tag, no questions asked? Why didn't he ask for shipping records? Maybe signed pay sheets of the Bedford, IN employees who were responsible for the limestone fireplace mantle? I mean, what's to say that the limestone fireplace mantle wasn't built in Kenya or Indonesia or some other place, and then someone just put a Bedford, IN tag on it to fool those silly Americans?

Or it could actually be true considering Bedford is known as the limestone capital of the world.

Sure, it could be true. But I believe this was darker variety of limestone, and when I see darker limestone I getvery suspicious about its origins. It's not that I don't believe it came from Bedford, and I know that the tag tells me that the product meets all the requirements for domestic production that is required by law. It's just that I'd really like to see every single document related to the production of this limestone, you know, just because I'm skeptical. Again, I'm 99.99% sure it's from Indiana- but what it is it hiding?

You have a point. The darkest thing from Bedford, IN was Damon Baily. .

 

[GreatLakesMike]

As if they wouldn't go onto some other crazy accusatory tirade. And everyone knows it.

That is a pretty lame argument which is often used.

It's already happened. Birthers demanded to see Obama's birth certificate to prove he was born in America. He produced that. Now they want to see a different birth certificate to know which specific hospital he was born in, as though that has any relevance. If he produced that, there's a nearly infinite supply of inconsequential facts about the man (WHO WAS OBAMA'S DATE TO THE SENIOR PROM?!? WHY IS HE COVERING THIS UP?!?) that birthers could demand.I mean, if you were perfectly honest with yourself, you'd see that your position here is not based in reason, but emotion. You want Obama to look bad. You want him to be hiding something. Even though on some level, you know that he isn't.

Why would Obama's date to the prom be relevant to whether he was naturally-born?Personally, I want to see DNA evidence that he's not some character from Plan 9 from Outer Space. After all, he does have the support of the zombie element here on earth!

Zombies are not aliens. Come on, haven't you ever seen a Zombie movie?

Obviously, you haven't seen arguably the worst B movie ever made, even though you have been living it since Obama was elected.

Whoa. Just Googled Plan 9- I know of it, but didn't realize the zombie/outer space connection it reveals.Mind=blown.

I knew this thread was good for something. Nothing finer than a bad B movie.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

Government should get out of the way of forcing daughters to marry their abusive fathers at the age of nine to join the older sisters who are already performing their duties as the father's wives.

 

[timschochet]

I knew this thread was good for something. Nothing finer than a bad B movie.

B-Movie? If you've ever seen Plan 9,. you would know that it doesn't come close to rising to that level. It is more like a marvelous Z movie.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Can Jon produce a birth certificate proving that he was born in Birther-land? Long form, not short, and it must be signed by a Doctor.

Yes, the copy is signed by the doctor.

This one?

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

 

[bigbottom]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

 

[bueno]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

I still have some of my ideals. Sorry you lost yours.

Pragmatism was the clear theme of your post.

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.

And what's with the personal shot?

"pipe dreams" wasn't a personal shot?

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

If that's so, Then what is this? a Hologram?

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

who has held the document in their hands in order to authenticate it?

 

[bueno]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

Obama was born after 2001?Actually this brings up the question of whether certain documents should be paperless. Call me old school, but I trust a piece of paper more than I call ever trust my hard drive.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

So Obama posts his version of his BC, Orly posts her version.

And who do we have refereeing - factcheck.org and DailyKos

that just gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling

 

[the moops]

Orly posts her version.

I would think you other birthers would distance yourself from the kookiest of your bunch.

Taitz has made other Obama-related claims, including:A number of homosexuals from Obama's former church have died mysteriously.Obama has dozens of Social Security numbersObama's first act as President was to donate money to HamasObama, or someone connected to him, has made threats to Taitz's life and vandalized her carObama is having the Federal Emergency Management Agency build internment camps for "Anti-Obama disside

nts"and more

Baxter International has developed a bird flu vaccine that kills peopleRepresentative Alcee Hastings and the House of Representatives are planning to build at least six labor campsHugo Chávez owns the software that runs American voting machines

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Obama was born after 2001?

He wasn't born. He was manufactured.

In order to drive you freaking American Hating Conservatives crazy and lead to your eventual demise.

Muahahahahahahahaha!

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

Obama was born after 2001?Actually this brings up the question of whether certain documents should be paperless. Call me old school, but I trust a piece of paper more than I call ever trust my hard drive.

People lose or misplace their birth certificates. A lot. When this happens you go request the state to issue you whatever it is your particular state does so you can get your passport, drivers license, satisfy obsessed idiocy, etc.

 

[bueno]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

Obama was born after 2001?Actually this brings up the question of whether certain documents should be paperless. Call me old school, but I trust a piece of paper more than I call ever trust my hard drive.

People lose or misplace their birth certificates. A lot. When this happens you go request the state to issue you whatever it is your particular state does so you can get your passport, drivers license, satisfy obsessed idiocy, etc.

Well duh. What's the point here?

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Orly posts her version.

 

[bigbottom]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

There's also this from Maurile's earlier link:

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

Obama was born after 2001?Actually this brings up the question of whether certain documents should be paperless. Call me old school, but I trust a piece of paper more than I call ever trust my hard drive.

The question was about who had seen the COLB Obama produced during the election, not about his original birth record. The COLB record would have been generated electronically.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

please provide a list of all of those who have been allowed to personally view the document he provided.

anyone and everyone?

the key word here is personally.

anybody can post a jpg on a website

Here's an example

The linked document, per snopes is the "document he provided". By clicking on the link does one not "personally view the document he provided"? Or does "personally view" mean something other than the personal action of viewing it?

who has held the document in their hands in order to authenticate it?

What does "held the document in their hands" have to do with "personally view the document he provided"? Oh, and the answer as to who authenticated it has been provided numerous times in this thread, but in case you missed it.

 

[bigbottom]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

I still have some of my ideals. Sorry you lost yours.

Pragmatism was the clear theme of your post.

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.

And what's with the personal shot?

"pipe dreams" wasn't a personal shot?

No. It was a comment on the likelihood of the outcome you were proposing. Again, the point I took from your post was that government recognition of gay marriage won't ever happen legislatively because social conservatives won't let it happen:

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.There are too many social conservatives in this nation that will never recognize the lifestyle as one that the government should recognize. Legislatively, this won't happen. In even the most liberal of states, gays can't win this issue at the ballot box.

You may very well be right (though I hope you're wrong). But government getting out of the marriage business altogether is even more remote a possibility from a legislative standpoint. I understand and respect your position on that issue. Indeed, I'm even inclined to agree with it. But there seems to be a disconnect when you appear to be asserting that gay rights advocates abandon their efforts to achieve government recognition of gay marriage through the legislative process because the prospects for success are remote, and then follow that up with a legislative solution just as, or even more, remote.Pointing this out doesn't mean I have no ideals.You're still ticked about the Bueno and Craig parody, aren't you?

 

[BigTex]

From OP:

Keyes recently called the citizenship issue "the greatest crisis this nation has ever seen" and warned of "chaos, confusion and civil war."

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

From OP:

Alan Keyes

Fixed.

 

[bueno]

The gay community actually lobbied against the civil union law in California. The laws wasn't perfect and didn't app;ly to federal benefits obviously, but it was a step in the proper direction. A county clerk in the Bay area started marrying gays anyway until a stop was put to it. Subsequent ballot issue recognizing gay marriage was soundly defeated.

To what ballot initiative are you referring?

Part of the reason I believe the gays don't want civil unions is they want acceptance. You can argue separate but equal, but it is a weak argument. You can try to get civil marriages judicially, but you will only find that gays are treated with more hostility by social conservatives for ramming this issue down their throats.

I hate it when the gays ram things down my throat.

So give the social conservatives the damn word. Let marriages be a spiritual joining, and keep the government's role limited to a recognition of contractual rights. This is the only way this is going to happen Tim. All it takes is enough people to lobby for it.

What do you think the likelihood is of the government getting out of the marriage business? Talk about pipe dreams.

I still have some of my ideals. Sorry you lost yours.

Pragmatism was the clear theme of your post.

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.

And what's with the personal shot?

"pipe dreams" wasn't a personal shot?

No. It was a comment on the likelihood of the outcome you were proposing. Again, the point I took from your post was that government recognition of gay marriage won't ever happen legislatively because social conservatives won't let it happen:

It doesn't matter what I want though. It is what might be possible.There are too many social conservatives in this nation that will never recognize the lifestyle as one that the government should recognize. Legislatively, this won't happen. In even the most liberal of states, gays can't win this issue at the ballot box.

You may very well be right (though I hope you're wrong). But government getting out of the marriage business altogether is even more remote a possibility from a legislative standpoint. I understand and respect your position on that issue. Indeed, I'm even inclined to agree with it. But there seems to be a disconnect when you appear to be asserting that gay rights advocates abandon their efforts to achieve government recognition of gay marriage through the legislative process because the prospects for success are remote, and then follow that up with a legislative solution just as, or even more, remote.Pointing this out doesn't mean I have no ideals.You're still ticked about the Bueno and Craig parody, aren't you?

I'd forgotten about that, but now that you bring it up.

 

[Shtaym Syek]

Obama was born after 2001?Actually this brings up the question of whether certain documents should be paperless. Call me old school, but I trust a piece of paper more than I call ever trust my hard drive.

Cool argument.