|
|
Post by HoyaLawya on Aug 3, 2009 9:29:06 GMT -5
or is it "birther Bro' " ? www.buenavistamall.com/kenya-bc.jpgI think the guy was born in Hawaii to an unwed mother (bigamous marriage, at a minimum, and no marriage license to be found regardless). That should/would end the natural born debate. Why is press feeding the frenzy NOW instead of during '08 when it might have mattered? |
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Aug 3, 2009 9:39:58 GMT -5
Except Mombassa wasn't part of Kenya in 1961, and E(arth) F(riendly) Lavender is a type of detergent.
Because the press doesn't generally deign to explore racist conspiracy theories?
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 3, 2009 9:44:44 GMT -5
or is it "birther Bro' " ? www.buenavistamall.com/kenya-bc.jpgI think the guy was born in Hawaii to an unwed mother (bigamous marriage, at a minimum, and no marriage license to be found regardless). That should/would end the natural born debate. Why is press feeding the frenzy NOW instead of during '08 when it might have mattered? I was waiting for a thread on this. I don't think the press is to blame as much as the intellectual wing of the Republican Party. Several members of Congress have willfully refused to quell what, in practice, amounts to a non-violent coup attempt during a time of war. When it came time in Mike Castle's town hall to condemn the birthers, who used the forum to promote their brand of America, Castle bit his nails. Lou Dobbs in all of his wisdom has been so helpful to the birthers that his network has distanced itself from him. Liz Cheney and certain other fringe activists are on the stump to support it. I have watched the birthers for sport, and I admittedly have a tough time finding any evidence to support their view. I sense it is more of a cultural movement of people yearning for the "halcyon days" of America-for-white-people and viewing Obama as "exotic." The birther campaign and the organized Republican Party's tacit approval of it or unwillingness to loudly condemn it, along with the organized reactions to the Gates incident and the Sotomayor nomination, raise doubts about the Republican Party's commitment to equality and race relations. |
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506 
|
Post by theexorcist on Aug 3, 2009 9:59:24 GMT -5
or is it "birther Bro' " ? www.buenavistamall.com/kenya-bc.jpgI think the guy was born in Hawaii to an unwed mother (bigamous marriage, at a minimum, and no marriage license to be found regardless). That should/would end the natural born debate. Why is press feeding the frenzy NOW instead of during '08 when it might have mattered? I was waiting for a thread on this. I don't think the press is to blame as much as the intellectual wing of the Republican Party. Several members of Congress have willfully refused to quell what, in practice, amounts to a non-violent coup attempt during a time of war. When it came time in Mike Castle's town hall to condemn the birthers, who used the forum to promote their brand of America, Castle bit his nails. Lou Dobbs in all of his wisdom has been so helpful to the birthers that his network has distanced itself from him. Liz Cheney and certain other fringe activists are on the stump to support it. I have watched the birthers for sport, and I admittedly have a tough time finding any evidence to support their view. I sense it is more of a cultural movement of people yearning for the "halcyon days" of America-for-white-people and viewing Obama as "exotic." The birther campaign and the organized Republican Party's tacit approval of it or unwillingness to loudly condemn it, along with the organized reactions to the Gates incident and the Sotomayor nomination, raise doubts about the Republican Party's commitment to equality and race relations. Oh, please. The Gates incident? You mean the one where POTUS screwed up so bad that he held a big alcohol apology session in the White House? Where all allegations about racism pretty much went up in smoke? THAT Gates incident? Give it up, man. Your side has its own kooks, too. And your "halcyon days of America for white people" argument is a reach. So stop tarring Republicans as racists. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 3, 2009 10:01:11 GMT -5
Oh, blah, blah.
And according to Rasmussen, 61 percent of Democrats either believe or "aren't sure" that George Bush knew about 9/11 in advance.
And there are still Vince Foster/Ft. Marcy Park believers. And those who think Ronald Reagan intentionally infected people with the AIDS virus (one of those people is was pretty close to our current President, IIRC).
Why do these things keep coming up, on both the left and the right? Because you can't cure crazy. (Sorry, psychiatric profession).
Why don't politicians denounce them 100%? Because they're politicians and these distractions serve a purpose, no matter how off the wall they are.
Crazy people are to be ignored at all times, except maybe if you are looking for lottery numbers or need a hand at blackjack.
But let's not pretend that crazy doesn't cut across the political spectrum pretty evenly. It is pretty common for the party out of power to have the nuts shouting on their extreme wings, and they always get more attention than they deserve.
EDIT:
"Is Barack Obama a Muslim?"
"Not as far as I know...."
- Yeah, that was our Secretary of State, less than one year ago. It's what they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by HoyaLawya on Aug 3, 2009 10:06:22 GMT -5
Only thing I don't understand: Why would Obama open a can of worms to Constitutional interpretation by claiming dual citizenship on his FightTheSmears website? Could he, himself, be stirring the pot?
Flat out, there's been no locatable marriage license for his parents. A reporter for Time magazine hit that brick wall in the town of the alleged marriage in 2007, and had to fall back on the claims in the divorce petition as to date, place. (Amanda Ripley was the reporter, she flagged what she was relying upon in her bio profiling the candidate.)
Even if a license makes an appearance, probably there'd be a finding of "bigamy" because of Kezia and the 2 kids in Kenya. So just as null a situation as no marriage at all.
Is the press trying to protect the Obama daughters from information that Dad was illegit? Are we back to the days of reporters looking the other way about JFK's affairs as "too personal to report" or what?
Just curious.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 3, 2009 10:26:08 GMT -5
Anyone who reads this board knows how i feel about our current President and his policies. That said, this nonsense must end. He won. Case closed.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Aug 3, 2009 10:36:01 GMT -5
Oh boy, let's get into all this: First of all, you only get to 60 if you count the 26% that are "not sure". Furthermore the wording of the question "incompetently failed to act on warnings about the possibility of’" was included in the "yes" column, but those aren't the same responses. I agree. But the Republican party has not yet had it's come to Jesus moment on this yet. Right now the GOP is hoping these crazies will all go away. They won't, and Republicans need to forcefully fight against it the way an earlier GOP did against the John Birch Society and elected Democrats did with the 9/11 Truthers. There's a birther bill with 10 GOP co-sponsors in the House. Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs are dabbling in bitherism without rebuke. I'm sorry, but this is a lot worse than the Democrats' response to the 9/11 truthers. Except that was the fourth time in a row she was asked the question, and the "as far as I know" came out of exasperation. Link? This is news to me. If true, none of this information affects the President's natural born status. If his parents were unmarried, is that his fault? |
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Aug 3, 2009 10:39:42 GMT -5
Only thing I don't understand: Why would Obama open a can of worms to Constitutional interpretation by claiming dual citizenship on his FightTheSmears website? Could he, himself, be stirring the pot? Where does FightTheSmears say that? I checked because I was interested and the only mention of dual citizenship I see is the statement from a quoted passage from factcheck.org that says that his Kenyan Citizenship expired in August 1982. Wow, that JFK analogy is Malkin Award territory. Sure, it's just like JFK's affairs except Obama wasn't involved and was a child, the parents marital status has no bearing in pretty much any discussion, the father wasn't involved, it wasn't a ground shattering revelation that shook the whole premise upon which the popular image of the person was based (JFK's was based on the tight nuclear family / Camelot), and Obama wasn't cheating on his wife. But except for all of that, it's exactly like Kennedy's affairs. |
|
AvantGuardHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
Posts: 1,489
|
Post by AvantGuardHoya on Aug 3, 2009 10:41:01 GMT -5
If Obama's parents were not married, frankly, what difference does it make? I mean, who cares?
|
|
|
|
Post by HoyaLawya on Aug 3, 2009 10:41:16 GMT -5
Phil Berg ... lead crazy ... 9/11 troofer ... member of ACLU ... Democrat ... Hillary supporter ... Kenyan birther extraordinaire.
Utterly bewildering that what started out as Hillary's opposition research effort on Obama has come to be identified with the other party. How does that happen?
I think remedial laws to make job applicants for public elected office turn over more biographical "hard" data might be a good thing to come out of this, however.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 3, 2009 10:41:28 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Aug 3, 2009 10:43:00 GMT -5
First of all, you only get to 60 if you count the 26% that are "not sure". Furthermore the wording of the question "incompetently failed to act on warnings about the possibility of’" was included in the "yes" column, but those aren't the same responses. Wasn't this a crazy Zogby poll sponsored by 911truth.org? The Birther poll stats are being born out by PPP, which is not sponsored by ihatethebirthersandwanttomakerepublicanslookbad.net or whatever the similar thing would be. |
|
|
|
Post by HoyaLawya on Aug 3, 2009 10:52:25 GMT -5
Oh boy, let's get into all this: First of all, you only get to 60 if you count the 26% that are "not sure". Furthermore the wording of the question "incompetently failed to act on warnings about the possibility of’" was included in the "yes" column, but those aren't the same responses. I agree. But the Republican party has not yet had it's come to Jesus moment on this yet. Right now the GOP is hoping these crazies will all go away. They won't, and Republicans need to forcefully fight against it the way an earlier GOP did against the John Birch Society and elected Democrats did with the 9/11 Truthers. There's a birther bill with 10 GOP co-sponsors in the House. Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs are dabbling in bitherism without rebuke. I'm sorry, but this is a lot worse than the Democrats' response to the 9/11 truthers. Except that was the fourth time in a row she was asked the question, and the "as far as I know" came out of exasperation. Link? This is news to me. If true, none of this information affects the President's natural born status. If his parents were unmarried, is that his fault? Does pulling up the wholesale language from FactCheck into a campaign website count as an admission or endorsement of what it says? “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”So, he had another citizenship. Before the Afroyim decision by SCOTUS in 1967, dual citizenship wasn't recognized by the U.S. It's still not recognized by statute, particularly, and State Department discourages it. Impact upon the "natural born" thinking in 1787 which gave rise to the singular extra requirement for POTUS opens up a can'o'worms. |
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Aug 3, 2009 10:52:39 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that. Unfortunately that article is spot-on. |
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Aug 3, 2009 10:52:54 GMT -5
Phil Berg ... lead crazy ... 9/11 troofer ... member of ACLU ... Democrat ... Hillary supporter ... Kenyan birther extraordinaire. Utterly bewildering that what started out as Hillary's opposition research effort on Obama has come to be identified with the other party. How does that happen? I think remedial laws to make job applicants for public elected office turn over more biographical "hard" data might be a good thing to come out of this, however. Phil Berg and Larry Johnson started this mess, true, and they're both Hillary supporters (they're not in her campaign). But you can't deny that the far right wing has run with this, can you? |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 3, 2009 10:53:31 GMT -5
It was Rasmussen, not Zogby and no. Now, you may think Rasmussen leans right, but it's certainly a credited/respected polling organizaiton. A lot more than Daily Kos, that's for sure.
B. The question in the poll was "Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?" Not as ambiguous as you are making it out to be. 35% of Democrats answered Yes. And then you had the "not sures' who I did account for in my original post.
But that is entirely missing the point anyway (well, my point at least). I am not trying to say that Democrats are crazier because more of them answered yes to this than Republicans did in the Daily Kos birther poll. Or that Republicans are crazier because more of them may be "not sure," or whatever.
I am trying to say that you are going to get these kinds of results with ANY crazy conspiracy theory, whether it comes from the left or the right. And no, I don't think Democratic electod officials' reactions were any better or more dismissive than Republican elected officials' reactions. They are doing what politicians do.
Lou Dobbs is going after ratings. That is all. I haven't heard Glenn Beck talk about this, I've never really seen his show, but my guess is that if he is talking about it, he's doing the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 3, 2009 10:57:02 GMT -5
I was waiting for a thread on this. I don't think the press is to blame as much as the intellectual wing of the Republican Party. Several members of Congress have willfully refused to quell what, in practice, amounts to a non-violent coup attempt during a time of war. When it came time in Mike Castle's town hall to condemn the birthers, who used the forum to promote their brand of America, Castle bit his nails. Lou Dobbs in all of his wisdom has been so helpful to the birthers that his network has distanced itself from him. Liz Cheney and certain other fringe activists are on the stump to support it. I have watched the birthers for sport, and I admittedly have a tough time finding any evidence to support their view. I sense it is more of a cultural movement of people yearning for the "halcyon days" of America-for-white-people and viewing Obama as "exotic." The birther campaign and the organized Republican Party's tacit approval of it or unwillingness to loudly condemn it, along with the organized reactions to the Gates incident and the Sotomayor nomination, raise doubts about the Republican Party's commitment to equality and race relations. Oh, please. The Gates incident? You mean the one where POTUS screwed up so bad that he held a big alcohol apology session in the White House? Where all allegations about racism pretty much went up in smoke? THAT Gates incident? Give it up, man. Your side has its own kooks, too. And your "halcyon days of America for white people" argument is a reach. So stop tarring Republicans as racists. As far as the Gates incident, it is incorrect to call it an apology session. Indeed, many criticized Obama for not apologizing, even at the fellowship summit at the White House. The White House also issued statements to that effect. The outrage over Gates' comments has less to do with the fact that he called someone a racist than the fact that the person called a racist is white. The "racist" label finds popularity on the right to describe even the most accomplished jurists of our time. If you Google "Sotomayor racist," you may be astonished by the number of hits you get for prominent Republican commentators - Tucker Carlson (who should know better), Newt Gingrich, et al. I await the round condemnation of these comments from the GOP. Perhaps they would be kind enough to invite Sotomayor to their homes for coffee. My post did not foreclose the possibility that there are nuts on the left. The 9/11 Truthers were disgusting, and, as others have noted, roundly condemned by Republicans and Democrats. Such side shows only distract from the need to condemn the birthers quickly and forcefully. As far as my race-based argument, I think you dismiss it too easily. The best defense is for Republicans to do something about it. * * * * * The marriage license issue is truly disgusting. It has nothing to do with presidential legitimacy but rather an effort to combat Obama's image as a self-made intellectual with the image of a bastard child of a multi-racial couple. To the birther-types, perhaps the question remains of what is worse - a bastard child or a multi-racial couple? |
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Aug 3, 2009 10:58:58 GMT -5
If you are a birther, you are retarded.
Let's think about this with some common sense. You are claiming that the rise of a person who by his own admission had no ambition until law school and only became Senator after a series of issues with other candidates campaigns and a convenient foil in the form of Allen Keys was managed 30 years before he ever thought of running for the presidency. You are further claiming that he managed to keep this a secret throughout an incredibly strong primary challenge and general presidential election.
The real issue here is that a minority of Republicans can't be honest about what they believe. They want to take "our country" back and turn things back to the "way it was." This is because they either have issues with (1) a person of color being elected to the presidency, or (2) feel that a coalition of your voters and persons of color that do not agree with them politically have taken their white majority political establishment from them.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Aug 3, 2009 11:01:04 GMT -5
HoyaLawya, a foreign law granting citizenship means nothing in eyes of US law on this issue. Unless Obama renounces his US citizenship and claimed his Kenyan one, this means nothing, especially since the Kenyan citizenship was conditional.
Furthermore, you've yet to provide any evidence that dual citizenship somehow runs afoul of the natural born citizen requirement. A natural born citizen is one who was an American citizen at birth. Since Obama was born in Hawaii, and being born on American soil is enough to grant citizenship, any dual citizenship objection seems to be moot.
|
|
