Birther roll call

[Tedminator]

taking a DP membership poll... could the Birthers please identify yourselves.

ktanxbai,
T

 

[spud_meister]

i was born, so i guess i am.

 

[Tedminator]

i was born, so i guess i am.

grrrrr ohman you messing up the poll! :2mad:

the results of this list is suppose to be a time saving device.. by indentifying certain umm, personality traits.

 

[spud_meister]

grrrrr ohman you messing up the poll! :2mad:

the results of this list is suppose to be a time saving device.. by indentifying certain umm, personality traits.

just go look in the conspiracy theories forum, much quicker that way

 

[Slartibartfast]

taking a DP membership poll... could the Birthers please identify yourselves.

ktanxbai,
T

You would probably get better results if you made the poll anonymous.

 

[Slartibartfast]

just go look in the conspiracy theories forum, much quicker that way

Even faster is to look here, it is where most hacks congregate.

US Partisan Politics and Political Platforms

 

[Zyphlin]

grrrrr ohman you messing up the poll! :2mad:

the results of this list is suppose to be a time saving device.. by indentifying certain umm, personality traits.

Really the threads not going to be much use.

The people who ARE birthers tend to primarily populate the conspiracy theory forum, which is the home for threads that are simply about how obama is a secret terrorist muslim born in kenyaa.

You're also not going to likely reflect the sizable amount of poster who go "I'm not a birther!!!!" but then defend birthers, defend the notion there's "questions" to be asked, defend the notion that its not idiotic to ask, suggest that he doesn't "Seem" American but assures us that they think he is, etc. Essentially the "I"m not a birther!" birthers.

Best bet as someone else said...go look at the conspiracy forums. They'll jump out at you quick.

 

[Tedminator]

You're also not going to likely reflect the sizable amount of poster who go "I'm not a birther!!!!" but then defend birthers, defend the notion there's "questions" to be asked, defend the notion that its not idiotic to ask, suggest that he doesn't "Seem" American but assures us that they think he is, etc. Essentially the "I"m not a birther!" birthers.

Ooo good point. no wonder youre a mod.
por favor add "I'm not a birther!" Birther" as third poll option

 

[jamesrage]

You would probably get better results if you made the poll anonymous.

Anonymous polls in the pull forum section can be cheated.

 

[MaggieD]

You're also not going to likely reflect the sizable amount of poster who go "I'm not a birther!!!!" but then defend birthers, defend the notion there's "questions" to be asked, defend the notion that its not idiotic to ask, suggest that he doesn't "Seem" American but assures us that they think he is, etc. Essentially the "I"m not a birther!" birthers. Best bet as someone else said...go look at the conspiracy forums. They'll jump out at you quick.

"I'm not a birther. Having said that, I have no problem with any lawsuits brought to investigate the matter further. What is wrong with that? As I looked around the internet to debunk this theory, I noticed one thing. I could find nothing to indicate that presidential candidates are formally vetted by the FBI or whomever. I was able to find the the parties themselves do the vetting. That doesn't make much sense to me. Fox says hen house is safe.

So, while I'm confident it's much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the process. Does that make me an "I'm-not-a- birther birther? If so, I'd like to change my vote. ;-)

 

[liblady]

"I'm not a birther. Having said that, I have no problem with any lawsuits brought to investigate the matter further. What is wrong with that? As I looked around the internet to debunk this theory, I noticed one thing. I could find nothing to indicate that presidential candidates are formally vetted by the FBI or whomever. I was able to find the the parties themselves do the vetting. That doesn't make much sense to me. Fox says hen house is safe.

So, while I'm confident it's much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the process. Does that make me an "I'm-not-a- birther birther? If so, I'd like to change my vote. ;-)

how about this: with each party desperately wanting to win, don't you think the opposing party thoroughly vets a candidate? if there were really something to this whole birther nonsense don't you believe an elected republican would have shined the light by now?

 

[MaggieD]

how about this: with each party desperately wanting to win, don't you think the opposing party thoroughly vets a candidate? if there were really someting to this whole birther nonsense don't you believe an elected republican would have shined the light by now?

Absolutely, I believe that. That's why I'm not a birther. Still, shinin' a light on the process can't hurt.

 

[Zyphlin]

"I'm not a birther. Having said that, I have no problem with any lawsuits brought to investigate the matter further. What is wrong with that? As I looked around the internet to debunk this theory, I noticed one thing. I could find nothing to indicate that presidential candidates are formally vetted by the FBI or whomever. I was able to find the the parties themselves do the vetting. That doesn't make much sense to me. Fox says hen house is safe.

So, while I'm confident it's much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the process. Does that make me an "I'm-not-a- birther birther? If so, I'd like to change my vote. ;-)

I’m not a truther. Having said that, I have no problem with any lawsuits brought to investigate the matter further. What is wrong with that? As I looked around the internet to debunk this theory, I noticed one thing. I could find nothing to indicate the attacks are formally investigated by an international source. I was able to find that the U.S. government themselves did the investigation. That doesn’t make much sense to me. The US Government says the hen house is safe.

So while I’m confident its much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the events. Does that make me an “I’m-not-a-truther-truther”? If so, I’d like to change my vote ;-)

My question would be if the above is something you think is legitimate and someone you wouldn't consider a conspiracy theorist or someone that's a truther, if not by name by action.

There is little to no legitimate evidence to suggest Obama's not an American citizen. It would require a cover up includign such groups as the government of hawaii along with both political parties that undoubtably vets their own and the other candidates, spanning more than a decades worth of time since the point he became heavily involved in politics. Its a ridiculous notion predicated off the one loud yell that he won't reveal to the public a piece of private information that no other President has been required to reveal despite the fact other documents have been provided to prove his citizenship. Its like saying if some moonbat suggests we faked the moon landing that we should give credance to and legitimacy to people wanting to talk about it as if its a reasonable belief to have. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to bring lawsuit, I think its stupid but if its allowable in law its allowable (and will undoubtably be thrown out). What I'm saying is talking about it like its a legitimate view, like its a reasonable view, like its something not to be labled as a conspiracy theory or that must be given equal credence with other questions like "Does Barack Obama wish to raise taxes? that I have an issue with as its none of those things.

 

[MaggieD]

I was able to find that the U.S. government themselves did the investigation.

I wasn't able to find a thing. Your source? Oh, wait -- as I think about it, I think I understand your point.

I don't talk about it like it's a legitimate belief. I don't discuss it. It's like talking to mad men. I don't have the time for it. But I'll say again, "There's nothing wrong with shining a light on the process." If this lawsuit does that, it's accomplished MY purpose, anyway.

 

[Tucker Case]

I voted "yes" because Spud looked lonely. He also made a compelling argument.

 

[spud_meister]

I voted "yes" because Spud looked lonely. He also made a compelling argument.

thanks mate :iloveyou:

 

[Crunch]

I voted no..... I'm a dualer.

I would, just out of curiosity like to know what Barry is hiding by sealing all of his records.... I'm sure it's nothing. :roll:

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I voted "yes" because Spud looked lonely. He also made a compelling argument.

And now we are three.... :thumbs:

 

[Tucker Case]

And now we are three.... :thumbs:

Ah, the three Birthsketeers.

You can be Kenyamis, Spud can be Certificos, and I'll be Birthos.

 

[Middleground]

Really the threads not going to be much use.

The people who ARE birthers tend to primarily populate the conspiracy theory forum, which is the home for threads that are simply about how obama is a secret terrorist muslim born in kenyaa.

You're also not going to likely reflect the sizable amount of poster who go "I'm not a birther!!!!" but then defend birthers, defend the notion there's "questions" to be asked, defend the notion that its not idiotic to ask, suggest that he doesn't "Seem" American but assures us that they think he is, etc. Essentially the "I"m not a birther!" birthers.

Best bet as someone else said...go look at the conspiracy forums. They'll jump out at you quick.

I voted no..... I'm a dualer.

I would, just out of curiosity like to know what Barry is hiding by sealing all of his records.... I'm sure it's nothing. :roll:

Ah, man... Zyph. You called it like a clairvoyant. I'm gonna start calling you Miss Cleo. :lol::2razz:

 

[Objective Voice]

"I'm not a birther. Having said that, I have no problem with any lawsuits brought to investigate the matter further. What is wrong with that? As I looked around the internet to debunk this theory, I noticed one thing. I could find nothing to indicate that presidential candidates are formally vetted by the FBI or whomever. I was able to find the the parties themselves do the vetting. That doesn't make much sense to me. Fox says hen house is safe.

So, while I'm confident it's much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the process. Does that make me an "I'm-not-a- birther birther? If so, I'd like to change my vote. ;-)

My wife says I made it my personal mission to prove the birthers wrong. I suppose she'd have a point by the one or two threads I've started on the matter, particularly the NBC -vs- U.S. Citizen thread, but also the number of posts I've made arguing in the President's defense. In a nutshell, the basis for my arguments have been:

1. The Constitution itself which gives the power to the states to determine who are it's residents and how to record same (via birth records/certificates).
2. By the State of Hawaii's laws that govern who are its residents and how same is registered within their state.
3. U.S. Immigration and Nationalization law (as revised since 1952 which was the governing INA law that covers the President's birth).
4. The Foreign Affairs Manual which supports INA law.
5. Lower U.S. District courts have upheld the natural born status of children born to 1 U.S. citizen parent and 1 foriegner long before the issue came about over President Obama but subsequent to such Supreme Court cases, i.e., Minor v Happersett or U.S. v Wong Kim Ark.
6. DNC By-laws which outline their vetting process for presidential candidates (which is actually stronger than the RNC By-laws).

When you put it all together, you really can't refute the evidence that's been presented nor the law. The man was born in Hawaii and meets minimum eligibility requirement under the U.S. Constitution to be this nation's 44th President. Those who disagree can bring about any law suit they wish; it is their right to do so. But I contend that without concrete evidence of the contrary, they'd be wasting their time.

 

[Crunch]

My wife says I made it my personal mission to prove the birthers wrong. I suppose she'd have a point by the one or two threads I've started on the matter, particularly the NBC -vs- U.S. Citizen thread, but also the number of posts I've made arguing in the President's defense. In a nutshell, the basis for my arguments have been:

1. The Constitution itself which gives the power to the states to determine who are it's residents and how to record same (via birth records/certificates).
2. By the State of Hawaii's laws that govern who are its residents and how same is registered within their state.
3. U.S. Immigration and Nationalization law (as revised since 1952 which was the governing INA law that covers the President's birth).
4. The Foreign Affairs Manual which supports INA law.
5. Lower U.S. District courts have upheld the natural born status of children born to 1 U.S. citizen parent and 1 foriegner long before the issue came about over President Obama but subsequent to such Supreme Court cases, i.e., Minor v Happersett or U.S. v Wong Kim Ark.
6. DNC By-laws which outline their vetting process for presidential candidates (which is actually stronger than the RNC By-laws).

When you put it all together, you really can't refute the evidence that's been presented nor the law. The man was born in Hawaii and meets minimum eligibility requirement under the U.S. Constitution to be this nation's 44th President. Those who disagree can bring about any law suit they wish; it is their right to do so. But I contend that without concrete evidence of the contrary, they'd be wasting their time.

From Minor v Happersett

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, *snip*

The court ordered Wong Kim Ark to be discharged, upon the ground that he was a citizen of the United States.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

:lamo

 

[Barbbtx]

Really the threads not going to be much use.

The people who ARE birthers tend to primarily populate the conspiracy theory forum, which is the home for threads that are simply about how obama is a secret terrorist muslim born in kenyaa.

You're also not going to likely reflect the sizable amount of poster who go "I'm not a birther!!!!" but then defend birthers, defend the notion there's "questions" to be asked, defend the notion that its not idiotic to ask, suggest that he doesn't "Seem" American but assures us that they think he is, etc. Essentially the "I"m not a birther!" birthers.

Best bet as someone else said...go look at the conspiracy forums. They'll jump out at you quick.

:shock: I think you nailed me. I might be a (I'm not a birther, birther) I know I hovered over the Yes No before finally hitting NO. I might have said Yes, if it wasn't public.
So there is my confession.:3oops:

 

[Rightwingnutjob]

If I believe Hawaii shouldn't be a state and therefore that Obama isn't a citizen and therefore can't be president, what am I??

In all seriousness, I'm a 'no' to this poll.

 

[Crunch]

:shock: I think you nailed me. I might be a (I'm not a birther, birther) I know I hovered over the Yes No before finally hitting NO. I might have said Yes, if it wasn't public.
So there is my confession.:3oops:

Well.... you are in good company.

Sen. David Vitter
U.S. Rep. Steve King
U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis
Champaign, Ill., mayor Gerald Schweighart
Hawaii state Sen. Will Espero
Oklahoma state Rep. Mike Ritze
U.S. Rep. Bill Posey
Arizona state Sen. Sylvia Allen
Arizona state Rep. Judy Burges
U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal
Tom DeLay
U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt
U.S. Rep. Trent Franks
New Hampshire State Rep. Laurence Rappaport
Former Rep. J.D. Hayworth

Something tells me Barry won't run for a second term.