jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (82 posts)

Obama will show his long-form BC to reporters today

  1. Aficionada profile image89
    Aficionadaposted 6 years ago

    I just heard on the news that the President plans to show his long-form birth certificate to reporters a little later today.

    What do you want to bet there will be people who will claim it is a fraud?

    Do you suppose the questions about his Social Security cards and trip to Pakistan and all will go away now?

    1. JOE BARNETT profile image60
      JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      ha ha ha they'll say the ink is not real ink ha ha ha.

    2. profile image60
      C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It should be the end of it. I'ts probably not going to be the end of it for some. Already there are people questioning his SSN. Supposedly the prefix indicates issuance from Conneticut. Don't know, don't care. Obama should be held to account for his job performance, not some "Trump'd" up accusations. Birthers are probably the biggest critics of Obama. They need to wisen up. Their wild claims only bolster Obama's chances in the next election. Any issue that distracts attention away from the economy is a good thing for the Obama Admin.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Quite true.

    3. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If it's real, he should have shown this a long time ago.
      He's still game-playing, and did this just in time for his re-election campaign.  It took a well-known man like Trump to make him show proof before he had planned to, like whipping it out at the last minute per his own plans.   And according to the news, his speech contains mockery of the average citizens who've asked for this proof all along.
      His backers seem to have forgotten that is is HE who is answerable to the American people, not the other way around. He himself never cared and still doesn't!  Any leader who was really concerned about what his people think, would've never let this issue go this far;  he would've been fallin' all over himself to prove himself to the American people from day one.

      1. lovemychris profile image80
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Errr, real American already knew! wink

        It's just the kook-balls that had an issue...ask yourself why.

        And while you're at it....ask yourself where did Orly go?
        And what did Trump gain from his deception?

        I think pres Obama is game playing too---psychologically.
        That's what you HAVE to do when a psy-op is being done to you.
        You HAVE to play their game.

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No you don't.  That in itself is silly.  An American President should never play games.  Obama is an immature person with the mindset of making American citizens pay for the racial crimes of its ancestors.  He's not about fairness nor about leading us in the right direction; he's about vengeance, supposedly non-violent vengance, but vengeance still.  No true leader would mock any citizen's or group of citizens' legitimate questions.  He seems to think that because of the color of his skin, he doesn't have to show any transparency nor abide by the laws of the land.  Even Congress is afraid to question him.  He has you (and all of us) in the palm of his hand.  You, eating out of it; the rest of us who can read between the lines, in a vise-grip of his Administration's agenda.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Brenda--you JUST described your own side to a T!

            Even when it's proven they have done him dirty...it's STILL Obama's fault!

          2. thebrucebeat profile image59
            thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            He hasn't mocked any citizen with a legitimate concern.  He is mocking birthers.  Not remotely the same thing.
            But it is telling that you immediately jump to his race in furthering your explanation.   Here is the real crux of the matter.  Here is the true bottom line.
            We have a black president, and you hate it.

            Fortunately, many of us find you silly, and our votes won the day the last election.  Thanks to people like you and Trump, we have a very good chance of winning the next one, too.  You folks make Obama look better and better with each unhinged accusation.

            Rock on!

            1. Reality Bytes profile image91
              Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Wasn't the last election in November?

              1. thebrucebeat profile image59
                thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Sorry.
                I was referring to the last presidential election, since this thread refers to the president.
                But I think you actually knew that.

                1. Reality Bytes profile image91
                  Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Ahhh, reminiscing about the glory days.

                  1. thebrucebeat profile image59
                    thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    And predicting the future.

              2. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, how's that workin out fer ya?

                Did you SEE the town-hall meeting with Ryan and some other Bagger?

                Woooooo, the peeps were angry!

                And not paid-off angry, like we saw during the Healthcare debate...but REAL anger!

          3. JOE BARNETT profile image60
            JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Dear Mrs.Beck_ yes you do know me somewhat . abortion is not perfect but what other choices do we have. it's a complex issue. you do remember what used to happen before abortions don't you? Gay marriage? What's the point?

            In my last response to you however i made no mention of color as to my reason for support of the potus to you, but after going back through you comments i see that you are on a tangent about his color and you have come to some pretty wild conclusions.my first question is how did you reach these conclusions? what is your source? probably the same one that said he was not eligible to become presdent huh? isn't once enough for you and yours to learn?

            i think your responses come without much thought (as usual) and may be based on the hopes that stirring at some sort of some guilt/fear paranoia is a much more emotional issue and can create a debate. because i have seen "nothing" that he has done that could be construed as vengeance.i have only seen him help americans when "asked" and if possible. as i said i think simply you either want to stir the pot since he has shown his certificate to instigate another debate.  i wonder how many of the lowest common denominator will be attracted again . . . to such nonsense?

          4. cdub77 profile image88
            cdub77posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "We do not have time for this kind of silliness," Obama told reporters at the White House. "I've been puzzled at the degree to which this (story) just kept on going."

            "Normally I would not comment on something like this," the president said. But the country has "some enormous challenges out there" that it will not be able to effectively meet "if we're distracted."

            "We're not going to be able to (meet those challenges) if we spend time vilifying each other," he stressed. "We're not going to be able to do it if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts. We're not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers."

            --

            Dear anyone who finds this discussion.  Compare the differences between what Obama says here and the anger-fueled rants from Birther Brenda.

            Enough Said.

      2. thebrucebeat profile image59
        thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So now that he has done what you fringe folks have been screaming for, that isn't the problem.  The goalposts are moved and now he is evil for not doing it sooner.
        You see, we have all caught on to folks like you long ago.   It has nothing to do with any issue; not the BC, not his being Muslim, not him being a commie, or anything else, other than you hate the MAN HIMSELF!
        Reason, facts, knowledge, none of these are of any importance.  When one thing is resolved, it's on to the next.  Your issue is with him personally.  I am fairly sure I know why, but you will have to look at yourself in the mirror and determine that.  Maybe you look there and see a bigot and simply like what you see.  Ok, then admit it.  At least we can admire your honesty while finding your position repulsive.  But these constant fantasies that are developed to discredit him don't even allow us to admire your honesty.
        We are left with absolutely nothing to admire.

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Those accusations are totally un-called-for and totally untrue.
          I'm amazed that his supporters still think it's okay to attack and accuse others.  Is this still the result of his racial instigations, or have you always been so quick to attack other citizens?
          I've never looked at Obama's candidacy nor his Presidency as a matter of whether he's black or white.  HE and others like you have MADE it an issue themselves!
          I have always, and still do, look at the issues and policies he backs.   When he said in public during his campaign that he didn't want his daughters "punished with a baby" and that America should "spread the wealth around" and kept inserting the gay "rights" issue into every place he could,  I knew he wasn't right for this Country's top position of leadership (nor any lower position either!)

          It is YOUR swooping-in on me and anyone who openly looks at those issues, and attacking us, that's repulsive.  Your accusations don't even deserve me having to defend my position, but once again the liberal agenda that incites racial tension and controversy has reared its ugly head within your post.  Are you simply an Obama puppet, or have you always been biased against people who are anti-abortion and for traditional marriage?


          I don't give a rat's behind whether you "admire" me or not.  What I have a problem with is when you and other liberals attack people PERSONALLY when the discussion is about the American Presidency.   That is vile and bigoted and horrible.  You should know better than to do that.

          1. lovemychris profile image80
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Those accusations are totally un-called-for and totally untrue."

            Obama, to Trump. And all the rest of the Birthers. Shame on you.

            "you and other liberals attack people PERSONALLY "

            It was you who always called me a Hater. That's personal. You who say I hate all Jewish people. That's personal.
            Jew-Hating Anti-Semite.....how much more personal can you get?

            CONSTANTLY.

            1. profile image0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              That's because YOU spouted outright that hatred.  YOU printed it in black on white paper (actually, on screen).
              I have NEVER said I hated Obama.  I DON'T hate Obama.  I speak against his policies and the things that he PERSONALLY and PUBLICLY has said.  And since that's his mindset, yes, I speak against him for THOSE things.  HE is responsible to ME and all other citizens;  not ME responsible to him.
              I personally hope Obama will repent and change his life, thereby being a good example and a good President.  But that doesn't look likely to happen.  ESPECIALLY when you and others take everything he says and does as being right when it's obviously so WRONG.  In your mind, apparently, the man can do no wrong.  And apparently that's because of one thing----the color of his skin; that's what YOU see when you look at him.  What I see is a man who advocates horrid policies, immoral agenda, and thinks he's above questioning.  It wouldn't matter if his skin was lily-white; I'd still speak against those ideas and policies of his.

              1. lovemychris profile image80
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I said I hate Bush and Cheney, Bibi and Likud...how does that translate to all Jewish people?

                It doesn't. You used it to smear me, and now you see just how it feels.
                Difference is, I admit my hate, you don't.

                Which, as I have also said, has turned to pity now.
                I feel sorry for them when they die.

                1. profile image0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I admit no hate because I have no hatred.

                  Did you know there's a way to get rid of that hatred you seem so proud of displaying?

          2. thebrucebeat profile image59
            thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Didn't you say in your previous post that "He thinks because of the color of his skin..."

            Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

            If you are all about the issues, why is the birther bs even on your radar?  This isn't an issue.  He provided the same documentation that every white candidate has had to supply in every presidential election.  But he was held to a different standard.  Why do you think that is?  You really aren't fooling anyone.  You showed your hand in your accusation that he is making decisions based on the color of his skin.  Your words, nobody elses.  Own it.

            By the way, yes, I support the law of the United States defending the right of women to make their own decisions regarding their bodies.  I support gay rights, as they are Americans, just like you.  I do not support making Christian doctrine federal law.  I don't support unfunded tax cuts to the very wealthy to the detriment of the country as a whole, as Bush did.  Isn't that redistribution?  Of course it is.  Top tax rates have only been lower than today once in the last 80 years, during Bush I, and they can afford to pay a bit more for the good of the country.

            But this thread is about the long form bc, and why showing it was ever necessary.  Issues were not the reason.  This was a personal attack, and you guys lost.

            1. profile image0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Obama MADE skin color an issue by his immediate defense of Professor Gates in the controversy with the firefighter.  He has BROUGHT UP the issue of skin color time after time.  He advocates a policy of retribution by his socialist agenda.  He was "mentored" (he proudly stated) by a man (no, SEVERAL men!)who advocates black liberation theology.  WHEN are liberals going to admit that blacks are now FREE?   ALL blacks are now FREE!  WHEN are people going to STOP blaming whites who had nothing to do with black oppression for "sins" against today's blacks who've never been oppressed?   WHEN are liberal blacks and liberal whites (like you apparently are, from your picture) going to STOP attacking people like me for things I've never done and am NOT now doing?

              And let me tell you this-----it wasn't Obama's skin color that caused me and others to question his birth place (aside from the comments he himself made regarding skin color).  It was his support of Muslim countries and his anti-Christian remarks and actions, plus his immoral ideology.   Add it all up, and we have MANY reasons to question his fitness for the Presidency.

              1. thebrucebeat profile image59
                thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                When we are in a battle for the hearts and minds of moderate Muslims with a radical faction that seeks to radicalize the moderates, it seems that holding out a welcoming hand to moderate Muslims is exactly the right thing to do.  Since we are a secular country by law, where is the offense of being accepting of people of Muslim faith, or any other faith for that matter?  It is only a problem for those that seek to Christianize the U.S. as a matter of public policy, which the first amendment forbids.

                To me, this attitude makes him particularly well suited to lead our country right now.  Bush declared our wars to be battles between good and evil, and called them crusades.  Word choices of a diplomatic moron.  Obama will not make such child-like errors.

                Black and accepting of other cultures.  What's next ?

                1. profile image0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  We're not a secular country by law.
                  The first amendment forbids no such thing.

                  I'm amazed at the rhetoric of people who have so much more official learning than the average person, but who cannot even properly interpret things that are plain as day.

                  1. thebrucebeat profile image59
                    thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Interpret away!

                    The first amendment will not allow you to establish a religion of any kind in this country.  There is no official religion.  We are officially secular.  Interpret that away.

                    The racism behind this bc issue is plain as day to me.  There is no logic behind it, no evidence, no credibility.  Just desperation.  Today's long form revelation has confirmed that beyond any doubt.  It has nothing to do with issues, policies or leadership.

                    What is plain as day to me remains obscure to you.  You thinking the world should be made safe for Christianity makes other things "clear" to you.  But I'm defending my position, not deflecting to some other issue to avoid confronting the fact that my irrational accusations have been revealed as such. 

                    If it wasn't race, what was behind the late great birtherism?

              2. junko profile image64
                junkoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Brenda, Skin color is the reason you question Obama's fitness to be President. You know that is the reason for most of your post, the people who read your post here on hubpages get your drift. Black were freed from slavery after the civil war, racism in most case is worst than slavery. Your lack of understanding of the two,(slavery and racism) cause me to doubt your understanding of what you claim to know and understand about today's politica and social issues.l

      3. DTR0005 profile image83
        DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Brenda, every rational person in the US knew this. It was only the Tea Party/Birther kooks who kept hell a poppin' over the issue. So let's address now the fact that Trump has obviously lied as, up until last night, he was publicly spinning the fantasy that "his people in Hawaii were coming up with evidence that strongly points toward the President not being born in the US..." So the question is simple: Did the current Savior of the Tea Party, Donald Trump, lie through his teeth or didn't he? Cause from where I am sitting and having followed his interviews word-for-word, he is indeed lying.

        Birthers and the Tea Party have been really good at dosing out the venom so now it's time to "name your poison..."

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'm only interested in what policies Trump would or will back if he becomes a Candidate.   If he's an atheist, I wouldn't vote for him unless there's no other qualified Candidate.  If he's for abortion, I wouldn't want him for President.  If he's for gay marriage, I wouldn't want him for President.  If he's gonna try to be a tyrant like Obama and his minions are, I wouldn't want him for President.
          He has done something good by putting the pressure on for Obama to show responsibility concerning his birth certificate.   But that doesn't mean I want him to be the leader of the free world.  That would depend on his policies.

      4. JOE BARNETT profile image60
        JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        brenda! this doesn't even deserve a response but i will respond anyway and say that" this doesn't even deserve a response!"

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Nor does yours Joe.  But once again I'll defend myself.
          You and I have talked about this before.  You continue to back Obama, and I think that's simply because he's black.  You're against abortion, are you not?   You're against gay marriage, aren't you?   WHY would you back anyone who's FOR those things just because he's got the same skin color as you?
          Or maybe you ARE for those things.  I just think I recall you being against them?   At any rate, WHY do you persist in sticking up for a man based simply on skin color?   WHY do you persist in accusing me of bias when I've told YOU and others time and time again that it is Obama's POLICIES that I'm against?
          The man was either never taught good morality, or else he's deliberately determined to change American into something unrecognizeable.  One way, he needs counseling and other help!  The other way, he needs to resign!   Either way, he's not fit for the Presidency. 


          It was the same issue when Colin Powell jumped ship.  A Republican!  He went against the Party Platform and came out in public to stand behind Obama's run for President!   If Powell is for abortion and socialism and gay rights, then he should've never been in the Republican Party to start with, and he sure as heck should've never backed a far-Left Democratic Candidate.   There's no legitimate reason he would've backed Obama.  Racial bias is the only logical conclusion.  If it were because of the Iraq issue, he would've come out and said he didn't trust either McCain's affiliations NOR Obama's.

  2. BillyDRitchie profile image59
    BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago

    Hopefully this will be the end of the issue.....

    1. Aficionada profile image89
      Aficionadaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      We'll see.  It would be nice if all of the questions would go away.  I believe that this would have settled the issue, if it had been done nine months or more ago.  But in the process of trying to find out about the BC, curious people have uncovered a lot of other mysteries.

      1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
        BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The BC may be authentic, and I'm hoping it is (I'd hate to think the office of President could be so easily usurped by someone who is so blatantly unqualified).

        Barack Obama has far more serious issues that make him unqualified for the position as it is.....

      2. thebrucebeat profile image59
        thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        One of the great mysteries was the BC,and it has been proven the bunk that rational people have understood it to be for years.
        Keep chasing rainbows, my dear.  You are showing the reality behind these absurd claims, the real origin of your need to discredit this man.
        How many ways will you silly people need to be humiliated by your hatred of this guy?  He looks better and better, and  you make it easier and easier for him to get elected, as you show yourselves to be unserious conspiracy theorists with no credibility and less reason to take you seriously as a political force.
        Just say you hate him.  Whether because he is black, or liberal, or just much smarter than you, just come out of the closet and say you hate him.  That's all that is behind any of these pathetic attempts to smear him.
        At least then we could have a modicum of respect for your honesty.
        As it is, you are a punchline.

        1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
          BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Since when is disagreeing with a President's policies or criticizing his lack of leadership "hate"?  I've not heard a single conservative on these boards say they hate the man, and I have nothing against him personally.

          Why do liberals love to play the "hate" card so much?

          No, wait, brucebeat, don't tell me....you're not a liberal, right?

          1. thebrucebeat profile image59
            thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You're right.  You made my point.
            They don't say they hate him.  They make up absurd conspiracy stories instead, rather than be honest.  That's exactly what I said.
            Come out of the closet.  Admit that the underlying reality is a hatred of the man.  Why else make up ridiculous accusations, provide forged birth certificates, REPEATEDLY, that get immediately discredited.
            You guys hate him so much you are not afraid of the outright humiliation that you have brought upon yourselves with these patently silly witch hunts with ZERO evidence to support them.
            Say you hate him.  Allow us to at least respect your honesty, while you stop trying to hide your racism or ignorance or whatever it is that causes this deep seated hatred that has been obvious since he announced his candidacy.

            1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
              BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Because I don't hate the man.  Unlike you Bruce, I can disagree with a person's policies, or even consider them downright inept and incompetent without resorting to personal hatred.

              Obama seems like a nice enough guy, a great father, and probably someone you'd enjoy having a beer summit with.

              That said, I also consider him dangerous simply because he is so far in over his head.

              I'm surprised that someone who posts as eloquently as you do is unable to grasp this concept.....

              1. thebrucebeat profile image59
                thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The reason is this is not a policy issue.  It's not a policy issue.  Heck, it's not even an issue, and never was one.  These are personal attacks by desperate people with an agenda.  That agenda is hatred, for whatever reason.  Why else would the proponents of this idea produce multiple forged documents to try to bamboozle the american public?
                These are not serious people with policy issues.  They are personal adversaries.
                As for his leadership, he has demonstrated it over and over again.  You may not like where he's leading, but it took enormous leadership to get healthcare passed, credit card reform, DODT repealed.  He authorized the Seals to take out pirates on the high seas, and whether you agree with the Lybia decision or not it took command leadership to make that decision.
                Have honest disagreements with his decision.  Make credible arguments to challenge him.  But birther stuff and Muslim assumptions and communist ties and so on are sophmoric tactics of hateful, small minded children.

                1. lovemychris profile image80
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  waaaaaaaa! Baggers need a binky!

                  ahahahahaha, let's see how Trump defends himself now. Hey--I KNOW!:

                  I never SAID Obama wasn't born here, I just asked him to prove it!

                  Just like: Filing bankruptcy 3 times(more?) doesn't mean I failed as a businessman...

                  Cheating on my wife doesn't mean I'm not a good Sunday Christian.
                  Using my position as a media-wh*re doesn't mean I'm not a credible candidate for president.


                  LOL LOL LOLOLOLOLOL

                  Oh, how the smarmy have fallen.

                  1. DTR0005 profile image83
                    DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    NO SH!T!

          2. livelonger profile image88
            livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Why do you play the "liberal card" so much?

            Just because Hannity repeats something often doesn't mean you're required to parrot him.

            1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
              BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well, the liberal card has some basis to it....the hate card does not....

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image70
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Amen.

  3. Greek One profile image79
    Greek Oneposted 6 years ago

    the last time I tried to show my long form to a group of people the police were called in and I was cut off at the bar

  4. Ralph Deeds profile image70
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    There's an old saying that may be apt:  "Let him get his xxxx all the way out before you cut it off."

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol

      You nailed it Ralph.  He could have done this a long time ago; better to let the teabaggers make even bigger fools of themselves over the issue.

  5. tony0724 profile image61
    tony0724posted 6 years ago

    It's not Obamas birthplace I doubt. It's his ability to lead that I question because thus far he has shown none !

    1. JOE BARNETT profile image60
      JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Tony, how would  you expect expect him to lead in a two party system? what specifically would you liked to have seen from him?

    2. thebrucebeat profile image59
      thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It's really not that he has shown no leadership, but that you don't like where he has lead.
      To get the health care bill, DODT repealed, credit card reform and so on passed took tremendous leadership.  These were not easy tasks.
      Compare the leadership the GOP is providing.  The first four bills introduced by the new republican Speaker of the House went down to defeat.  He has done nothing to bring together the split in the republican party, and his prospects are poor toward accomplishing that.
      As for republican presidential leaders, none seem to be appearing.  With Trump leading several polls and alot of accusations to answer for, the GOP is looking as vacant and petty as it ever has.
      You can turn your back on the BC humiliation and try to change the conversation, but this is a major setback for the party.
      Actually, this is what I predicted would happen.  Obama was going to let more and more opponents hang themselves on this BC bs, and then pull the plug on them and watch them slither down the drain.
      The water's running.

  6. kerryg profile image86
    kerrygposted 6 years ago

    It's been shown.

    http://i52.tinypic.com/2rqohox.jpg

    I'm kind of irritated that he gave in to the crazies, since crazies by definition are beyond reason and I doubt this will be the end of it, but at least it might shut Trump up.

    1. Greek One profile image79
      Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Forgery!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    2. thebrucebeat profile image59
      thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I share your feelings.
      It didn't shut Trump up, though.  He is crowing about taking credit for this.  He will have to answer to the lies he's told of having an investigative team in Hawaii that were digging up "interesting" stuff and the unfounded attacks he has been making.
      I was hoping Obama would wait and pull an October surprise on these charlatans, but I knew he would pull the trigger sooner or later isolate these blowhards that can't help but let their hate show through these childish taunts.
      Oh, well, it just makes the re-election efforts that much easier.

      1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
        BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hate hate hate....we get it, Bruce.......(yawn)

        1. thebrucebeat profile image59
          thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          A non-response.
          I understand.

          1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
            BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            About as meaningful as your constant beating of the "hate" drum.....

            1. thebrucebeat profile image59
              thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm making a cogent argument as to why your bleating about policy is a total smoke screen.  Engage the argument.  Why was this so important to advance forgeries, commit crimes to advance the agenda?
              You have no response to this.  Explain what the motivation would be to take such extreme and embarrassing measures?  Can you not make compelling policy arguments?  Compelling leadership arguments?  Then make them.   Whining about being called out is not an argument.  It's an admission.

              1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
                BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Right, the constant "hate" mantra is really a cogent, compelling argument.

                You're a one-note, one-trick pony, Bruce......

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
                  Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You mean the constant hate and lies from Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, et al. Not to mention the lunacy from Beck.

                  1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
                    BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Hate hate hate, lies lies lies......well, at least Ralph gives us TWO dimensions.....

                2. thebrucebeat profile image59
                  thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  And you lack the ability to engage.
                  Or the courage.

                  1. BillyDRitchie profile image59
                    BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    With someone as one dimensional as you?  You're right, I don't care to engage....

  7. proudlib profile image61
    proudlibposted 6 years ago

    Should I even bother to read the hubs that are being written right now to refute the validity of this document?  I could probably write them myself.  Will they find something that proves it is a forgery?  will they see something on it that is proof of Obama's lack of fitness to be President?  How about, this proves nothing, he could still be a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia, or someplace else.  He is still the alien, the other, not one of us.  It is so discouraging that such vile verbal vomit is spewed so incessantly on these pages of political pap.  Help...I can't stop the alliteration!  sorry about that, chief.

    1. I am DB Cooper profile image70
      I am DB Cooperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I can't even tell anymore if those people are serious or if they're just trying to make the birthers and Tea Partiers look crazy. I think even some of the local Tea Party leaders in my area would look at some of the comments on this thread and say "whoa, I don't support the president's policies, but this stuff isn't what I believe".

      1. Aficionada profile image89
        Aficionadaposted 6 years ago in reply to this


        I don't even know anyone who believes the things that some people have accused in this thread, even among the most far-right people I know.

  8. Reality Bytes profile image91
    Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago

    If I remember correctly Clinton had his own share of conspiracies directed at him.

    Racism????

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      What? A Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy you say???

      Ahhhhhh--now you may have to admit there is some validity to it!

      They attack on whatever will get the base Riled up.

      With Obama it is what they play up as "Otherness".
      With Clinton, it was "that Horny Dog and his Uppity Wife."

  9. Aficionada profile image89
    Aficionadaposted 6 years ago

    Well, folks, let me say that I apologize for opening this thread. Initially I posted rather hastily because I was practically on my way out the door to a funeral and I have only just recently returned from it.

    I certainly should have employed some emoticons in those first posts, because the very imaginative (creative writer?) thebrucebeat took what he wanted to see in my posts and galloped wildly away.  I am totally out of breath after reading his accusations against me, especially the ones of the "When did you stop beating your wife?" variety.

    TBB, you asked me to come out of the closet, so Okay.  I thought it was a very positive move and very impressive that the President finally recognized that more and more moderates like me were growing increasingly puzzled by strange questions that have arisen through the course of the BC controversy. He realized that ignoring the big question would not make it go away, and so he took action.  I also predicted (accurately) that in spite of his action some people would still claim that the long-form BC was a fraud.  I alluded very briefly to questions that I have run across while I have been searching to see what the controversy was really all about - trying to find out for myself, rather than taking anyone else's words about it and rather than just hurling accusations at a fringe group as some folks do.

    I'm sure that all of you here have run across the claim that it was Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign that first stirred up the birther question. That may be an urban legend – I haven't tracked it to the ground yet – but it has been mentioned in several locations.  One of the most interesting items that I've run across is a newspaper headline when Mr. Obama was running for Senate that described him as "Kenya born."  The same expression was used on an article that was posted on the NPR website, but that has been removed.  Obviously, news media are not infallible and they can and do make mistakes. I only mention these because it has not just been the fringe element who have had some confusion or questions about the President's birthplace. And there have been numerous other, similar little bits and pieces here and there that have kept the BC question alive.  Because it was kept alive, I have seen more and more information that concerns me about him.  I wish it had been addressed much earlier, but it wasn't. 

    You, TBB, have said that he looks better and better.  That is your opinion.  With me, the reverse is true.  In my opinion, his time in office has shown him to be much weaker and less of a leader than his impressive campaign rhetoric promised him to be.  You asked me to be honest about my feelings towards him:  the real reason I was cool towards him from the beginning and have never warmed to him much (other than in the Somali pirate situation) is his inexperience.  Jesse Jackson (Sr) was not my favorite leader on the national scene, but at least he had the kind of experience that gave some promise of success.  I think he could have been more effective as the first African-American POTUS than Mr. Obama has turned out to be.

    The sort of vitriol that has flourished in this thread is something that I probably should have been able to predict.  I honestly thought there would be a few "ho-hum, he did it" yawning remarks and that would be it.  So sorry.  I will likely ask that this thread be closed, because I don't like having my name associated with the kind of vileness that I have seen here.

    1. thebrucebeat profile image59
      thebrucebeatposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry you feel  responsible for the tenor of the debate.  Your opening post was quite reasonable, but the one i responded to implied that these other "mysteries" has any more credibility than the bc issue did, opening the door for the continuation of the lynching of a president.

      It is a volatile issue, because it is about the politics of character assassination, and not policy.  You describe yourself as a moderate who was interested in the questions that had been brought up by the controversy.  The fact is, there never was a controversy.  It began to get traction on the backs of forgeries that were immediately discredited.  It was clearly and always agenda driven, and not remotely supported by the evidence. 

      If you started to take it seriously, then you were duped, and there was plenty of evidence out there that you were being duped, so you have to ask yourself why you would have allowed that to happen to you.  What's at the bottom?

      You seem a fairly reasonable person, and I apologize if I was too strident in my evaluation of your post.  I offer no such apology to the others who are now moving on to their next theory or declaring the long form a fraud, and so on.  These people have an agenda and it is driving their needs to discredit this guy.

      As for Obama looking better and better, I simply was referring to his prospects of getting elected, and this has helped.  We can argue policy and what you don't like and what I do, but on balance he has taken a big leap ahead with today's revelation.

      Hope you don't close it down, but let your conscience be your guide.

  10. Norah Casey profile image65
    Norah Caseyposted 6 years ago

    Closing thread at OP request

Closed to reply
 
working