tk421;735771 wrote:Only if she registered his birth with the appropriate U.S. embassy, I believe.
O-Trap;735774 wrote:I've always been curious about this. What if he's born in international waters, on a personally owned boat, and there is no embassy?
Not the case, I know. I'm just curious.
I Wear Pants;735743 wrote:They'd say it was fake no matter what he showed you or no matter who said the documents were real.
Prescott;735704 wrote:April 7, 2011
Read more: Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=254401#ixzz1Iro6dUcz
I understand a certificate of live birth has been given as proof. Is that correct?
Jamiaca Hospital of New York City
The document released to Newsmax is below. It shows that Trump was born in New York, June 14, 1946.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/donaldtrump-birthcertificate-newsmax/2011/03/28/id/390930
The link below clearly proves that Trump was born in the United States of America.
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/TrumpCertificate2.pdf
stlouiedipalma;735818 wrote:Wow! I didn't realize that so many of you are Birthers. You may deny it, but your actions prove otherwise.
I think the root of Pitts' column is that the depiction of Obama "not being like us" is simply code for "he's a N*****". Let's face it, it's out there, whether spoken or not. I remember when he was running for the nomination and several of my former co-workers told me they would "never vote for a N*****". I really thought that we had gotten beyond all that, but apparently we haven't. Those who choose to de-legitimize his citizenship are simply using one thing in place of another. You may be against his policies or his politics, but to keep raising the birth thing tells me that you haven't gotten past the fact that he was elected President. Pitts simply chose to put it in words that many have thought of but don't use in mixed company.
O-Trap;735820 wrote:I, for one, am not a birther. However, I don't think "he's not from here" is equitable to a racial issue. I think it's more a "He's not my candidate, and I don't like him, so I'm gonna find a reason why he shouldn't be president."
I honestly think it would be the same if he was an elderly white man who *might* be from Poland, so long as he was still a Democrat.
Absolutely. Either side would be using this issue balls out regardless of skin color if they smelled blood in the water.stlouiedipalma;735822 wrote:Do you really believe that?
I believe that would be the majority, yes.stlouiedipalma;735822 wrote:Do you really believe that?
fish82;735826 wrote:Absolutely. Either side would be using this issue balls out regardless of skin color if they smelled blood in the water.
O-Trap;735827 wrote:Look at how much many Republicans seemed to hate President Clinton when he was in office, and how "Watergate" was thrown around constantly. If the scandal had instead been that he was not a citizen, you don't think they would have been using that?
Do you really believe this? If you do you look as foolish as the author of the column.stlouiedipalma;735818 wrote:I think the root of Pitts' column is that the depiction of Obama "not being like us" is simply code for "he's a N*****". Let's face it, it's out there, whether spoken or not. I remember when he was running for the nomination and several of my former co-workers told me they would "never vote for a N*****". I really thought that we had gotten beyond all that, but apparently we haven't. Those who choose to de-legitimize his citizenship are simply using one thing in place of another. You may be against his policies or his politics, but to keep raising the birth thing tells me that you haven't gotten past the fact that he was elected President. Pitts simply chose to put it in words that many have thought of but don't use in mixed company.
Why wouldn't he? For example: A 2007 Rasmussen poll showed 61% of democrats believed the white male George Bush and his white male side kick Dick Cheney, planned, had foreknowledge, or were not convinced they were not involved (unsure) in the attacks on 9/11. 42% of democrats beleived the white male duo planned or had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks in a Zogby poll. Sounds like code for honky, cracker, redneck, or maybe gringo. I am glad you don't have to use **** for derogatory white slang.stlouiedipalma;735822 wrote:Do you really believe that?
Ty Webb;735685 wrote: 2.Trump's Birth Certificate lists Jamaica as his birthplace,therefor he is not able to serve
But none quite so diverting!ptown_trojans_1;735937 wrote:This thread just makes me shake my head.
There are way more important issues than these. Come on.
jhay78;735766 wrote:
You don't have to be a "birther" or a nutcase to at least ask some questions about Obama's birth. The fact that millions have been spent to keep things under wraps is what is keeping this going.
I Wear Pants;735955 wrote:Yes you do. Millions can be spent on one damned press conference. You guys act like there are people out there sneaking around and using James Bond tactics to keep some giant secret under wraps. But pretty much anything the president does will be expensive by the very nature of it.
I've yet to hear a birther explain how or why Obama's birth would be in the newspaper in Hawaii when he was born. Was there some conspiracy to make their son appear to be a US citizen in case he may ever want to, be qualified for, and get the support to run for president 50 years later?
