May 21 2012

Birther Nonsense Poisons 2012 Election

Boy, if you want to help President Obama win reelection, one of the best ways to do so is to park your brain and go full Birther – ignoring all other critical issues facing this country.

The state of Hawaii has responded to Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett’s request for proof that President Barack Obama was in fact born in the Aloha State.

The Hawaii attorney general’s office has reportedly told Bennett that there are steps he needs to take in order to confirm President Obama’s birth records.

Those steps include Bennett proving that he legitimately needs confirmation in order to update the records at his office.

This is so stupid, and it reflects stupidity on those trying to unseat this inexperienced liberal politician before he can do more harm to our economy and country. How does this affect the economy, jobs, the rising national debt, the crumbling family, our military, our health care, our education system,….? How?

Let me be clear here – President Obama is a US Citizen by birth. Why?

Because his mother was a US Citizen. No other aspect of the definition of citizenship comes into play because where you are born has no bearing over who your parents are. None.

There is no question of soil or location or statehood. A child born at sea, in Europe, Asia or Africa to a US citizen is a US Citizen. A child born in space or on the moon to a US Citizen is a US Citizen.

All those who explore beyond this fact are just being foolish. And since it was Obama’s mother who was the US Citizen (not the father where paternity issues could arise), there is no doubt about his lineage.

If you want to make Obama look good by allowing him to compare himself to confused and distracted fools – go right ahead. But don’t blame anyone else if Obama wins election because no one b0ught into the Bogus Birther Brouhaha.

Update: As predicted, the Birther die-hards are having trouble adjusting to reality. Here is a very interesting story about in vitro children born overseas:

She found that the U.S. State Department did not share in her joy when she went to the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to apply for citizenship for her children.

An embassy staffer wanted to know whether Lavi got pregnant at a fertility clinic. She said yes and was told that her children were not eligible for citizenship unless she could prove that the egg or sperm used to create the embryo was from an American citizen.

“I was humiliated and horrified,” Lavi said. “We’re talking about the children I gave birth to. Of course they’re my children.”

The incident points out what critics say is a glaring inequity in U.S. citizenship regulations. A child adopted overseas by a U.S. citizen is eligible to become an American, and a baby born in the USA is American even if the parents are not.

But a child born to a U.S. citizen overseas through the increasingly common practice of in vitro fertilization with embryos from donor eggs and sperm is not American, unless an American is one of the donors.

Let me recap for the stubborn ones: If Obama was ADOPTED by his mother from Kenya he would be a US Citizen. So OF COURSE if she gave birth to him he would be as well. I mean – really??

71 responses so far

71 Responses to “Birther Nonsense Poisons 2012 Election”

  1. Louctiel says:

    “Doesn’t matter, I don’t get a choice, it’s fake so that’s the reality we have to deal with. ”

    Repeating something doesn’t make it true.

    “I could just as easily state that I get the idea that you want it to be real, but that doesn’t matter either because you can’t turn that fake certificate into a real one.”

    There you go, repeating it is fake again. Doesn’t make it so.

    “Why would I spend hours and hours looking at it? why would you? was it really that hard to find something about it that you can claim is not fake? ”

    Because unlike you, I don’t trust people with an agenda. You looked at it and said “it’s fake.” You had no understanding of the process or the very “evidence” you were basing your conclusion upon, and yet you are standing by it. I, on the other hand, wanted to see, know and understand how people were arriving at a conclusion. Unlike you, I went looking for the facts, and did not rely on others. Such a fact finding journey takes time – time that you apparently were too busy or lazy to give.

    But let’s be clear here – you put your best argument up as to why you think the birth certificate is a fake. That argument is based upon something you admit you have no understanding. Therefore, your conclusions are not based on facts or demonstrable evidence. They are simply based on either what you “feel” what you want to believe or both.

    “let’s try to keep this on an adult level. If you’re gonna start claiming you have done something more hours than I have, would you please submit your time sheets? ”

    I am on an adult level. You admitted you didn’t look at the birth certificate for more than 5 minutes. I have looked at it and written about it in posts that anyone can see took hours to compose and make. So please, if you want to talk about being “an adult,” don’t try to berate people for looking at something for longer than the 5 minutes you claim you looked at it.

    “See how dumb it can be when you start making up things to try to explain things. Reality is much easier. You don’t have to deals with all those lies…”

    This is one of the most amazing things about conspiracy theorists. When they get trapped, they just turn to another subject. That is their MO. They come to a conclusion based on ignorance and then when that conclusion is challenged in light of their ignorance, they change the subject.

    For the record, I believe Barack Obama is a liar. That being said, his being a liar does not preclude or excuse those who are against him from making up lies as well.

  2. Redteam says:

    louctiel,

    “Repeating something doesn’t make it true. ”

    Ditto.

  3. Neo says:

    The adoption rule went into effect in 2001, so if Obama had been adopted, he would only be eligible to be a US citizen if the adoption occurred after 2001.

  4. Layman says:

    Neo: OK, that’s a new one. Please enlighten me. I’ve never heard anyone suggest that Obama’s mother wasn’t his real mother and that he was adopted. Is that what your suggesting? Why else your last post?

  5. Redteam says:

    Layman, I don’t want to start a whole new skreed, but one rumor is that Obama is really the son of xxxxxxxx and Malcolm X. That he was born in New York City and that he was taken to Hawaii by that communist guy that lives there(you know his name) and the ‘birth’ was arranged there (since Hawaii had different ‘birth rules). I don’t think that qualifies as an ‘adoption’.

    This is a rumor that ‘could’ be true, but I’d have to see a whole lot more evidence. After his time as president is over, we’ll know all these things and how the population was fooled, we may even find out who was behind it all.

    but as I said. I’m just saying this because of what was said above. It’s not my story.

  6. Redteam says:

    Layman, following up: xxxxxx above is Jo Ann Newman.

    “Obama’s real name is Bâri? M. Shabazz, born in New York City, on October 28, 1959″, son of Jo Ann Newman and Malcolm X.

    Google it, it’s as likely as any other rumor and no more likely than some.

  7. Louctiel says:

    “Ditto.”

    Good. We both agree that your continual repeat that birth certificate is a fake doesn’t make it true.

  8. Redteam says:

    “Good. We both agree that your continual repeat that birth certificate is a fake doesn’t make it true.”

    no we agree that you didn’t understand that your repeating that the birth certificate is not a fake is going to make it real.

    Thanks for finally agreeing..

  9. Layman says:

    Hey RT:

    First of all a confession. I don’t know squat about digital documents. So I called someone who does. My brother in law is a pain and we don’t get along all that well but he’s a geek extraordinare. I asked him about the question of layering and if it proves a document is a forgery.

    When he got done laughing at me he suggested I scan a ten or twenty dollar bill, save it as a PDF, and then open it in Illustrator. He said, ” That will give you your answer.”

    I’m not that into this argument so I’ll leave that to you. Please report back your findings.

  10. Redteam says:

    well, since dollar bills are printed in layers, maybe it’ll show that they are. as it did the BC, which is not supposed to have been, it was supposedly scanned.
    Besides Layman, you and I both know that when you ‘call up an expert’ you usually get the answer you want. After all isn’t that the reason to call an expert on your subject; to prove you are right? Rarely do you call up an expert to prove you are wrong.

    Now if you want a ‘real’ expert, I know this guy, louctiel that you can call up. He keeps time sheets on how many hours he studys ‘your’ subject. or something…

  11. Redteam says:

    Layman, here is a link that will describe the us currency printing process and how it is done in a very large number of steps or layers.

    http://moneyfactory.gov/uscurrency/theproductionprocess.html