Evidence presented by the U.S. government
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-07-2012, 02:50 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 02:47 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-07-2012 02:44 PM)StatiK Wrote:  My honest best guess is because Obama is still hearing shit about birth certificates. Wink It probably had more to do with votes than it did about anything else, but I can only speculate.
Birth certificates? Huh


Some people do not believe Obama was born in the US and isn't a US citizen. He cannot hold the office of president if that was the case. These people will not let this go.

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 02:51 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
Not an American? (I haven't gotten to know everybody yet because I'm new to the forum.)

There has been a lot of argument from a certain minority of conservatives in the U.S. that question whether or not President Obama was actually born in Hawaii and have, for a long time, demanded to see his birth certificate. They believe that he is a Kenyan-born Muslim. Donald Trump was among the most vocal of the celebrity "birthers" as that group of conservatives is called.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 03:03 PM (This post was last modified: 11-07-2012 03:09 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 02:51 PM)StatiK Wrote:  Not an American? (I haven't gotten to know everybody yet because I'm new to the forum.)

There has been a lot of argument from a certain minority of conservatives in the U.S. that question whether or not President Obama was actually born in Hawaii and have, for a long time, demanded to see his birth certificate. They believe that he is a Kenyan-born Muslim. Donald Trump was among the most vocal of the celebrity "birthers" as that group of conservatives is called.
No, I was born and grew up in Germany.

Wait, why does it matter where has was born? I don't see why it's anyone's business where he comes from. It shouldn't have any affect on anything. I mean, why would you have to be born in the U.S. to become a president? If he's doing a good job, then why the fuck does he need to be born in a specific country?

I like the name of the convervative group, as it's a spin off of "truthers". Smile

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
11-07-2012, 03:07 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 03:03 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-07-2012 02:51 PM)StatiK Wrote:  Not an American? (I haven't gotten to know everybody yet because I'm new to the forum.)

There has been a lot of argument from a certain minority of conservatives in the U.S. that question whether or not President Obama was actually born in Hawaii and have, for a long time, demanded to see his birth certificate. They believe that he is a Kenyan-born Muslim. Donald Trump was among the most vocal of the celebrity "birthers" as that group of conservatives is called.
No, I was born and grew up in Germany.

Wait, why the heck does it matter where has was born? Are there laws in the U.S. that forbid a foreigner to become a politician? I don't see why it's anyone's business where he comes from. I like the name of the convervative group, as it's a spin off of "truthers". Smile


The law doesn't prevent foreigner-born individuals from becoming politicians as you probably heard about Arnold Schwarzeneger being the Governator of California, but it does prevent someone from being the President of the United States. The highest office in the land, Commander in Chief, nuclear launch capability, and all of that. Smile

Yeah, the birthers name is a spin off of the truthers - A lot of Tea Partiers, not all, but many were/are birthers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 03:14 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 03:07 PM)StatiK Wrote:  
(11-07-2012 03:03 PM)Vosur Wrote:  No, I was born and grew up in Germany.

Wait, why the heck does it matter where has was born? Are there laws in the U.S. that forbid a foreigner to become a politician? I don't see why it's anyone's business where he comes from. I like the name of the convervative group, as it's a spin off of "truthers". Smile


The law doesn't prevent foreigner-born individuals from becoming politicians as you probably heard about Arnold Schwarzeneger being the Governator of California, but it does prevent someone from being the President of the United States. The highest office in the land, Commander in Chief, nuclear launch capability, and all of that. Smile

Yeah, the birthers name is a spin off of the truthers - A lot of Tea Partiers, not all, but many were/are birthers.
I rephrased it and removed the "politicians" part, but unfortunately you replied to the unedited version. Undecided

Still, why do you have to be born in the USA to become a president? When was the law established and what was the reasoning for it?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 03:18 PM (This post was last modified: 11-07-2012 03:25 PM by StatiK.)
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 03:14 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-07-2012 03:07 PM)StatiK Wrote:  The law doesn't prevent foreigner-born individuals from becoming politicians as you probably heard about Arnold Schwarzeneger being the Governator of California, but it does prevent someone from being the President of the United States. The highest office in the land, Commander in Chief, nuclear launch capability, and all of that. Smile

Yeah, the birthers name is a spin off of the truthers - A lot of Tea Partiers, not all, but many were/are birthers.
I rephrased it and removed the "politicians" part, but unfortunately you replied to the unedited version. Undecided

Still, why do you have to be born in the USA to become a president? When was the law established and what was the reasoning for it?


It's part of the U.S. Constitution. "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligibale to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

That's the way it has always been. Smile

Edit to add: I should point out that the Constitution lays out the framework for how our entire system of government works. This means that if President Obama were actually born in Kenya then he would be ineligible for the office of President, which is what many conservatives were hoping for.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 04:10 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 02:32 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-07-2012 02:16 PM)StatiK Wrote:  Yeah. There is. That doesn't mean that you're privvy to seeing it. Wink
I should have phrased it differently.

i.e. Unlike the "conspiracies" named above, there actually was no physical evidence released for this one.

The result is the same though. By using that logic you could believe in God by claiming that there is proof for him but nobody is privy to seeing it.
Mormons. Duh.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 04:51 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
The reason anyone could tie it in conspiracy to the birthplace of Obama issue is because of the timing of it. The week right before it was announced they killed Osama Bin Laden was when they released the "long form" style of birth certificate after the months of repeated moronic talks from Donald Trump... Who still claims he can go and get his real official birth certificate if he wanted, which is false since it is US law that only copies of birth certificates can be released from Hospital records.

As far as I saw, there is not many here saying you shouldn't be skeptical. This idea contains more than just being baseline skeptical because you have to acknowledge the ramifications and be skeptical on all fronts. I've seen much in this forum that one would say is not accepting the official given story; which is a good thing, but it often gets to a point where that isn't applied with the conspiracy theory claims which as well as the story itself, need skeptical examination. (Mostly that was particularly by ArticSage who got the boot since he carried that along with attitude across the whole board)

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 05:22 PM (This post was last modified: 11-07-2012 05:26 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
(11-07-2012 04:51 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  As far as I saw, there is not many here saying you shouldn't be skeptical. This idea contains more than just being baseline skeptical because you have to acknowledge the ramifications and be skeptical on all fronts. I've seen much in this forum that one would say is not accepting the official given story; which is a good thing, but it often gets to a point where that isn't applied with the conspiracy theory claims which as well as the story itself, need skeptical examination. (Mostly that was particularly by ArticSage who got the boot since he carried that along with attitude across the whole board)
Don't worry about that, I'm not going to mention it anywhere else. Although I think TheArcticSage was more than just a conspiracy theorist. The extend to which he denied the physical evidence for both the Holocaust and 9/11 was astounding. I still don't see how he can claim that the Holocaust didn't happen while providing Holocaust deniers and right-wing extremists as his source. Especially those whose claims have been evaluated by several scientists and have been found to be false.

As I've said, I'm very open to actual evidence concerning this. The day they release a photo of his corpse will be the day that my current position becomes null and void. They will probably do so in a few years because then it wouldn't be nearly as harmful as doing it right now. Until that day, only those involved in the whole thing will know the truth.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2012, 07:24 PM
RE: Evidence presented by the U.S. government
In answer to the "why" the Constitution requires you be a natural born citizen: the logic for it was, at the time the document was written all of Europe was ruled by royals and most of them were related. If the king of England died without an heir, then a royal from another country could come in and claim the thrown. It happened all the time. It became so incestuous that many of the leaders of the warring nations in WWI were actually cousins and knew each other very well. The Great War was largely a family squabble, and millions of people paid the price for it with their lives. Anyway, when the US Constitution was written, they were making a point about ensuring no one claimed any kind of "royalty" right over the US to avoid the problem of foreign royalty coming over and trying to take over. How real the threat was even in 1787 I couldn't say but it happened often enough at the time that they made it a point to put a stop to it.

Whether or not that provision has outlived it usefulness is a matter of debate but, given the current climate in the US, it's a sure bet no one is going to push to amend the constitution to change that part any time soon.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: