Michael Bloomberg: Birther Issue A 'Terrible Mistake' For Republicans

[washamericom]

I could give a shit what Bloomberg says, a MAJORITY of people are Asking that the Obama show his Long Form BIRTH CERTIFCATE.

The majority aren't asking jack shit like that, just a bunch of ******* retarded idiots who refuse to accept the truth that has already been put out there, just because those retarded dickheads don't know the law and refuse to accept the truth doesn't mean there's any conspiracy, but hey, please keep up the birther issue, it will ensure that hardly anyone votes for the dickheaded Repugs who keep talking about it.

this sounds like panic to me.

 

[washamericom]

The evidence in case someone still hasn't gotten it

FactCheck.org: Born in the U.S.A.

The State department's requirements for proof of citizenship have already been met, no where does it sy a long form birth certificate is required, thats just dickheaded birthers hifting goalposts.

you're missing the point of selective transparency. we're following the money. once we see what money was used for what, we should have a more transparent picture... so to speak.

 

[G.T.]

I could give a shit what Bloomberg says, a MAJORITY of people are Asking that the Obama show his Long Form BIRTH CERTIFCATE.

uh, no they're not.

about a third of registered voters... tens of millions

I wonder if you know what Majority means?

 

[G.T.]

The evidence in case someone still hasn't gotten it

FactCheck.org: Born in the U.S.A.

The State department's requirements for proof of citizenship have already been met, no where does it sy a long form birth certificate is required, thats just dickheaded birthers hifting goalposts.

you're missing the point of selective transparency. we're following the money. once we see what money was used for what, we should have a more transparent picture... so to speak.

The same Registrar that Certifies the COLB that was released as valid in any Court of Law, is the Registrar that would Certify that his Long Form is real, also.

In other words, you don't trust their seal now, why are you going to trust it *if* a long form was released? Makes no sense.

 

[washamericom]

uh, no they're not.

about a third of registered voters... tens of millions

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ?? i'm no math major, but i wouldn't use one third and majority in the same sentence. to be clear, about one half of rebublicans. anyone know about independents and democrats ??

 

[G.T.]

about a third of registered voters... tens of millions

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ??

Being a birther shows that you lack analytical skills, is all. I'm guessing that's where he gathered your brain size. I *am* however just guessing.

 

[VaYank5150]

about a third of registered voters... tens of millions

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ?? i'm no math major, but i wouldn't use one third and majority in the same sentence. to be clear, about one half of rebublicans. anyone know about independents and democrats ??

THIS, is about the only thing truthful you have posted so far....

 

[washamericom]

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ?? i'm no math major, but i wouldn't use one third and majority in the same sentence. to be clear, about one half of rebublicans. anyone know about independents and democrats ??

THIS, is about the only thing truthful you have posted so far....

An estimated 201.5 million U.S. citizens age 18 or over will be eligible to vote Nov. 2, although many are not now registered.

Of these, about 55 million are registered Republicans. About 72 million registered Democrats.

About 42 million are registered as independents, under some other minor party or with a "No Party" designation.


once again, i never said majority. let's just say quite a few. how bout the shoe on the other foot ? what would you do.? abject panic.

 

[washamericom]

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ??

Being a birther shows that you lack analytical skills, is all. I'm guessing that's where he gathered your brain size. I *am* however just guessing.

we all are.

 

[washamericom]

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ?? i'm no math major, but i wouldn't use one third and majority in the same sentence. to be clear, about one half of rebublicans. anyone know about independents and democrats ??

THIS, is about the only thing truthful you have posted so far....

please show me what i have posted that isn't true, this is a direct challenge to you. put up or shut up.
why do you think the president won't show ?

 

[G.T.]

I noticed. Aren't you the guy that said Atlas Shrugged will change the face of American politics, and then in the same thread said that you hadn't even fully read it? Those analytical skills.

 

[washamericom]

All of which are die hard Republicans. Tell me again how 1/3 of registered Republican voters constitutes "a MAJORITY of people" in your little brain?

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ??

Being a birther shows that you lack analytical skills, is all. I'm guessing that's where he gathered your brain size. I *am* however just guessing.

you're saying that questioning shows a lack of analyitical skills, interesting. do you see why there may be a controversial issue on the president's plate with this.?

 

[washamericom]

I noticed. Aren't you the guy that said Atlas Shrugged will change the face of American politics, and then in the same thread said that you hadn't even fully read it? Those analytical skills.

yes, if you look back you will see that was within the framework of facetiousness. you're not the only one, magie may missed that too. i'll try to find it for you. i have read each of her books many times, starting when i was in junior high.

 

[G.T.]

i never said majority. how do you know what size my brain is ??

Being a birther shows that you lack analytical skills, is all. I'm guessing that's where he gathered your brain size. I *am* however just guessing.

you're saying that questioning shows a lack of analyitical skills, interesting. do you see why there may be a controversial issue on the president's plate with this.?

No, I'm saying that irrational questioning when all of the viable answers are available, is a lack of analytical skills.

There's no controversy.

The $2mil spent on his legal team was mostly for his CAMPAIGN. This is normal for all campaigns. Birthers took that number, and said he spent 2mil to combat birther issues.

You're uncovering all types of false information, and saying the PRESIDENT'S the one appearing fishy.

No.

The Stata of Hawaii has stated publicly where he was born.

It is the State of Hawaii that would confirm the long form bc. as accurate.

Therefore, you're calling an agency a liar out one side of your mouth, while calling something that would come from the same agency *proof* of something. It makes no sense, it is a logical fallacy.

 

[washamericom]

I noticed. Aren't you the guy that said Atlas Shrugged will change the face of American politics, and then in the same thread said that you hadn't even fully read it? Those analytical skills.

atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My original post:


this is your last chance to read the book before the movie comes out.

i have waited my whole life for this. when i was in high school i discovered ayn rand, it changed my life , and much to my delight, would end up in a conservative website framed by objectivism.
i remember thinking, someday, once the internet is invented, this will be my political philosohpy and i will take it to the people..

life imitates art. we are dagney taggert and hank rearden (the protagonists) and the democratic party (led by one barrak obama... if that is your real name), is the government, and "mr. thompson".

you are going to be seeing and hearing and feeling atlas shrugged a lot in the coming time until the 2012 election.

as wonderfual as the original novel is, no, magnificient... the movie will better present to the masses, that big government is not only wrong, in this country, according to our constitution, it is immoral.

i further suggest that this hollywood production will play a large roll in unseating the president of obama, how ultimately and deliciously ironic. how do you like us now.


panel #68.

You neocons LIKE that the manly "producers" drop off the grid and form a commune in the end? Because that's exactly what they effing do! You like that do you, hippies?


me...

shhhhh, i haven't seen it yet

is this what you are talking about ?


sometimes i use humor/sarcasm instead of personal insults and name calling. i don't know if this speaks to your observational skills or not.

 

[washamericom]

Being a birther shows that you lack analytical skills, is all. I'm guessing that's where he gathered your brain size. I *am* however just guessing.

you're saying that questioning shows a lack of analyitical skills, interesting. do you see why there may be a controversial issue on the president's plate with this.?

No, I'm saying that irrational questioning when all of the viable answers are available, is a lack of analytical skills.

There's no controversy.

The $2mil spent on his legal team was mostly for his CAMPAIGN. This is normal for all campaigns. Birthers took that number, and said he spent 2mil to combat birther issues.

You're uncovering all types of false information, and saying the PRESIDENT'S the one appearing fishy.

No.

The Stata of Hawaii has stated publicly where he was born.

It is the State of Hawaii that would confirm the long form bc. as accurate.

Therefore, you're calling an agency a liar out one side of your mouth, while calling something that would come from the same agency *proof* of something. It makes no
sense, it is a logical fallacy.

seriously ? , this birther issue, isn't controversial ? i haven't called any agency a "liar". why are there other long forms from hawaii 1961 on line ? really the only viable answer i seek is "why won't he show it?"

once again, please show me, false information or "lie's" i have posted.

 

[misteroboto]

by saying they want to actually "see" it means the Birthers want to actually walk up and touch the document and have it tested and verified and carbon dated along with testimony from the person that typed it the company that printed it and the actual doctors nurses that were ther when obama popped out along with the time date and geopositional sattellite telemetry information.

then and only then when this information is presented to EACH person that questions the president location of birth will this issue be resolved

 

[G.T.]

you're saying that questioning shows a lack of analyitical skills, interesting. do you see why there may be a controversial issue on the president's plate with this.?

No, I'm saying that irrational questioning when all of the viable answers are available, is a lack of analytical skills.

There's no controversy.

The $2mil spent on his legal team was mostly for his CAMPAIGN. This is normal for all campaigns. Birthers took that number, and said he spent 2mil to combat birther issues.

You're uncovering all types of false information, and saying the PRESIDENT'S the one appearing fishy.

No.

The Stata of Hawaii has stated publicly where he was born.

It is the State of Hawaii that would confirm the long form bc. as accurate.

Therefore, you're calling an agency a liar out one side of your mouth, while calling something that would come from the same agency *proof* of something. It makes no
sense, it is a logical fallacy.

seriously ? , this birther issue, isn't controversial ? i haven't called any agency a "liar". why are there other long forms from hawaii 1961 on line ? really the only viable answer i seek is "why won't he show it?"

once again, please show me, false information or "lie's" i have posted.

Because "what he showed" says right on it that it's good in ANY COURT OF LAW as proof of his Birth records.

And it's been verified as accurate by the State of Hawaii.

So by then requesting for seeing yet ANOTHER document, which again is only Certified by the SAME ******* AGENCY, you become a bit kooky and you're over-reaching your bounds in saying that the State's verification has not been good enough for you, when it's good IN ANY COURT OF LAW, as it states right on the very document.

 

[kiwiman127]

The only problem for the left is that the longer the birther issue continues....the more people that are slowly starting to say "Hmmmm...." about it. A year ago, I thought this issue was dead. Now it's back, and it's actually growing. Lots of people are starting to wonder about it. I think its a non-issue, simply because:

A) If he was born here well it's a non issue.
B) If he wasn't, no one will ever pursue or confirm it. Disqualifying the 1st black president would be a catastrophe for blacks and no one will allow that to happen.

But, people are pushing it, and the Obama response to it is weird at least.

The bolded comment all goes to show, if you repeat it often enough, it must be fact.
Birthers have never stopped repeating their baseless accusations and as there is a segment of the population that are gullible enough to believe anything that they have heard over and over and over again.
Fact is that every bit of "evidence" the birthers have submitted has been proven to be bogus. The Supreme Court, who's majority are conservatives, have refused to hear the case because of lack of evidence. Where as the Obama birth certificates have been declared legal. There were two newspapers carried Obama's birth announcement after which they received from Hawaii's Health Department.
Yet, the birthers carry on. What an embarrassment to America.

 

[Avatar4321]

Of course it's a losing issue. It was started by the freakin Clinton campaign. Look at where Hillary is right now.

Why on earth is anyone wasting time on this nonsense. Obama wants to keep this issue alive so he can paint his enemies as stupid.