Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Birthers

PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:02:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://en.wikinews.org...

President Obama has gone above and beyond to prove that he is indeed a United States citizen, and the fact is more than apparent, so let this thread not be about stupid conspiracy theories. Instead, let's take a different approach: even if President Obama were not a US-born citizen (which he clearly is), what would it matter?

We are no longer living in colonial times, and the British are not trying to infiltrate the highest office of our land, and it is clear that President Obama is not a spy or informant of another land. Unless you're Glenn Beck, you should realize that--if even only on a superficial level--President Obama's loyalties lie with the United States, and he at least thinks he's helping us.

So again I posit the question: even if President Obama were not an American citizen, why would it matter?
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:05:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:02:10 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

So again I posit the question: even if President Obama were not an American citizen, why would it matter?

Then he wouldn't be eligible to be President of the United States. That'd be pretty significant. lol
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:06:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:05:05 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Then he wouldn't be eligible to be President of the United States. That'd be pretty significant. lol

Lolz. I thought this was pretty obvious.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:08:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:05:05 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:02:10 PM, PoeJoe wrote:

So again I posit the question: even if President Obama were not an American citizen, why would it matter?

Then he wouldn't be eligible to be President of the United States. That'd be pretty significant. lol

And I'm saying that the rule is pointless in this situation, because regardless of whether you believe President Obama is US-born, you should still at least see that it doesn't make much difference--at least in this instance.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:11:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:08:10 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
And I'm saying that the rule is pointless in this situation, because regardless of whether you believe President Obama is US-born, you should still at least see that it doesn't make much difference--at least in this instance.

In this instance, yes. However, this instance isn't indicative of all instances that will follow. The Constitution exists for principle, not to be used as a document for a case by case basis.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:17:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:11:05 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:08:10 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
And I'm saying that the rule is pointless in this situation, because regardless of whether you believe President Obama is US-born, you should still at least see that it doesn't make much difference--at least in this instance.

In this instance, yes. However, this instance isn't indicative of all instances that will follow. The Constitution exists for principle, not to be used as a document for a case by case basis.

Okay, let's take the hypothetical further.

Do you really think that the United States would seriously elect a spy?

Okay, maybe so. But after finding out that the United States president is a spy, don't you think, then, that the people would impeach said president (if these accusations are actually accurate).

In any case, the birthers need to shut up about this one.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:21:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:11:05 PM, Nags wrote:

In this instance, yes. However, this instance isn't indicative of all instances that will follow. The Constitution exists for principle, not to be used as a document for a case by case basis.

The rule should be maintained because it is a rule? Misses PoeJoe's intent entirely. Think of it another way, if that clause never existed, would it matter?

@ PoeJoe, it was a safety net to keep ill intended people from governing - a birth certificate doesn't give a free pass from that ideological frame set. Subverts the whole idea of the president being a representative of democratic voting procedure.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:22:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:17:14 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
Okay, let's take the hypothetical further.

Do you really think that the United States would seriously elect a spy?

Maybe. I don't have much faith in the American electorate, especially considering the elections of the past decade.

Okay, maybe so. But after finding out that the United States president is a spy, don't you think, then, that the people would impeach said president (if these accusations are actually accurate).

What could we impeach the spy for? It is certainly constitutional at this point. And it's highly unlikely that it would be found out that the spy is a spy before the spy extracts all the information from the US it needs, and destroys it. Although, Presidents Bush and Obama have done a noble job of destroying American in their own right. Who needs a spy when the American public will elect such terrible Presidents?

In any case, the birthers need to shut up about this one.

Oh, right. Who cares about the Constitution nowadays?
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:41:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:22:26 PM, Nags wrote:
What could we impeach the spy for? It is certainly constitutional at this point. And it's highly unlikely that it would be found out that the spy is a spy before the spy extracts all the information from the US it needs, and destroys it.

Okay, let's suppose that the United States elects a spy, and said spy leaks all the secret information, and the US is doomed. You realize that even in this scenario, playing by your own rules, that the constitutional clause disallowing foreign-born people from taking the President's office does nothing to prevent such a scenario from happening, right?

In any case, the birthers need to shut up about this one.

Oh, right. Who cares about the Constitution nowadays?

The Constitution is not infallible. On this issue, I'm saying it's ineffective.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:46:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:41:51 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
Okay, let's suppose that the United States elects a spy, and said spy leaks all the secret information, and the US is doomed. You realize that even in this scenario, playing by your own rules, that the constitutional clause disallowing foreign-born people from taking the President's office does nothing to prevent such a scenario from happening, right?

Yes, it would. The spy would have never been elected in the first place because the Constitution would not have allowed it. Besides, lowering the probability of something happening is not a bad thing.

The Constitution is not infallible. On this issue, I'm saying it's ineffective.

I've already explained how it effective in this situation.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:51:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:46:23 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:41:51 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
Okay, let's suppose that the United States elects a spy, and said spy leaks all the secret information, and the US is doomed. You realize that even in this scenario, playing by your own rules, that the constitutional clause disallowing foreign-born people from taking the President's office does nothing to prevent such a scenario from happening, right?

Yes, it would. The spy would have never been elected in the first place because the Constitution would not have allowed it.

You just finished saying that you don't place faith in the American electorate and that the United States could unwittingly elect a spy.

Besides, lowering the probability of something happening is not a bad thing.

How does it lower the probability of something happening, according to your own quote?
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2010 11:56:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:51:44 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
You just finished saying that you don't place faith in the American electorate and that the United States could unwittingly elect a spy.

Then you said to take a situation in which the Constitution did not allow for the election of foreign-born people, ie. the current situation. This spy would therefore be compelled to give his birth certificate or ID to prove that he was born in America.

How does it lower the probability of something happening, according to your own quote?

How does not allowing foreign born people to be elected as President reduce the probability of a spy being elected as President? Seriously, did you just ask that question?
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 12:00:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:56:00 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:51:44 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
You just finished saying that you don't place faith in the American electorate and that the United States could unwittingly elect a spy.

Then you said to take a situation in which the Constitution did not allow for the election of foreign-born people, ie. the current situation. This spy would therefore be compelled to give his birth certificate or ID to prove that he was born in America.

Mmhmm.

How does it lower the probability of something happening, according to your own quote?

How does not allowing foreign born people to be elected as President reduce the probability of a spy being elected as President? Seriously, did you just ask that question?

If such grand frauds can be committed, surely getting the American electorate to accept a falsified birth certificate should be easy--those chumps.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 12:49:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Simple question people, I'm not sure how you can bastardize it so much: why should being a US-born citizen matter?

If the only response is fears of being a spy, well that's not too alarming. It'd be one hell of an operation to train someone to become liked enough to win a presidential election - how easy is that. And no, saying it's in the Constitution evades the problem entirely.

Even then, the US can utilize extensive background checks. Plus, if enemies of the U.S. really wanted an infiltrator it isn't too hard to find someone born from America.
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:49:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/18/2010 11:17:14 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:11:05 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/18/2010 11:08:10 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
And I'm saying that the rule is pointless in this situation, because regardless of whether you believe President Obama is US-born, you should still at least see that it doesn't make much difference--at least in this instance.

In this instance, yes. However, this instance isn't indicative of all instances that will follow. The Constitution exists for principle, not to be used as a document for a case by case basis.

Okay, let's take the hypothetical further.

Do you really think that the United States would seriously elect a spy?

Yes, because idiots love to go and vote without knowing enough about who they are voting for. That's why you probably cried when Bush got elected again.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:56:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Although officials in Hawaii have confirmed that Obama was born there, birthers still insist that he has not proven his natural-born citizenship."

Uhhhh, no they haven't. All Hawaii produced on Obama's behalf was a Certificate of Live Birth (not the same thing as a Birth Certificate). A Certificate of Live Birth is something that immigrants get to prove their real name and such. It serves as a "substitute Birth Certificate" for people who weren't born in the US. There's no need for a natural born US citizen to ever get one of those documents. Yet Hawaii has one with Obama's name on it.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 8:04:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Do you really think that the United States would seriously elect a spy?

I think they could elect people who are more beholden to other countries.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 8:15:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:56:25 AM, nickthengineer wrote:
It serves as a "substitute Birth Certificate" for people who weren't born in the US.

That's incorrect, nick. The Certification of Live Birth isn't a substitute for people who weren't born in the United States - it's a document which is essentially the short-form certificate which indicates the existence of the "long form," but is used in place if its either lost or whatever. Short form birth certificates show pretty much the same information that long forms do, including birth place. And if Obama was indeed born outside of the country, his birth place wouldn't be Honolulu, unless there was a grand conspiracy all that many years ago, orchestrated by Kenyan super-spies, to put him in the Presidency.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 8:20:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
But, anyways...

I can see why the original clause in the Constitution was put there. But these days, its pretty much pointless. Not only is the United States filled with millions of immigrants, but any notion that, oh, a person from another country could be spying on us!, is simple stupidity, because a) an American citizen could just as easily spy on you, b) a non-natural born citizen can serve as Governors, Congresspeople, Senators, Cabinet Ministers, CIA heads, mayors, AGs, etc. If you had such a damn concern about foreign-borns being spies, at least be consistent with your bigotry!
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 9:42:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
So again I posit the question: even if President Obama were not an American citizen, why would it matter

Anything that has a chance of getting rid of Obama by reference to some arcane rule matters for people who do not like Obama's policies, whether they think that rule should exist or not. Come now Poejoe, you know you'd support an action to take Bush to court had his citizenship been in doubt. Perhaps privately but you'd still do it.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:24:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 9:42:34 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Come now Poejoe, you know you'd support an action to take Bush to court had his citizenship been in doubt.

If Bush were able to prove his citizenship as well as President Obama has, then I'd have no problem with Bush remaining the president.

Perhaps privately but you'd still do it.

Well, this gets us nowhere. You get to assert I'm lying, and all I can really do is deny it.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:58:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
So okay, maybe you're irrational. Or maybe you're lying. Oh well.

And lol @ "IF HE WAS ABLE TO PROVE HIS CITIZENSHIP." If he wasn't, which is the scenario I was illustrating, you'd do it then.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:10:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:58:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
And lol @ "IF HE WAS ABLE TO PROVE HIS CITIZENSHIP." If he wasn't, which is the scenario I was illustrating, you'd do it then.

But after Bush proved his citizenship, I'd stfu about it.

And President Obama has proven his citizenship. So they should stfu about it.

In any case, I can see what you're saying. Still, Bush was far worse than Obama.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:15:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:24:38 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
If Bush were able to prove his citizenship as well as President Obama has, then I'd have no problem with Bush remaining the president.

You don't understand. Only the most ignorant actually care whether Obama was born on U.S. soil or not. The point is that if they can get him on this technicality then those who dislike him can get him out of office.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 8:05:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:10:47 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:58:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
And lol @ "IF HE WAS ABLE TO PROVE HIS CITIZENSHIP." If he wasn't, which is the scenario I was illustrating, you'd do it then.

But after Bush proved his citizenship, I'd stfu about it.

And President Obama has proven his citizenship.
A government document is legal proof, it isn't proof anywhere else though.

In any case, I can see what you're saying. Still, Bush was far worse than Obama.
By an avowed socialist's standards.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2010 8:28:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 8:15:31 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/19/2010 7:56:25 AM, nickthengineer wrote:
It serves as a "substitute Birth Certificate" for people who weren't born in the US.

That's incorrect, nick. The Certification of Live Birth isn't a substitute for people who weren't born in the United States - it's a document which is essentially the short-form certificate which indicates the existence of the "long form," but is used in place if its either lost or whatever. Short form birth certificates show pretty much the same information that long forms do, including birth place. And if Obama was indeed born outside of the country, his birth place wouldn't be Honolulu, unless there was a grand conspiracy all that many years ago, orchestrated by Kenyan super-spies, to put him in the Presidency.

If you lose your birth certificate you can have it replaced. There's nothing from stopping a natural born citizen from getting a certificate of live birth, there's just no reason to ever get one. And Obama never said he lost his birth certificate and that's why he got a certificate of live birth. He just never explained it.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2010 9:10:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Do you think the birthers would be taking McCain to court had he won the presidency? He was actually not born in the U.S., but in Panama.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2010 9:33:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/20/2010 9:10:44 AM, JBlake wrote:
Do you think the birthers would be taking McCain to court had he won the presidency? He was actually not born in the U.S., but in Panama.

I think US Naval base = US territitory = US
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2010 9:34:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/20/2010 9:33:09 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 4/20/2010 9:10:44 AM, JBlake wrote:
Do you think the birthers would be taking McCain to court had he won the presidency? He was actually not born in the U.S., but in Panama.

I think US Naval base = US territitory = US

but then honolulu = hawaii = US, too... :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."