• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Louisiana Republican Flees Interview When Asked About Obama's Birthplace

yep. that question was never asked

duh!

what was asked were questions about two topics. both topics the candidate had commented about previously: the validity of global warming and the legitimacy of Obama as president based on his birthplace

neither of the comments about her opinions on those topics approaches being a 'do you still beat your wife' question

actually, that you incorrectly used that expression causes me to believe you are ignorant of the meaning of such a question

I didn't say it was asked...duh!
 
A Republican congressional candidate fled her interview with a major election-forecasting group after being asked why she believed that global warming was a hoax and whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States, according to a new report in the Washington Post.

Read more here: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/louisiana-republican-flees-interview-asked-115123316.html




This lady was obviously not well prepared for this interview.

Kind of reminds me of Sarah Palin.

Any thoughts?

$istah $arah would never run out on a chance to demonstrate her profound stupidity... She is far too much of a media whore.
images (60).jpg


IMHO Lenar Whitney was well prepared for the inevitable questions about teabagger fundamentals by the media. The smartest thing she could have done was to STFU and run away before her profound stupidity could spill out into the public domain.
She knows that her best chances for being elected are to keep her stupid teabagger beliefs known only to teabaggers.
 
Last edited:
Yep, and some of them who don't know their backside from a hole in the ground are trying to get elected.



What do you mean? "Trying to get elected." They're all incumbents and even getting re-elected. Seems to be one of those important qualifying characteristics to get funded by either political organization.
 
At least she doesn't think Guam is about to capsize. Of course that idiot got re-elected by his idiotic constituents.

That said, does anyone care anymore about the Obama birthplace question? Don't we have big problems in this country that need to be addressed? Why not ask her questions about specific important issues?

Why do people say global warming is a "hoax"? Reminds me of the dingbats who say the holocaust is a hoax. Say you don't think it's as big an issue as others do, say it's too politicized, say you don't really care about it, but ffs don't call it a "hoax"!
 
I hate seeing hack threads in breaking news. Maybe this candidate was offended that she would be asked about the President's birthplace.

It's on par with, "Have you stopped beating your wife."

Really. Asking if one believes the president is a US citizen is a loaded question? How hard is it to say..."Yes I do believe the President was born in the US as he says" ...or.. "No, I do not believe he was born in the US.

How hard is it to say I have never hit my wife...I have never hit any woman.
 
Maybe she shouldn't have made dumb comments and she wouldn't have been asked that huh? Oh wait, that's personal responsibility, can't have that. :roll:

And this qualifies as breaking news, how? Let's hold people accountable for what they do and worry less about what they say. People say dumb stuff all the time, but really, how much of any of it is really important?
 
And this qualifies as breaking news, how? Let's hold people accountable for what they do and worry less about what they say. People say dumb stuff all the time, but really, how much of any of it is really important?

Well it's obviously important enough for you to post in this thread about how it isn't important. Nobody forces you to read EACH breaking news piece. Don't like it, move on.
 
Well it's obviously important enough for you to post in this thread about how it isn't important. Nobody forces you to read EACH breaking news piece. Don't like it, move on.

Yeah, isn't that cool?
 
And this qualifies as breaking news, how? Let's hold people accountable for what they do and worry less about what they say. People say dumb stuff all the time, but really, how much of any of it is really important?

Except the only way to know if you want to even see what she does, is by listening to what she says. Are you suggesting that one should be elected regardless of what they say? And then the electorate should just live with it, even if what she'd been saying indicated that she was too stupid to be of any use to anyone? How bizarre. But I guess it confirms the idea that Republicans idolize ignorance.
 
Does Dan Rostenkowski remind you of Sarah, too?

God!!! I wish I could find a Youtube video of him being asked a question by Chicago reporters and vaulting over the hood of a nearby car only to continue running down the street.

Oddly enough, no one is running to defend Rostenkowski the way right wingers are rushing to defend Palin and this nutsack
 
Really. Asking if one believes the president is a US citizen is a loaded question? How hard is it to say..."Yes I do believe the President was born in the US as he says" ...or.. "No, I do not believe he was born in the US.

How hard is it to say I have never hit my wife...I have never hit any woman.

Are candidates normally asked where they think the president was born?
 
Yes I'm serious. Should they have asked her what 2+2 is so we can see whether she can do math? Let's turn it into a game show and ask all sorts of dumb questions. I know, she could be handed a Doctor Suess book and tested whether she can read it aloud. I want to know whether a candidate can read before deciding whether to vote for them.

For sports, I follow things like football and baseball, I haven't turned politics into my sport.

But if she's not a birther, the question takes one second to answer. "Hawaii." That's not remotely like "have you stopped beating your wife." That question presumes the person is a wife beater. That's the first problem. The second problem is that because of the assumption embedded in the question, it cannot be answered without providing the questioner with a line of additional attack.

A simple answer to "where was Obama born" presumes nothing. It's a straightforward question. You can ask me that right now and I'll end the discussion right away. Hawaii!

Or, maybe she's a birther, and lots of voters, me included, want to know before we cast our votes for a birther. Clinging to that conspiracy nonsense tells me something very important about a candidate - IMO they're stupid, or pander to the stupid. But maybe you think the opposite - if they believe Obama was born in Hawaii, there is no question, THEY are the stupid ones. Either way, it's a distinguishing viewpoint.
 
Oddly enough, no one is running to defend Rostenkowski the way right wingers are rushing to defend Palin and this nutsack

There's only 3 of us on this forum who remember him. ;)
 
But if she's not a birther, the question takes one second to answer. "Hawaii." That's not remotely like "have you stopped beating your wife." That question presumes the person is a wife beater. That's the first problem. The second problem is that because of the assumption embedded in the question, it cannot be answered without providing the questioner with a line of additional attack.

A simple answer to "where was Obama born" presumes nothing. It's a straightforward question. You can ask me that right now and I'll end the discussion right away. Hawaii!

Or, maybe she's a birther, and lots of voters, me included, want to know before we cast our votes for a birther. Clinging to that conspiracy nonsense tells me something very important about a candidate - IMO they're stupid, or pander to the stupid. But maybe you think the opposite - if they believe Obama was born in Hawaii, there is no question, THEY are the stupid ones. Either way, it's a distinguishing viewpoint.

Do you think people who vote for politicians who say dumb things are stupid people?
 
Do you think people who vote for politicians who say dumb things are stupid people?

Short answer is it depends - on the statement and how people judge whether that statement is dumb, and how that statement stacks up to other statements and positions, etc. I'd bet we have different bright lines on what a politician can say and still get our support, and that's as natural as us having different hair styles.

I'm just pointing out that I'd personally NEVER vote for a birther, because it tells me (maybe not you) something meaningful about how a person fails to process and acknowledge evidence, or is willing to say dumb things contrary to ALL THE EVIDENCE to pander to lowest common denominator voters. I lost all respect for the Donald when he went there. He's too smart to embrace that BS, so just signaled (to ME) when he did that he's a huckster and wasn't trying to be a serious person politically. I mean, we knew that, but he made it official - no need to take him seriously on anything ever again.

But like I said, others may (and I'm sure DO!) think NOT questioning Obama's birthplace even today is a sign of stupidity, and won't vote for someone who accepts the gubment/Obummer line on that. Whatever floats their boat! But it's not a frivolous question IMO.
 
Short answer is it depends - on the statement and how people judge whether that statement is dumb, and how that statement stacks up to other statements and positions, etc. I'd bet we have different bright lines on what a politician can say and still get our support, and that's as natural as us having different hair styles.

I'm just pointing out that I'd personally NEVER vote for a birther, because it tells me (maybe not you) something meaningful about how a person fails to process and acknowledge evidence, or is willing to say dumb things contrary to ALL THE EVIDENCE to pander to lowest common denominator voters. I lost all respect for the Donald when he went there. He's too smart to embrace that BS, so just signaled (to ME) when he did that he's a huckster and wasn't trying to be a serious person politically. I mean, we knew that, but he made it official - no need to take him seriously on anything ever again.

But like I said, others may (and I'm sure DO!) think NOT questioning Obama's birthplace even today is a sign of stupidity, and won't vote for someone who accepts the gubment/Obummer line on that. Whatever floats their boat! But it's not a frivolous question IMO.

Do you think his mother was an American citizen?? Or is that also a lie??

If his mom is a U.S. citizen, it doesn't matter a tinker's dam where he was born.
 
if you are running for office and you make a statement about the President's birthplace it is not gotcha to be asked about. If you run away you are a coward and everyone in the region you are running in should be told. If you defend this behavior I pity what you have become because of your party.
 
Do you think his mother was an American citizen?? Or is that also a lie??

Of course.

If his mom is a U.S. citizen, it doesn't matter a tinker's dam where he was born.

Well, it did make a difference to the birthers. But I'm not going to try and make sense of those nutjobs or their nonsensical positions on the whole controversy.
 
Short answer is it depends - on the statement and how people judge whether that statement is dumb, and how that statement stacks up to other statements and positions, etc. I'd bet we have different bright lines on what a politician can say and still get our support, and that's as natural as us having different hair styles.

I'm just pointing out that I'd personally NEVER vote for a birther, because it tells me (maybe not you) something meaningful about how a person fails to process and acknowledge evidence, or is willing to say dumb things contrary to ALL THE EVIDENCE to pander to lowest common denominator voters. I lost all respect for the Donald when he went there. He's too smart to embrace that BS, so just signaled (to ME) when he did that he's a huckster and wasn't trying to be a serious person politically. I mean, we knew that, but he made it official - no need to take him seriously on anything ever again.

But like I said, others may (and I'm sure DO!) think NOT questioning Obama's birthplace even today is a sign of stupidity, and won't vote for someone who accepts the gubment/Obummer line on that. Whatever floats their boat! But it's not a frivolous question IMO.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm no birther either. The original birthers were Hillary supporters so it sprang from politics. I can't believe anyone followed suit and kept it going. But I would vote for someone who for whatever reason thought there may be some merit to the story and said as much assuming that said candidate would be a good legislator in DC.

Donald I think let his grandiose demeanor get in the way of clear thinking when he went there.
 
Of course.

Well, it did make a difference to the birthers. But I'm not going to try and make sense of those nutjobs or their nonsensical positions on the whole controversy.

Well, I'm confused by your post. You call them nutjobs, and yet you say this:

But like I said, others may (and I'm sure DO!) think NOT questioning Obama's birthplace even today is a sign of stupidity, and won't vote for someone who accepts the gubment/Obummer line on that. Whatever floats their boat! But it's not a frivolous question IMO.

Oh, wait!!! "...others may (I thought it read, "and I sure DO!)... My bad.

Never mind.
 
Back
Top Bottom