Last edited by liblady; 07-14-10 at 09:13 AM.
Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:
These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.
So while I’m confident its much ado about nothing, I say shine some light on the events. Does that make me an “I’m-not-a-truther-truther”? If so, I’d like to change my vote ;-)
My question would be if the above is something you think is legitimate and someone you wouldn't consider a conspiracy theorist or someone that's a truther, if not by name by action.
There is little to no legitimate evidence to suggest Obama's not an American citizen. It would require a cover up includign such groups as the government of hawaii along with both political parties that undoubtably vets their own and the other candidates, spanning more than a decades worth of time since the point he became heavily involved in politics. Its a ridiculous notion predicated off the one loud yell that he won't reveal to the public a piece of private information that no other President has been required to reveal despite the fact other documents have been provided to prove his citizenship. Its like saying if some moonbat suggests we faked the moon landing that we should give credance to and legitimacy to people wanting to talk about it as if its a reasonable belief to have. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to bring lawsuit, I think its stupid but if its allowable in law its allowable (and will undoubtably be thrown out). What I'm saying is talking about it like its a legitimate view, like its a reasonable view, like its something not to be labled as a conspiracy theory or that must be given equal credence with other questions like "Does Barack Obama wish to raise taxes? that I have an issue with as its none of those things.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
I wasn't able to find a thing. Your source? Oh, wait -- as I think about it, I think I understand your point.I was able to find that the U.S. government themselves did the investigation.
I don't talk about it like it's a legitimate belief. I don't discuss it. It's like talking to mad men. I don't have the time for it. But I'll say again, "There's nothing wrong with shining a light on the process." If this lawsuit does that, it's accomplished MY purpose, anyway.
Thank you, Quazi!
I voted "yes" because Spud looked lonely. He also made a compelling argument.
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
"To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by rights to hand down to them."~ Theodore Roosevelt (Message to Congress, Dec. 3, 1907)
I voted no..... I'm a dualer.
I would, just out of curiosity like to know what Barry is hiding by sealing all of his records.... I'm sure it's nothing.
There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.
Originally Posted by PogueMoran
I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.
"There is a lot of talk coming from CitiGroup about how Dodd-Frank isn't perfect, So let me say this to anyone listening at Citi —I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. It should have broken you into pieces." -- Elizabeth Warren