• 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!

To Obama Birthers Look Unreasonable/Unhinged?

To Obama Birthers Look Unreasonable/Unhinged?

  • Total voters
    33
hiswoman said:
The whole argument is absurd. To me, it looks like a bunch of people who are sore losers :baby2.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this from the beginning. That's all it is.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Already getting into the smarmy comments, eh, folks? Next one will be that poster's last one on this thread.
 
There are many things to challenge and criticize the President over. The amount of effort they put into this futile and illogical snipe hunt certainly makes them look unreasonable and unhinged.
 
jackalope said:
Yes, I think I remember reading that he was.
Click to expand...

A point of order. When you are asked a question such as "is Rush Limbaugh a brither?", and you start your answer off with "yes" then you have given a definitive answer in the affirmative. The rest of your sentence is merely a vague reference as to how you came to your conclusion.

A definitive answer like that indicates you believe this to be fact, otherwise you would have simply said "I'm not sure" or "I'm uncertain," something other than "yes." I'm not trying to bust balls here or be nasty, I just think you should choose your words a bit more carefully. Lightning rod statement will attract lightning strikes you know?
 
Last edited:
Lerxst said:
A point of order. When you are asked a question such as "is Rush Limbaugh a brither?", and you start your answer off with "yes" then you have given a definitive answer in the affirmative. The rest of your sentence is merely a vague reference as to how you came to your conclusion.

A definitive answer like that indicates you believe this to be fact, otherwise you would have simply said "I'm not sure" or "I'm uncertain," something other than "yes." I'm not trying to bust balls here or be nasty, I just think you should choose your words a bit more carefully. Lightning rod statement will attract lightning strikes you know?
Click to expand...


Sorry, but no. Taking one word out of a sentence is the epitome of taking out of context.

Besides, I was the only person who bothered to answer the person's question. Anyone who doesn't like my answer should go ahead and answer the person's question another way.
 
jackalope said:
Sorry, but no. Taking one word out of a sentence is the epitome of taking out of context.
Click to expand...
Nobody took anything out of context. You answered a simple question with a definitive affirmation. You said "yes." You didn't say "he might be" or "I'm not sure." You said "yes." Saying you think you read it somewhere doesn't indicate any wavering in your answer. All it does is tell us you aren't sure where you heard it, but you heard it somewhere. And it doesn't change your answer from "yes."

Besides, I was the only person who bothered to answer the person's question. Anyone who doesn't like my answer should go ahead and answer the person's question another way.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
 
Lerxst said:
Nobody took anything out of context. You answered a simple question with a definitive affirmation. You said "yes." You didn't say "he might be" or "I'm not sure." You said "yes." Saying you think you read it somewhere doesn't indicate any wavering in your answer. All it does is tell us you aren't sure where you heard it, but you heard it somewhere. And it doesn't change your answer from "yes."


Irrelevant.
Click to expand...


I answered in a complete sentence, all of which is relevant. And, I am the only one in this thread who bothered to answer the person at all.

Enough of this nonsense.
 
Dunno, I quit paying attention to the whole birth certificate issue after it became obvious that no further official inquiry would be forthcoming.

At this point, I'd like to see the government establish more definatively what being a native born citizen who is eligible for the Presidency means, and a mechanism for investigating this BEFORE a person becomes a viable candidate for same, in order to avoid such disputes in the future.
 
earthworm said:
What do either have to do with reality ?
Click to expand...

The Tax Day Tea Parties spoke to the reality of a government that's gotten too big for its collective britches, whereas the die-hard birthers ignore the reality that Obama's citizenship status, and thus his eligibility to sit in the Oval Office, has been fully satisfied.
 
mikhail said:
Is Rush limbaugh a "birther" ?
Click to expand...

Quite possibly from limbaugh's own site:

What's the Difference Between God and Obama?

RUSH: What do Obama and God have in common? Neither has a birth certificate. How do they differ? God does not think he's Obama. And there's another difference between God and Obama, and that is that liberals love Obama.
Click to expand...

Even if he's trying to tell a joke obviously there's some indication of how he believes.

Then there's this radio show:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5k0aY25Kc"]YouTube - Rush Limbaugh: Obama Has Yet to Prove He's a Citizen—Where's the Birth Certificate?![/ame]
 
Some people think the matter is still open to question, as it hasn't been proven beyond any doubt where Obama was born or whether he possesses (or is eligibile to possess) dual citizenship somewhere. There's also some grey areas surrounding what constitutes a "natural born citizen".

Some people raising these issues have honest concerns. Others are nutjobs who jump on every conspiracy-theory bandwagon that comes along. Others are making political hay where they can.
 
jackalope said:
High fringe quotient. Yes, some were reasonable, too many were looney tunes wackos. Made everyone look like fringe bat**** crazy.
Click to expand...

Yea those "boobs not bomb" and "code pink" demonstrators don't look bat **** crazy.

Every side has it's own loony fringe. It is just funny how both sides try to say the other is more loony based on the crazes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom