Oh Heck yeah, its Political, and found by foriegners, so take it for what its worth...
Seems Dear Leader wasn't always Baptist.
So, while he's deriding "Birthers" others pick up this?
I still say, if you want to shut up so called "birthers" show a real US birth certificate. Heck, while your at it, show us your Columbia University records, and other schoolastic works you have. (OPINION)
AP photo of school register reveals "Barry Soetoro" as muslim Indonesian By Israel Insider staff August 14, 2008
Bookmark to del.icio.usDigg This Story
A 2007 Associated Press photograph, suppressed until now, shows the school register of the child who is today known as Barack Hussein Obama but was officially listed then as Barry Soetoro, whose citizenship was listed as "Indonesian" and whose religion was listed as "Islam." The visual evidence starkly contradicts the Obama campaign's claim that he was not a Muslim and confirms that he is a national of at least one other country.
In addition, it raises the highly problematic issue of what is Obama's official name. If it turns out to Barry Soetoro, and no official change of name was ever made, Obama may face an array of charges of deception and misprision that may throw into doubt, at the very least, his fitness to run.
Deep doubts remain about the veracity of the "certificate of live birth" image produced for his campaign by the radical left-wing Daily Kos blog. There are reports that investigative teams -- from the Republican and Democratic parties as well as various intelligence agencies -- are seeking out the details of his murky childhood from Kenya to Indonesia. There are indications of growing disquiet in the circles of power that the so-called "smears" may have understated the gravity of the candidate's identity problem: he may not be American, he was not raised Christian and, it appears, he was not Barack Hussein Obama.
The evidence of the candidate's un-American, un-Christian upbringing is nothing new, and has been documented by bloggers as early as 2007 and by Israel Insider in our very first report on this subject in June of this year. But until now the photograph of his school record has been lacking. The image is dated from 2007 and was apparently taken to accompany an AP article that appeared in January of that year. Ironically, that article was about how Obama was rejecting the untrue charge that the public school he attended was a radical Indonesian madrassa.
Some excerpts:
"We will not be swift-boated," said Obama communications director Robert Gibbs. "And we won't take allegations that are patently untrue lying down."
"Obama's mother, divorced from Obama's father, married a man from Indonesia named Lolo Soetoro, and the family relocated to the country from 1967-71. At first, Obama attended the Catholic school, Fransiskus Assisis, where documents showed he enrolled as a Muslim, the religion of his stepfather. The document required that each student choose one of five state-sanctioned religions when registering -- Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic or Protestant. Gibbs said he wasn't sure why the document had Obama listed as a Muslim."
Gibbs may not have been sure, but it appears that the Obama campaign made sure that this image did not see the light of day, because the photographic listing of the candidate, even as a child, as an Indonesian whose religion was Islam was worth, well, a thousand words. "Senator Obama has never been a Muslim," Gibbs said in the article. "As a six-year-old in Catholic school, he studied the catechism."
That may be Gibbs' assertion, but evidence from grown-up school chums of little Barry Soetoro indicates that he studied, and excelled in, the teachings of the Koran in the original Arabic and could recite the Shehada, the Islamic article of faith, by heart, and with a decent tune, according to the New York Times roving columnist Nicholas Kristof, to whom "Obama" remarked that the sound of the Muslim call to prayer was one of the world's most beautiful sounds.
The AP article quoted Iis Darmawan, 63, Obama's kindergarten teacher, who "remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. 'He wrote an essay titled, "I Want To Become President,"' the teacher said." She didn't indicate which country he wanted to become president of.
The AP caption reads: "This registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia, shows the registration of Barack Obama under the name Barry Soetoro into the Catholic school made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro. The document lists Barry Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen, born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, and shows his Muslim step-father listed the boy's religion as Islam. (AP Photo/ Tatan Syuflana)" Syuflana is a well-known and frequently published photographer, specializing in Indonesia.
A representative of the AP confirmed that the photo is authentic.
The most damaging revelation in the AP photo (registration required to see the large-scale image. A derived image is here.) may turn out to be the listing of his name as Barry Soetoro. It has been reported that he used the name Barack Hussein Obama and failed to mention Barry Soetoro when asked to provide any former names. (He reportedly also did not respond honestly when answering negatively to a question concerning illegal drug use, which he has since admitted.) It is believed that failure to report his previous name is not an isolated instance, and may have contributed to the perceived need to manufacture a forged birth certificate listing Obama's preferred identity as if it were present from the start.
The listing of Barry Soetoro as a Muslim contradicts what appears on his campaign's Fight the Smears website, where he says that "I have never been a Muslim." In a private meeting with Jewish leaders in February, Obama emphatically re-stated the claim, but with a bit of a twist, declaring: "I am not, nor have I ever been, a Muslim (especially an anti-American one)."
Does the candidate protest too much here? Indeed, he is echoing language used in the 1950s by those who denied Communist ties. No one is claiming, here, that Obama is anti-American. But the image of his school registration doesn't lie, and indicates clearly that he was registered as a Muslim, and thus, despite the claim of his spokesman, he didn't study the catechism. Barry Soetoro studied the Koran.
I thought this was all old news which had been debunked by the Presidents, then candidate, denial of the facts. It is not so because I say it is not so!
------------------ Dealing with failure is easy: work hard to improve. Success is also easy to handle: you've solved the wrong problem, work hard to improve.
I thought this was all old news which had been debunked by the Presidents, then candidate, denial of the facts. It is not so because I say it is not so!
Like I said, Its from Foriegners, so take it for what (you think) its worth.
We've seen reports that he was registered as Muslim when he was in school in Indonesia. I wonder how many Baptist boys they've erected statues to in Jakarta? http://www.huffingtonpost.c...d-in-j_n_385434.html
The statue even recreates the medallion he wore as a child. Does anyone know what it represents?
I've seen enough based on "dear leader's" current actions to know he either is/was Muslim, or he has strong sympathies with them above other religions. He has repeatedly shown deference to Muslims and Muslim leaders. It's no different than him saying he's cutting deficits before releasing a budget proposal with the largest deficits in the history of our nation. He can "say" whatever he wants. His actions speak louder than his words.
Robert Gibbs. Obama Press Secretary "We will not be swift-boated," said Obama communications director Robert Gibbs. "And we won't take allegations that are patently untrue lying down."
Lets say it's true. He's a Muslim who was born outside of the US.
Who bought the presidency? Because obviously the DoJ and FBI and SS and everyone else would know about this. So who paid them off? Could they even be paid off? Someone in HI would have had to have been paid to forge the birth certificate records as well... Where are those records kept? Multiple people would have to know that the BC was forged since there wasn't a baby somewhere... How much would all this silence cost?
Yeah, missiles could have brought down the planes, and the towers could have been rigged with explosives, or maybe we could follow Occam's Razor for once.
[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 02-04-2010).]
Lets say it's true. He's a Muslim who was born outside of the US.
Who bought the presidency? Because obviously the DoJ and FBI and SS and everyone else would know about this. So who paid them off? Could they even be paid off? Someone in HI would have had to have been paid to forge the birth certificate records as well... Where are those records kept? Multiple people would have to know that the BC was forged since there wasn't a baby somewhere... How much would all this silence cost?
Yeah, missiles could have brought down the planes, and the towers could have been rigged with explosives, or maybe we could follow Occam's Razor for once.
Lets say it's true. He's a Muslim who was born outside of the US.
Who bought the presidency? Because obviously the DoJ and FBI and SS and everyone else would know about this. So who paid them off? Could they even be paid off? Someone in HI would have had to have been paid to forge the birth certificate records as well... Where are those records kept? Multiple people would have to know that the BC was forged since there wasn't a baby somewhere... How much would all this silence cost?
Yeah, missiles could have brought down the planes, and the towers could have been rigged with explosives, or maybe we could follow Occam's Razor for once.
Occam's Razor suggests he was born in Hawaii, son of a Kenyan Muslim, moved to Indonesia and was raised as a Muslim, in a Muslim nation, by a Muslim step father, attending a Muslim school, before coming to the U.S. and attending a Baptist church.
That about cover it?
Or do you suggest the simplest answer is that the Muslim father, Muslim step-father, and formative years at a Muslim school in a Muslim nation produced a Baptist man?
Occam's Razor suggests he was born in Hawaii, son of a Kenyan Muslim, moved to Indonesia and was raised as a Muslim, in a Muslim nation, by a Muslim step father, attending a Muslim school, before coming to the U.S. and attending a Baptist church.
That about cover it?
Or do you suggest the simplest answer is that the Muslim father, Muslim step-father, and formative years at a Muslim school in a Muslim nation produced a Baptist man?
Okay, he was a Muslim. Now what? He was baptized in the 80's, married and baptized his children. He swore his senatorial and presidential oaths on a Bible. I don't think there is that much leeway in the Islam faith for that kind of sacrilege?
By the way, I know many people who were raised Catholic by their family, put through Catholic school, etc, to only renounce their faith in their late teens to become agnostic or atheist.
[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 02-04-2010).]
Okay, he was a Muslim. Now what? He was baptized in the 80's, married and baptized his children. He swore his senatorial and presidential oaths on a Bible. I don't think there is that much leeway in the Islam faith for that kind of sacrilege?
Good question. I wasn't examining the ramifications, just pointing out the likely truth.
To Muslims, once Muslim always Muslim. To be seen as Christian would make him a heretic who should be put to death. Not a good thing for a man who's supposed to negotiate with Muslim ruled nations.
I do find it interesting that a person can be Baptist, call himself a Christian, baptize his children, then refuse to celebrate Christmas. Most Christians are aware of the religious meaning of the holiday. I'm pretty sure the local churches really sell it up. Even Occam's Electric Razor says something isn't right there. Occam's Speculum suggests that maybe it was Michelle who got him to convert from Muslim to Baptist, but that doesn't get around the heretic problem.
Originally posted by Formula88: I do find it interesting that a person can be Baptist, call himself a Christian, baptize his children, then refuse to celebrate Christmas.
From what I've read he has said in interviews that they don't give their kids gifts on Christmas (or birthdays). That has apparently been extrapolated into "doesn't celebrate Christmas."
From what I've read he has said in interviews that they don't give their kids gifts on Christmas (or birthdays). That has apparently been extrapolated into "doesn't celebrate Christmas."
So, to celebrate Christmas you have to give your kids gifts, and if you don't that means you don't celebrate Christmas? Better rethink that one.
If you watch any trials, crooks, thieves and murderers alway swear to tell the truth............ Obama never tells any lies..........LMAO. I can name at least a dozen major ones without even thinking about it.
If you watch any trials, crooks, thieves and murderers alway swear to tell the truth............ Obama never tells any lies..........LMAO. I can name at least a dozen major ones without even thinking about it.
Foriegn Website says Obama may have been Muslim after all...
[sarcasm]... and in other news ... The Globe reports (with pictures, yet) that an alien baby with two heads (one of which looks like young Elvis and the other like old Elvis) was recently discovered in rural Tennessee, but that information has been suppressed by the government.[/sarcasm]
Lies During Second Year I am immediately instituting PayGo “Pay as you go” Said during a speech immediately after the Trillion Dollar “Shovel Ready” bill.
I got the Message from Massachusetts Daily Bail
Lies During First Year Health Care deals will be covered on C-span Obama Lies
Recovery Act will save or create jobs ABC News
Unemployment rate will be 8.5% without stimulus. Obama Lies
I’ll get rid of earmarks Source: Any bill passed during presidency
I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan Specator.Org
We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. Obama Lies
I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage. NPR
2008 Campaign Lies Present Votes Are Common In Illinois NPR
I Won Michigan Huffington Post
I won Nevada The Nation
I don’t Have Lobbyists US News
My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad Crooks and Liars I Have Always Been Against Iraq Washington Post
My Wife Didn’t Mean What She Said About Pride In Country CNN
I Barely Know Rezko Sun Times
My Church Is Like Any Other Christian Church ABC News
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 02-06-2010).]
So, to celebrate Christmas you have to give your kids gifts, and if you don't that means you don't celebrate Christmas? Better rethink that one.
Pay attention. I already said the not giving gifts has been extrapolated into not celebrating Christmas. It's already been rethought. You should try thinking for the first time before posting.
To answer Boonies question it is YES; however, Citizenship is not enough by itself. The Prez is supposed to be natural born...BOTH parents must be citizens....
A person born on or after November 14, 1986, is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true:[6]
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person in question was born The citizen parent lived at least five years in the United States before the child's birth A minimum of two of these five years in the United States were after the citizen parent's 14th birthday.
Yes, for After 1986 Dear Leader was born in 1961, so No (in his case.) lol
For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true [6]:
One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person in question was born The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child's birth; A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent's 14th birthday
Where dear leaders problems arise is the residence, and where (location) he was born along with "dual status" citizenship.
The requirement for the US Presidentcy is more strigent (I believe) Ill look it up too.
For President, Natural Born means BOTH parents must be US citizens, in this case Dear Leaders problems well, grow.
A person who becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization is not considered a natural born citizen. Consequently, naturalized U.S. citizens are not eligible to become President of the United States or Vice President of the United States, which would ordinarily be the case as established by the Presidential Succession Act. For example, though the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor are tenth and eleventh in the presidential line of succession, Elaine Chao and Carlos Gutierrez (respectively former U.S. Secretaries of Labor and Commerce under President George W. Bush) would have been unable to succeed to the presidency because they became U.S. citizens through naturalization. The highest-ranking naturalized citizens to have been excluded from the Presidential Line of Succession were Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, each of whom would have been fourth in line as Secretary of State had they been natural born citizens.
Whether this restriction applies to children born to non-U.S. citizens but adopted as minors by U.S. citizens is a matter of some debate, since the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 is ambiguous as to whether acquisition of citizenship by that route is to be regarded as naturalized or natural-born. Those who argue that the restriction does not apply point out that the child automatically becomes a citizen even though violating every single requirement of eligibility for naturalization, and thus the case falls closer to the situation of birth abroad to U.S. citizens than to naturalization. This interpretation is in concert with the wording of the Naturalization Act of 1790, that "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens", which does not draw a distinction between biological children and adopted children, even though the process of adoption was certainly well known at the time.
Some[who?] argue that the phrase "natural born citizen" is distinguished as a separate legal entity from the phrase "U.S. Citizen" in Article Two of the United States Constitution. While it is true that "natural born citizen" is not defined anywhere within the text of the Constitution and that the Constitution makes use of the phrase "citizen" and "natural born citizen," Supreme Court Decisions from United States v. Wong Kim Ark to the present have considered the distinction to be between natural-born and naturalized citizenship.
Most legal scholars believe that the phrase "natural born citizen" is derived from the works of William Blackstone and depends on the legal doctrine of Jus soli. For example, in her 1988 article in the Yale Law Journal, Jill Pryor wrote, "It is well settled that 'native-born' citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born."[15]
An April 2000 CRS report by the Congressional Research Service, asserts that most constitutional scholars interpret the phrase "natural born citizen" as including citizens born outside the United States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born” requirement.[16]
A distinct minority view is that "natural born citizen" requires two citizen-parents. This view is based on the works of Emerich de Vattel, specifically his "Law of Nations," which, among other things, expressed the international law view that citizenship followed the doctrine of Jus sanguinis - that the citizenship of the child was determined by that of its parents. While Vattel was influential in his views of the relations of nation-states in international law, there is no evidence that his views on citizenship were influential to the founders.[17]
A person who becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization is not considered a natural born citizen. Consequently, naturalized U.S. citizens are not eligible to become President of the United States or Vice President of the United States, which would ordinarily be the case as established by the Presidential Succession Act. For example, though the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor are tenth and eleventh in the presidential line of succession, Elaine Chao and Carlos Gutierrez (respectively former U.S. Secretaries of Labor and Commerce under President George W. Bush) would have been unable to succeed to the presidency because they became U.S. citizens through naturalization. The highest-ranking naturalized citizens to have been excluded from the Presidential Line of Succession were Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, each of whom would have been fourth in line as Secretary of State had they been natural born citizens.
Whether this restriction applies to children born to non-U.S. citizens but adopted as minors by U.S. citizens is a matter of some debate, since the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 is ambiguous as to whether acquisition of citizenship by that route is to be regarded as naturalized or natural-born. Those who argue that the restriction does not apply point out that the child automatically becomes a citizen even though violating every single requirement of eligibility for naturalization, and thus the case falls closer to the situation of birth abroad to U.S. citizens than to naturalization. This interpretation is in concert with the wording of the Naturalization Act of 1790, that "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens", which does not draw a distinction between biological children and adopted children, even though the process of adoption was certainly well known at the time.
Some[who?] argue that the phrase "natural born citizen" is distinguished as a separate legal entity from the phrase "U.S. Citizen" in Article Two of the United States Constitution. While it is true that "natural born citizen" is not defined anywhere within the text of the Constitution and that the Constitution makes use of the phrase "citizen" and "natural born citizen," Supreme Court Decisions from United States v. Wong Kim Ark to the present have considered the distinction to be between natural-born and naturalized citizenship.
Most legal scholars believe that the phrase "natural born citizen" is derived from the works of William Blackstone and depends on the legal doctrine of Jus soli. For example, in her 1988 article in the Yale Law Journal, Jill Pryor wrote, "It is well settled that 'native-born' citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born."[15]
An April 2000 CRS report by the Congressional Research Service, asserts that most constitutional scholars interpret the phrase "natural born citizen" as including citizens born outside the United States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born” requirement.[16]
A distinct minority view is that "natural born citizen" requires two citizen-parents. This view is based on the works of Emerich de Vattel, specifically his "Law of Nations," which, among other things, expressed the international law view that citizenship followed the doctrine of Jus sanguinis - that the citizenship of the child was determined by that of its parents. While Vattel was influential in his views of the relations of nation-states in international law, there is no evidence that his views on citizenship were influential to the founders.[17]
A person who becomes a U.S. citizen through naturalization is not considered a natural born citizen. Consequently, naturalized U.S. citizens are not eligible to become President of the United States or Vice President of the United States, which would ordinarily be the case as established by the Presidential Succession Act. For example, though the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor are tenth and eleventh in the presidential line of succession, Elaine Chao and Carlos Gutierrez (respectively former U.S. Secretaries of Labor and Commerce under President George W. Bush) would have been unable to succeed to the presidency because they became U.S. citizens through naturalization. The highest-ranking naturalized citizens to have been excluded from the Presidential Line of Succession were Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, each of whom would have been fourth in line as Secretary of State had they been natural born citizens.
Whether this restriction applies to children born to non-U.S. citizens but adopted as minors by U.S. citizens is a matter of some debate, since the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 is ambiguous as to whether acquisition of citizenship by that route is to be regarded as naturalized or natural-born. Those who argue that the restriction does not apply point out that the child automatically becomes a citizen even though violating every single requirement of eligibility for naturalization, and thus the case falls closer to the situation of birth abroad to U.S. citizens than to naturalization. This interpretation is in concert with the wording of the Naturalization Act of 1790, that "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens", which does not draw a distinction between biological children and adopted children, even though the process of adoption was certainly well known at the time.
Some[who?] argue that the phrase "natural born citizen" is distinguished as a separate legal entity from the phrase "U.S. Citizen" in Article Two of the United States Constitution. While it is true that "natural born citizen" is not defined anywhere within the text of the Constitution and that the Constitution makes use of the phrase "citizen" and "natural born citizen," Supreme Court Decisions from United States v. Wong Kim Ark to the present have considered the distinction to be between natural-born and naturalized citizenship.
Most legal scholars believe that the phrase "natural born citizen" is derived from the works of William Blackstone and depends on the legal doctrine of Jus soli. For example, in her 1988 article in the Yale Law Journal, Jill Pryor wrote, "It is well settled that 'native-born' citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born."[15]
An April 2000 CRS report by the Congressional Research Service, asserts that most constitutional scholars interpret the phrase "natural born citizen" as including citizens born outside the United States to parents who are U.S. citizens under the “natural born” requirement.[16]
A distinct minority view is that "natural born citizen" requires two citizen-parents. This view is based on the works of Emerich de Vattel, specifically his "Law of Nations," which, among other things, expressed the international law view that citizenship followed the doctrine of Jus sanguinis - that the citizenship of the child was determined by that of its parents. While Vattel was influential in his views of the relations of nation-states in international law, there is no evidence that his views on citizenship were influential to the founders.[17]
Originally posted by spark1, maryjane, Jake_Dragon:
Was previous post deja vu twice? Same words three times? Maybe it's just getting late.
HA ha ha ha...
I normally prefer not to post when it comes to politics (I call pathetic's), but I do read a lot of it. On a serious note, Why would BHO want to release his personal information (such as his birth cert, school records, etc...)? The more people concentrate on these issues, the more distracted they are. Therefore, the more he can "work" with all the "Birthers" distracted. It is to his benefit not to release this information. Sounds like a strategy to me.
Wave your hands in the air to distract your adversary. While they are looking at your hands, kick them in the groin.
I personally believe he is qualified to hold the office, but, as I tried to explain to some of the liberals here, over 1/2 the voters in the south (according to several polls) do NOT believe he is an American citizen. Elections--especially in the case of re-elections, are not usually "won". Usually not a whole lot of difference in the big issues between the 2 candidates. They are lost-- because of tiny mistakes by a candidate. Just ask the liberal Senate candidate in Mass--she lost due to a list of small errors on her part. She didn't make a single or couple of big errors in her campaign--she lost because of the cumulative effect of a bunch of small errors--and that's how it is in national elections as well --almost all of the time. Obama, has absolutely nothing to gain, and possibly everything to lose by keeping all his records sealed, and it is one of a myriad of mistakes he should be tallying up and keeping track of.
Liberals can laugh off the birthers all they want, but they really should be imploring their guy to take this issue completely out of the equation by ordering all his records released--not just having a govt official release a birth certificate picture.
Little things lose elections--rarely big things--and they all add up.
Some will vote against Obama because of this issue. Some will vote against him because of his bowing to foriegn dignitaries. Some will vote against him because of him not forcing congress to televise healthcare debates. Some will vote against him for his handling of the auto industry. Some will vote against him for his global warming debacle in Copenhagen. Some will vote against him for his mixed signals regarding his religious affiliation. Some will vote against him for his percieved tie to Blago. Some will vote against him because of his head of Homeland Security's gaffe following the attempted plane bombing. On and On.
It's a very long list--of very small things, and he's only 1 year into his 1st term. Add the big things into the mix, (jobs-deficit, Iraq/Afgan wars and it could spell trouble for him in a close election, so why take the chance?
But hey, I hope he and the rest of the liberals docontinue to ridicule the "birthers". I hope they continue to attack the Supreme Court.(You think those justices won't remember that next time they rule on something?) I hope they continue to take TEA lightly. I hope Obama continues to bow to every foreign dignitary. Little things--each swaying voters.
And, brings up a question I have been wondering about. When was the last time an incumbent President did NOT carry the south and still won re-election? I do not know the answer to that question, but it might be interesting to find out.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 02-07-2010).]
Pay attention. I already said the not giving gifts has been extrapolated into not celebrating Christmas. It's already been rethought. You should try thinking for the first time before posting.
Hey wise ass, you're the one who said Obama refuses to celebrate Christmas and someone asked you to explain. All YOU came up with is Obama has said they don't give their kids gifts and that is "extrapolated" as "doesn't celebrate Christmas." My point is, since when is giving gifts to you're kids really have to do with the meaning of Christmas. Sorry, the "extrapolation" doesn't hold water. What's this "It's already been rethought" crap, you didn't call the "extrapolated point" as bunk.
[This message has been edited by Tigger (edited 02-07-2010).]
Hey wise ass, you're the one who said Obama refuses to celebrate Christmas and someone asked you to explain. All YOU came up with is Obama has said they don't give their kids gifts and that is "extrapolated" as "doesn't celebrate Christmas." My point is, since when is giving gifts to you're kids really have to do with the meaning of Christmas. Sorry, the "extrapolation" doesn't hold water. What's this "It's already been rethought" crap, you didn't call the "extrapolated point" as bunk.
Swing and miss. Better luck next time. Like I said - AGAIN, I had read he doesn't celebrate Christmas and upon further research found a People magazine interview that says he doesn't give presents to his kids for Christmas. So, yes, that has likely been extrapolated, exaggerated, spun, distorted, whatever you want to call it, into doesn't "celebrate" Christmas. I posted as much when I found it. So get over it. I'd already pointed out that inconsistency by the time you rushed in to try to be clever. You missed your window of opportunity. Stop trying to salvage some kind of slam, any kind of slam, just so you can think to yourself - wow, you sure showed me.
so all you got is a moslem step dad checked his own religion's box on a form
btw the law is mom is american any kid is a full citizen no matter where it is born so the whole birther BS is a BIG LIE from the start
My comment was a joke, never have voiced my opinion on the birth issue. He is f'ing this country up, and it only has to do with him being a Progressive, nothing to do with anything else..other than he is also a liar, thief and a cheat as is most politicians from both sides of the isle. He is a far cry from the liberals of the past.
[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 02-07-2010).]
Swing and miss. Better luck next time. Like I said - AGAIN, I had read he doesn't celebrate Christmas and upon further research found a People magazine interview that says he doesn't give presents to his kids for Christmas. So, yes, that has likely been extrapolated, exaggerated, spun, distorted, whatever you want to call it, into doesn't "celebrate" Christmas. I posted as much when I found it. So get over it. I'd already pointed out that inconsistency by the time you rushed in to try to be clever. You missed your window of opportunity. Stop trying to salvage some kind of slam, any kind of slam, just so you can think to yourself - wow, you sure showed me.
Funny... ok, you want a slam then here's a slam. Do something constructive like writing your Republican representative(s) and ask them to hold reviews and question Obama's citizenship. And while at it, ask them to ammend the Constitution to prevent certain people with certain religions, born as or not, from being President.
Obama never tells any lies..........LMAO. I can name at least a dozen major ones without even thinking about it.
