The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

It's hard to believe that only %32 of Republicans believe POTUS OBAMA was born in the US.
http://thepage.time.com/2011/04/21/birther-party/

If you too believe he was born in the US, please reply. Otherwise, we will count you in the birther category (you have 5 days to respond to the facts). So speak up if you believe POTUS OBAMA was born in the US.

I betcha it's %10 here at TNF. :o

I'm one of the32%.  I believe he was born in the US.  I also do not believe he is a Muslim

They might start with the same people asking them what country Hawaii is in.  That could clear some of that up.

Yeah but Hawaii had only been a state for two years when he was born there so it's almost like he wasn't born in the U.S.

Oh jeez, now you're lobbing them in there.

I like to see the Pavlov response in birthers.

I think we all need to see Hawaii's papers. I heard Hawaii came over the border in Arizona right before it's anchor baby, Alaska, was born. I bet Hawaii can't produce it's birth certificate.

I will be very surprised if President Obama was born outside of the US.

Skirts are skirting the issue already? :D

Come on Guido, show your colors!

People may not remember this, but there were some John McCain "birther" threads in this forum in 2008.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=9098.0

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=9045.0

Here is one TNF McCain "birther" mocking a former Tulsa dooshbaggers' "birtherism".

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=16841.msg184722#msg184722

Can I call those that questioned McCain's birth place "birthers"? Yep.

Wow Guido, very clever way of displaying your delusional politics. I mean really, John McCain is not POTUS. But it is a connection to this issue. Two wrongs make a right? Is that correct? Or is it a display of your ability to transfer distaste for this President to another thread vis a vie another lie from another time rather than just saying POTUS OBAMA is an American citizen?
Good search job. But we'll count you in with the majority of Republicans until you prove otherwise.
Thanks for waving your colors. I was wrong. All this time I thought you loved Turd Blossoms.

The foregoing post was brought to you by, you guessed it:

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRyTZoWgTN0ocfDrG7SvL4YK-giIRPQmO-kRDOamzIKTbqnoRu)

I bet Obama doesnt even remember being born

It's too late at night to go read all those threads, but my recollection was that McCain's birthplace wasn't in any serious question, certainly not by 60-70% of the Democratic Party. What was a possible question, because it's not actually settled law, is whether being born in a US possession is "good enough." Most seem to assume that that or being born to citizen parents anywhere in the world does indeed meet the bar.

It's a tricky question. What about a mere leasehold of the US? An embassy? A flight between two foreign cities on a US-based airline? You see where I'm going.

Obama's birth certificate was published on the Internet for all to see in 2008. That there is still any question about it in the mind of more than the usual lunatic fringe that shows up in every poll about any subject is utterly ridiculous. More so given the intervening time. It evidences quite the disconnect from reality in the minds of many of those who self-identify as Republicans. Whether it's the media they're choosing to feed themselves with or what, I can't say.

Guido never lets reality get in the way of an argument, when confronted by facts he doesn’t like he finds it easier to just change the argument. He knows that the McCain thing only came up when the Tea Party idiots started in with the stupid claims that Obama was born in Kenya. Which aside from all the evidence regarding his being born in Hawaii is particularly stupid because:

a.   Obama’s mother was American and therefore by law he is too and is eligible to be president even if he was born on the moon.
b.   McCain admittedly wasn’t born in the US, but his parents were so go see point a.

What is awesome about this train of logic is that it dovetails perfectly with another hard right obsession:  anchor babies!

Could someone in here find a post of mine wherein I declare myself a "birther"?

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15305.0

And the tea party was responsible for McCain birther stuff? Someone needs a history class because the tea party came to be after the 2008 election and after RM ran with his McCain birther crap.

Perhaps next time Swake you would look at "reality" before you get your panties all wadded up over nothing.

It was me who questioned the rules on candidates being born outside the country. I asked if people would trust him in response to the Obama birthplace chatter.

Why does the place of birth matter? It has as much relevance the month and date you were born. We all know that Leo people are the best leaders.

My parents were in Europe when I was born so my aunt and uncle had me instead.

By today's definition that makes you a birther! And who knew you were part of the tea party (at least in Swake's mind).

The people that call themselves the Tea Party are same ones who were and still are making the claims. Tea Party is just the current faddish moniker. And it's the same people funding them too. The Tea Party could just as easily be called the Koch Oil Party.

That's a fairly decent attempt to salvage your weak tea logic, but still:

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTvc_FfyJCU9aakM011lTaZWre17h6EpCCbOV8E1c-DOih1sksnRA)

And by the way, your stab was specific to the tea party and no one else. Take your lumps and move on...

If you had been a girl would your name be Denise?  How come your name isn't Denephew?

So are you suggesting that I should, as a Leo, run for office?

As a Leo, I KNEW I had a political future.  ;D

Wait, I share an astrilogical sign as you? Crap, now I have to go and change zodiacs.  The paperwork is going to be endless on this one.

So using the 2008 number of registered Republicans (55 mil), roughly 37.4 million people think Obama isn't American. 

That's a smile ton of people. 

The question that should naturally arise is, how do that many Americans still believe something that is provably false?

My favorite part of the Bible is where Jesus gives money to the rich, tells the poor to suck it up and asks for Caesar’s birth certificate

Call Obama's people.  They can generate a new birth certificate, but it will take a couple of years.

But I thought that was only good for recreating where you were born, not when.  I'm starting to see the possibilities of reliving my 20's.

Until about 2016?

... and it'd take another TWO YEARS for the "Obama's an empty suit" people to admit the truth......

Born in the U.S.A.
August 21, 2008
Updated: November 1, 2008
The truth about Obama's birth certificate.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Man!  Why do you guys keep bringing up this birth certificate stuff?

Because it stirs up the moonbats

He has a right to his privacy.  He has proven to the appropriate authorities that he's a citizen, and I assume they have both the authority and resources to verify that fact.

So what if the man wants his personal documents to be kept personal. That's his prerogative and right.  He has also kept his Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, baptism records and his adoption records under wraps.

I have no problem with this.  It shouldn't be necessary to biopsy the man.  Why would anyone ever want to run for president if this is the gauntlet that they are expected to run.  I am far more comfortable judging the man on his actions, then seeking out conspiracy.  He has done a fine job in producing enough fodder for the wolves.

First of all, guido, that's MY bong you are giving to someone else!  I call foul!



Privacy is one of our (allegedly) guaranteed Constitutional rights.  I am curious about the thesis, though.  TU basically told me that it was published as a public document.  Well, I may have to go back and shut that down....I wonder if anyone has just gone to the Columbia library and looked around?

It's the new litmus test for stupid people....abortion is old school.

And when the government funds it, it's little more than genocide on the poor and black.

Oh crap!

I think it's funny when you talk like the right wing counterpart of fotd/whoever he is.

Good thing they don't fund it.  Either way, do your part.  Bring 4-5 adopted babies to the next Tulsanow lunch.  Better yet, sit outside a clinic and tell them you will pay for their kids they don't have to worry about it.

I do my part.  I don't have irresponsible sex so that some woman needs to resort to using abortion for birth control.  As well, my tax dollars pay for the well-being of children carried to full term.  They help pay for housing, food, clothing, education, etc.

Care to prove tax dollars aren't being used for abortion?  We fund clinics outside the country which provide abortion and abortion counseling.  It was one of POTUS Obama's first executive orders when he took office.

"President Obama struck down a rule Friday that prohibits U.S. money from funding international family-planning clinics that promote abortion or provide counseling or referrals about abortion services."

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-23/politics/obama.abortion_1_abortion-counseling-family-planning-family-planning?_s=PM:POLITICS

It also trickles it's way into state-run health care programs for the poor which do receive Medicaid funding but through sleight of hand accounting measures, they appear to be compliant with the Hyde Amendment.

"Forced by a state Supreme Court decision years ago to pay for elective abortions, taxpayers in Minnesota were forced to pay for nearly 4,000 abortions in 2009, or about one-third of all abortions done that year.

Its aggressive promotion of taxpayer-funded abortions is enriching the abortion industry with increased numbers and revenue, complained Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life about the high court’s decision. It points to a just-released report from the Minnesota Department of Human Services showing nearly 32 percent (3,933) of all abortions performed in Minnesota in 2009 were paid for by taxpayers, at a cost of $1.58 million."

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/04/04/minnesota-taxpayers-forced-to-pay-for-more-abortions-in-2009/

Government funds, both Federal and state, wind up funding abortion.

That's the exact charge lefties would level at conservatives if they backed abortion.

Abortion is wrong, it kills unborn babies.  Birth control is wrong, it kills unborn babies.  Not having unprotected sex is wrong, it kills unborn babies.

There are state tax payers and federal tax payers.  I am sure Minnesota seperates their funding so the flu vaccine comes out of the federal and the abortions come from the state taxes.  They can do what they want in their own state.  I suggest you stop paying them state tax.

You forgot that your tax dollars also help pay for the kids schooling, counseling and finally incarceration when their parents don't give a crap about him/her. 

So again, abortion pre-emptively eliminates potential future drains on our society from the lower class.  Cheaper to kill the poor and neglected instead of giving them a fair shot at the American dream.  How fiscally conservative!

That's a fair trade I guess.

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html (http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html)

Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8% .

Income is only part of wanting to have a kid.  If you don't want a child, you don't want a child.  Haven't you heard its the parents that are the problem?  So load up on some unwanted kids and help the situation.

And nearly 1/2 of abortions are to women with less than $30K per year total family income.  Close to a third fall into the "poverty" zone.  Thanks for confirming my point with stats.

Act responsibly in the first place and you aren't forced into a situation where you have to make a difficult decision like getting an abortion.  I really don't care to be burdened by other's careless sexual proclivities, regardless of the outcome.  I'm doing my part.  When I was done having kids I made sure I can no longer contribute to the gene pool.  I'm sure there are those of you on here who are glad for that.  ;D

The Libertarian in me doesn't want the government legislating morality.  The Libertarian in me is what makes me think that if a woman wishes to use abortion as birth control, she should pay for it not the state or Federal government.  I didn't expect the government to pay for me to have a vasectomy.  As a personal decision, abortion is not a choice I'd personally make.  But if a woman wants that service, I'm glad she can obtain it legally and safely.  

My whole point in the first place was really nothing more than making an ironic statement.  I don't think anyone puts much thought into who these unborn fetuses are or would be.  

I have read where liberal thinkers have literally thought of abortion as being acceptable population control.  I guess if abortion results in fewer liberals it's not all bad then, eh?

Nobody is in favor of more abortions.

I always wondered why the right had it so in for Planned Parenthood. The vast majority of their work wasn't abortions; it was birth control.

I would think most would be in favor of birth control, especially when income is also a factor. Babies are expensive.

Yeah.. 48.2 percent are under 30k and 51.8 is above 30k.  Now, you are correct that isn't 48.2 percent of the population.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

This says that 31.7 % are below 30k a year.  That is a 16.5% differential.  However, that is skewed by teenagers I believe.  We really need income and age together in the same setting to determine the age/income effects.

Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.


  

In some parts of the country, abortions are far more common amongst minorities.  Nearly one half of all abortions in NYC are black women.  Estimates say nearly 2/3 of black pregnancies are terminated in NYC.  I'd say that's pretty disproportionate, wouldn't you?

I love how they've managed to find a PC term for abortion, it's now an "induced termination".  That makes it better.

(CBS/AP)  In a noticeable departure from strict Catholic dogma decrying abortion no matter what, New York's Archbishop Timothy Dolan called together religious leaders Thursday and asked everyone to work with each other to make abortion "rare."

Dolan's called for the gathering in light of a New York City Department of Health report (PDF) stating that induced terminations ended about 41 percent of the 214,454 reported pregnancies in the city last year.

Nationally, the number of pregnancies that ended in induced terminations was about 24 percent of the total in 2006, the most recent year reported by the Centers for Disease Control, which keeps thorough statistics on pregnancy outcomes nationwide.

While the 87,273 abortions reported in 2009 in New York City are down from the 10-year high of 94,466 reported in 1999, religious leaders say the number is still too high.

The New York Times reports that Dolan said the practice is unlikely to end but that it was important 'to tell people what is happening."

The Wall Street Journal reports that the religious leaders also criticized public schools sex education programs that include condom distribution.

The Health Department report points out some obvious places for religious leaders to start.

Teenage pregnancies and abortions are down from previous years, but women aged 20 to 24 had more than one out of every four induced pregnancy terminations performed in the city last year, which has been about the rate for the last decade.

African-American women had about half of all induced pregnancy terminations, and Hispanic women represented about one quarter of the total, which is in disproportion to their respective representation in the overall population.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/07/national/main7222625.shtml

I am for freedom. No good patriot is against the right to choose an abortion, the right to use a condom for protected sex, and the right to drop a morning after pill. ;)

Custonox, why are you against sex?

And what's with all the stats? Who give's a frozen embryo....

All I know is I'm glad my mother was pro-life.

Back on subject. . .

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/25/birthers.obama.hawaii/index.html?hpt=C1

Another investigation proves that President Obama is a natural born citizen!

So now can we focus on his leadership and drop the who's your daddy conspiracy?

All this time, I just knew you were a mistake! :P

Who said I was against sex?  I was just pointing out that the line of logic can be followed to the point of saying that refusing to have sex is a form of birth control and therefore could construed to mean that it is killing babies.  At some point a line must be drawn on what is acceptable and what is not.  This is what is at the heart of the argument.  I don't think anyone on here would consider it right to allow a mother to kill a baby the moment it's born because she doesn't want to raise it, but at what point does it become a baby that is a crime to prevent it's future?  We still charge people for double homicide/manslaughter when they kill a pregnant woman.  So the debate isn't if abortion is right or wrong, but at what point preventing/taking a life becomes wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Drfr40TDfmM0

Ask the hairpiece.

I am fairly certain that Trump's hair was not borne here!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RFtM2sB-kk[/youtube]

and the beat goes on....

Accident not mistake  ;)

It's out now.

http://www.kfyi.com/pages/jimsharpe.html (http://www.kfyi.com/pages/jimsharpe.html)

Forgery









Bahahahahahaha!

Wonder how long it will take for the birthers to say it's a forgery...Conan?

 ;D

Trump must have known that Obama was going to get a copy of the original document because he started to question the President's academic qualifications. What are we going to call the new club now that the 'birther' movement is put to rest?
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/26/trump_affirmative_action/index.html
Let's not forget Dumbya's Yale and Harvard credentials. Do you think he was academically qualified?

I can't speak to his qualifications but the story during the election was that W's grades were slightly higher than Kerry's.

Never believe liars.....  :) (refer Iraq)

We need a "like" button here.....

Did POTUS OBAMA really call Trump a "carnival barker?"

Again. . .I am not a birther but I saw this reported and tried it.  go to the White House Web site and download the birth certificate: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

If you have Corel Draw or Adobe Illustrator, open it.

A funny thing about Acrobat files that I learned while working for an engineering firm is that when you write a file to PDF, any "layer" that was created in that application is preserved, but not visible unless you re-open in a layered application.  We used to have companies send us their engineering files in PDF and as long as someone (Me) had illustrator we could pull all of the layers created and eliminate hours of reproduction.

Why the hell is this document composed of seven different layers designed to look like a scan?  I'll post the layers that I was able to open on my Corel Draw.  

The "Attendant" and the "Local Registrar" are original to the document. The remainder of the information resides on 6 other distinct layers. Someone forgot to hit the "flatten" button in Photoshop/Illustrator when they saved the PDF. 

Pays to hire an experienced graphic designer!

Still a good forgery though, don't you agree?

Birther Teabagger racist Republican :D


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnYJI4QTpXs&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


BRILLIANT!

I'm a racist first and foremost.  I just love NASCAR!

All they had to do was either un-check "preserve editability" or simply choose to flatten the image before saving as PDF.

I can't believe that they didn't think about this.

He held back publishing this because he thought the Teabagger/Birther/Republican obsession with it made them look like racist kooks (which they are). Its produced today because he realized the strategy wasn't working and there are more simpleminded racist kooks in America than any of us want to admit.

BTW, many on the left felt he should have continued to avoid handing out the long certificate and let this thing continue. But the left believes the real story today is Betrayus and Panetta war criminal shuffling at the top of Defense and the CIA. Rush does too. Left meets right....

Probably a lot of troof in that...

Wow.  You spend over a million dollars in legal fees to hide your birth certificate for two years and then release a rather innocuous document that your graphic designer forgot to flatten before PDFing.

Do you have any idea how long it would take a graphic designer to pay back that kinda scratch?

Should read "Kauikeolani Children's Hospital" or "Kapi‘olani Maternity Home."

 ;)

Kapi‘olani Maternity Home didn't become Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978 when it merged with the hospital.

He should have just kept it secret, or said it got lost. 

The original registrar's signature on the certificate should be spelled Ukulele (just like the instrument).   ::)

I don't know if I'm more embarrassed that this is what they produced or that the most powerful man in the world didn't fact-check (or spell-check) the damn thing!

You're just being racist now.

Not sure if serious... but just in case:


Other certificates produced around the same time reveal that "Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital" was printed as well. Scan down to "Susan Nordyke". http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=292053

Where are you getting this crap? The merger in 1978 wasn't to become Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital, it was a merger between the women's hospital (what I guess was called Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital at the time) and a children's hospital (Kauikeolani Children's Hospital) to become Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children.

Here's the story from the hospital itself:
http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx
This is the story of two hospitals: Kauikeolani Children's Hospital and Kapi‘olani Maternity Home.
Concerned about the welfare of Hawaii's mothers, Queen Kapi‘olani held luau and bazaars to raise the $8,000 needed to open Kapi‘olani Maternity Home in 1890. She endowed her legacy with “Kulia i ka nu‘u” or “Strive for the highest.”
In 1908, Albert and Emma Kauikeolani Wilcox donated $50,000 to start a children's hospital. The community, concerned that two of every seven infants in Hawai‘i did not live to see their first birthday, rallied to match the Wilcox's gift. A year later, Kauikeolani Children's Hospital opened.
The two hospitals joined in 1978 to become Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children.

As for the layers they happen as part of the creation of the PDF
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding

Additionally, Illustrator will attempt to interpret the PDF image and present it as possible layers. I'm familiar with this behavior from working at TU's newspaper.

That's not true. Illustrator cannot create layers from a raster image unless a "trace bitmap" function is run (in AI CS2 and higher).  Tracing a bitmap image to layers is time consuming. If illustrator did this, then every raster file you open would take several minutes to trace out.

I have been using Photoshop and Illustrator since the Space Monkey days.  Only a few geeks on this forum will know what that means.  ;)

Releasing this document produces nothing of merit.  The people who suspect Obama isn't a citizen aren't people who can be convinced by a single document or by ten or by 100.  There will always be a hair to split, a reason that the single piece of evidence under discussion might be incorrectly labelled, or incorrectly formatted, or on paper made from trees not native to the island, or whatever.  There will never be enough proof to prove Obama is a citizen, because the belief is not about fact.  It's about belief.

Gaspar, you're never going to trust any document he releases.  Regardless of how reliable it is.  You'll always hunt down the miniscule discrepancy that makes it, in your eyes, fatally untrustworthy.  It's not because you believe in the faultiness of the fact; it's that, at heart, you don't believe Obama's in any way shape or form an American like you, and the faultiness of the facts flow from that belief.

I think this is why 37 million Republicans don't believe Obama is a citizen; it's because they don't believe his (purported, mostly imagined) belief system is American. 

And that is it. We V US gets it. The question is: "is he as much of an American as I am?" :)

"They" (the mass psychotics) cloak him in the dark tone of imperialism out of hatred for what the man represents to their psyche.

wevus,

Is the URL under your name supposed to work?

Oh no, sorry.  I put the url for my prior avatar there while I searched for a new one.  It's a trash link.

I kind of figured - tried it and got errors.

All,
The people who suspect he isn't a citizen are idiots.  Even without a birth certificate, he is a natural born citizen due to the connection to his mother, who there is no doubt was a citizen.  But reality doesn't impinge very strongly into the wonderful wacky insane clown posse world of the RWRE. 

This is a year old, but is the definitive answer showing how he couldn't possibly be a US citizen - he was born in Hawaii!!  And is most likely heir to the throne to be King of Hawaii!!  So we have royalty usurping the most powerful position in the world!!  Geez, we are getting to be as bad as England!

http://www.hlrecord.org/news/original-obama-birth-certificate-unearthed-in-harvard-law-school-library-1.1293452

And the retardation continues.

But it likely makes Donald 'The Toop' Trump irrelevant now.

It is pretty funny watching the birthers continue to spew BS, even after all of CNN's digging. If you look closely enough, you can see the spittle flying from their mouth as they flame out in a rage worthy of one of Guido's idiotic Youtube videos.

I heard that he suffered a severe shoulder strain from patting himself on the back.

It just came to my attention that in parts of the UK, 'trump' is a euphemism for 'flatulate'.

Gaspar is apparently an idiot..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcWQw2AAIho&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

http://themoderatevoice.com/107889/birtherism-racism/

This won't appease the Teabagger morons Next, they'll say Obama is from another planet, the love child of an unholy union between his mother and an alien father. And the son is working to turn over the reins of power to an alien race that will suck the life out of the US and the planet.

POTUS OBAMA  should have made a deal with Trump: You show us your hairline and I'll show you my long form. :(

His mom is/was still a citizen of the US and that makes Obama a US citizen. 


This could still be true regardless of his citizenship.

When you run optimize on a flat version of the president's birth certificate you get layers based on color too.  You get about 60 of them.  This document consists of only 7. 6 monochrome and one RGB. ;)

I think you need to gain a better understanding about how Acrobat functions before you continue to toss about accusations based on your understanding of Acrobat. I probably shouldn't assume that Acrobat was even used to generate the PDF, either, for that matter. I haven't checked.

Interesting take...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110427/ts_yblog_theticket/birth-certificate-wont-end-race-related-attacks-on-the-president

Oh, Hoss...what are we gonna do with you??  Trump was irrelevant WAY before this....  (LOL)  His whole game is to plug his show.  This has been the cheapest advertising he could ever have gotten, and notice how every time he says anything, he mentions Celebrity Apprentice.  (Which IS a pretty ignorant show to begin with.)

Clown,
That's what my post earlier was saying - Harvard Law Review did a parody a year ago or so that in part stated that Obama couldn't be a citizen because he was born in Hawaii.  And is more likely the King of Hawaii.

Wait a minute....that's a law school!!  Geez, how could I have not seen it!  That's no parody!!  That's LAWYERS doing what they do best -- NOT contributing to society in any meaningful way!!  And being uneducated enough to believe that Obama can't be President, cause he's a king of a different country!  Hawaii!!

Oh, no,...my comments yesterday are coming back to bite me in the butt!!  I only made mention that maybe I should think about going to TU law school, and see what happens!!??  I almost get sucked into that vortex of inanity!!!  Oh, no....HELP!!  Save me from the dark side!!!??

RM,
No S***, Shylock??  (No aspersion intended - Shylock just kind of fits the sentence...)  I have a couple of acquaintances in Texass who have been slinging around "N" type terms for over a year about this!  What a bunch of dipsticks!  Oh, wait,...at least a dipstick has some value and makes a small but useful contribution to society.  I guess I shouldn't be maligning the lowly dipstick so much.

Sadly, there is more than enough reason to be adverse to an Obama Presidency without the blatant ignorance of the mentally deficient of the extremists.

Gaspar,
Are you talking the band or the rocket jockeys?  (They didn't have much technology during the rocket jockey era, so am guessing the band!)  And you are too old for that Euro-techno-trash stuff!  You should be thinking of Rolling Stones, Bob Seger, and Jethro Tull.

You getting oldtimers?  Try Sherlock. It fits and sarcastically ties something obvious to the famous (fictional) detective.

I guess I was just thinking along "pound of flesh" lines tonight.

As in what the RWRE is trying to get out of Obama.  And he never even defaulted OR spat!

Like him or not, Obama is not stupid.  He should be able to pull off the Merchant of Venice trick.

Why?

If the Clintons couldn't prove Obama isn't qualified by birth to be Prez, it ain't gonna happen.

Why save me??  Because you know how much more interesting it is here for you and the fun you have with me here and how dull it would be without.  Your mind is made to stretch, grow and think.  You are challenged, and being an engineer, THAT is what you love more than anything!!  (Unless you have become one of those jaded old disillusioned types that is just coasting until you can get out of the hamster wheel?)

For those who don't think of President Obama as "their President" this is their hanging chad, if you will.  This unveiling will simply deepen a conspiracy for those who can't be convinced otherwise.  Sort of like that Supreme Court Dubya paid for.  And for the total moonbats, they chose to release the certificate this week because Obama's ego wouldn't allow for Prince William's wedding to overshadow anything to do with the most important man on earth.  ;)

I have no idea if 37mm is an accurate figure for those still doubting, but it's been stated over and over that his mother was a U.S. citizen.  If he were born outside the U.S. or a U.S. territory, he would at worst, have dual citizenship assuming the mother wouldn't have renounced her citizenship.  I've got several friends born overseas to at least one U.S. citizen who enjoy dual citizenship.  If that little piece of Constitutional logic has whizzed by their temple, perhaps they should be required to take the citizenship exam themselves.

Poor calculation by The Donald.  He didn't need the birther issue to get notoriety as a candidate.  Instead it's become a side-show and really made people who have never ascribed to the birther issue wonder if he spent too much time hanging around Bussey.

Does anyone know how Clark Kent got a green card?  :P

Trump is channeling Busey!!

Wonder who lost in that deal??

They couldn't pass the citizenship test.  Probably can't read, and absolutely have not read, the Constitution.  I've seen sample tests when a relative-in-law took it a few years ago.  Tough test without taking a class.

Remember that latest darlin' of the Tea Party - Michelle Bachmann?  The one who though the founders had worked soooo hard to end slavery before we could become a country??

Yeah....

I bet they can't even brew tea correctly!!

Clark Kent lied.  His local parent's faked it.  And the cards aren't green.  They are white with a green stripe on the back.

I just knew this was coming:


(http://racecardpoliticswatch.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/racecard1.jpg)

Some unknown college history professor and an innocuous Miami Herald columnist say it's so, therefore it must be.  Imagine that, two men channelling the supposed psyche of millions of people they don't see eye to eye with politically.

"So what's fueling the dogged questioning of Obama's origins? Many critics of the birther movement say its core tenets--and its stubborn resistance to evidence disproving those beliefs--can be traced to racial hostilities. The fundamental birtherist conviction, these critics say, is that an African-American can't have legitimately won the presidency--and that his elevation to power therefore has to be the result of an elaborate subterfuge.
"There is a real deep-seated and vicious racism at work here in terms of trying to de-legitimate the president," Peniel Joseph, a professor of history at Tufts University, told The Ticket.

"This is more than just a conspiracy," Peniel added. "I think this is fundamentally connected to white supremacism in this country."

Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. in early April called for the connection to be publicly drawn between birthers and racism: "So it is time to call this birther nonsense what it is--not just claptrap, but profoundly racist claptrap."

After a while, ya gotta wonder if there ain't something to it.  But then, the same thing went on with Billy Bob for his entire term.

And Limbaugh/Hannity wonder why the Dummycrats tried to attack Bush for 8 years.  This is standard procedure, has been since the beginning and won't ever change.  Each side goes after the other.

At least as far back as Watergate and Iran/Contra.  I don't know about the GOP trying to dirty-up Kennedy or Johnson.  The only one interested in tanking the Kennedy's was Hoover and that was a whole power struggle issue with RFK.

Nixon went after Kennedy very hard.  And Kennedy did the same. 

This goes back to early 1800's.  I think Washington and John Adams were the only two that got a "pass".  After that, it was off to the races with some of the nastiest campaigning ever - much worse than today.  We got a long history/tradition of being nasty during elections.  And between.

Got ugly in 1796.  (I don't know much about the election, but apparently, it too was ugly)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1796

You know what, I'm so tired of this "smile" it's become the latest 9/11, twin towers, Murrah, Waco, Carter rabbit, Hinckley, Squeaky Fromm, Sir Hahn, Oswald-Ruby-Kennedy, Areae 51, conspiracy therory, that to me it's just stupid. So when are people going to include John Lenon, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Keith Moon, Kurt Cobain, the singer from INXS, and the members of The Pretenders since their song Ohio is used by Rush Limbaugh?

I can sorta see the hanging chad comparison on a superficial level -- both point to questions of legitimacy -- but that's really where it ends.  Bush v. Gore was the nearest thing to a constitutional crisis we've had in generations, while the birther controversy has never been more than a mania solidly outside of legally established fact (it was never gonna get near the Supremes, for instance, while Bush v. Gore HAD to be decided by them).  

And I could very well be off with 37mil but it's still established that slightly less than half of all GOPers are birthers to one degree or another, and that's def. in the double digit millions.  IMO it's a genuine problem one way or the other.  Either double digit millions are ignorant of our citizenship requirements or they firmly believe the facts are lying to them and it's a conspiracy.  

If you'd open your eyes, you'd see that there's quite a bit of latent and overt racism amongst Tea Partiers, and especially amongst the birther subset. The present version of the Wikipedia page on the Tea Party has a section describing a few of the various incidents.

It got nasty under Clinton....going after a sitting president like that.

The democrats were justified to go after Bush....he lost had Florida and had America in Iraq.

Conan, to deny this is race baiting and fear mongering politics is to deny you just might be one of them "birthers" racists too. :-X

It was nasty before Clinton. Are you too blind to remember or too stupid? And I'm so tired of the race baiting card, for me that went away when MLK was alive. I was in Tulsa Public Schools during the late 60's early 70's as a student and I had no predjudice as to who I went to school with. I'm so tired of that racial issue crap.

I drew my first political cartoon when I was nine years old in 1972. It was a school bus that had a wrecking ball dropped on it. It was an expresion that I had formed from my parents comments about the fact that that Tulsa Public Schools was putting forth intergration. My father was angry about my statement, and told me that it was to be accepted. He did not agree with the way that it was being done, but he felt that everyone deserved a chance for an equal education.

Clown, take the race card and race baiting and put it up your donkey. The birther thing, you can put that there as well.

I was just about ready to drop this when someone on facebook pointed this out to me.

Anyone with Acrobat reader can do this.

If you open the document then go to file/document properties you get the window below.  Two things are of interest. 

1. It says the document was produced on a Mac using the Quartz PDF plug-in.  So the idea that this thing was simply scanned or produced in a government office is out the window.

2.  The strangest thing, it that it registers as an Adobe 1.3 file format.  Adobe 1.3 does not support saving files with layers or transparencies.  This file has both. The meta-data is incorrect.


I am now absolutely convinced that this is the actual Birth Certificate.  I am also convinced that all of this data was added and altered to stir more controversy.  There is no reason for altering meta-data except to keep skeptics as skeptics and fan the flames.  This is brilliant and very Axelrodian.  It seems they want to create more birthers.  Birthers are easy opponents to crush.

I believe there were some others too.  At least Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan.

Kennedy had a religion problem in many voters' minds being a Catholic.  Some thought that he would have allegiance to the Pope over the USA.  I know he made a statement of some sort but don't remember the details.  There was also some resentment that the Kennedy family fortune reportedly came from bootlegging booze.

They must be getting help from the Clintons.
 :D

There are ignorant racists on every block Nathan.  How many black people objected to President Bush because he was a rich white man?  How many black people whose lives have not changed one iota for the better in the last 2 1/2 years think Obama is a great president because he's "one of them"?  Why is racism always defined as an issue with white people?  You really need to open your eyes.

To say opposition to Obama is all about racism is a great excuse to ignore his shortcomings as a leader.  Some of that image is a very deeply entrenched partisan political philosophy on the part of his harshest critics and some of it is well-earned through his actions.

I apparently don't associate closely with racist types since I'm not getting it.  Anyone I know who has a problem with President Obama has a problem with his tepid leadership skills, faux intellect, condescending attitude, and basking in his celebrity jet-setting status.

I'm quite sure there are blockheaded racists on the birther issue.  Most though, I think are people who are not as well informed about politics who are simply following the noise like lemmings because it seems like the thing to do.

I was referring to legal channels, not LBJ hiring Sam Giancana's crew to help him become president  ;)

Interesting.  It fits the template of Democrats trying to make opponents appear crazy.  Provide proof, but do so in a way that will still leave enough room to keep the morons on the other side at the forefront.  Good strategy.

Hey Gasp, you know who claims this doc is legitimate? THE STATE OF HAWAII

/thread

I will state it again, I now believe THE DOCUMENT IS 100% LEGITIMATE!!!!!

They have simply injected some fun into it.  One of my programmers just showed me that the RGB layer is 150dpi and all of the other layers are 300dpi.  They've laid so many Easter Eggs that the attempt to raise suspicion is too obvious. 

My cousin works for a PR firm in DC.  She emailed several people this morning with the message "Don't fall for the Easter Eggs, they are a trap."  I think, if not already, by the end of the day most of the birther fueling media will be wise to the attempt as well.

I appreciate cunning, it was the one trait in Hillary that I admired.  Though I doubt this was President Obama's idea, I admire the attempt. 

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p309/kallsop2/-trap.jpg)

Didn't you leave a t out of there somewhere?

Lemme guess....mAD hATTER???? ???

It's not just me dcracks: Birther Is Another Word for Racist  http://www.politicsplus.org/blog/?p=4700
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0xioVJMTCk&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
funny schtuff

Ain't reality fun??

What OTHER PRESIDENT of this country has ever been put through this birther crap?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

2008, 2009, 2010..... 2011 and this hasn't ever gone away.... why?
Well, with a plurality of Republican voters being fed this garbage, why not?


Keeping this alive for the election is more Dick Morris's style, not Axelrod's..... I think Obama would rather have a serious debate framed in the contrasts between his budget and Ryan's.... no carnival barkers need apply.

Thanks.

So he'll let someone else handle the diversions.

Poor, poor President Obama.

What other President had to put up with "He stole the election!" for eight years?

You reap what you sow.  I honestly think this is a moronic tit-for-tat partisan shenanigans. 

Please stop getting your information from the freepers. While you look smart compared to them, their ideas make you look like an idiot over here.

That's a fantastic straw man. It looks very realistic. Unfortunately, nobody here has said that all opposition to Obama is based in racism. Personally, I said that a lot of tea partiers are racists. It's come out both in their polling and in the signs they like to hold up in their rallies.

And to be honest, if the non-racists can't stand up to the racists and tell them to GTFO, I feel little sympathy for them being painted with a broad brush.

Wait a minute....he did steal the election with the help of SCOTUS and there's this enormous skip in logic. But hey, expectorant. ;D

HERE! The futility of reasoning with crazy - Gene Lyons http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/27/conservative_conspiracy_theories/index.html
You need hip waders to get through the bullsh!t of the teabaggers and GOP.

Some people still believe that.  Others believe it was the correct result.  Some people will always believe Obama wasn't born a US citizen. 

LOL! The person who pointed this out was actually one of your fellow "reacharounders."  He was trying to prove a different point by focusing on the Acrobat version but he accidently uncovered what no one else thought to look at.  Why the heck was the file created in QuartzPDF on a Mac?  :D

Answer?  By design.

Did it ever occur to you that some of the folks at the White House might actually use Macs? It's pretty common among web designers and graphics folks. And your talk about layers and whatnot shows that you really have no clue about how PDF works. It's very similar to Postscript. Go read up.

I am absolutely positive that some of the folks at the White House use macs.  ;)

Somehow I feel like that may have something to do with QuartzPDF.

Gore won Florida...look it up. We were had. Today we pay....

Ah yes, looking at Gore today and imagining what the world would be like. . .

I somehow feel rescued, but then Bush delivered President Obama into our laps!

You must have a pretty active fantasy life if you think Gore would have been able to do much you wouldn't like with a Republican-controlled Congress.

This is what I found.  

No definitive win for Gore, just a possibility by cherry picking places to recount votes that couldn't do it in a timely manner.  Yes, I know the Republicans made sure all the defective voting machines were placed in precincts that historically voted Democratic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

A group of newspapers did a statewide recount using several possible standards for what was considered a valid vote. Under most of them, Gore would have won. Under a couple, Bush. Of course, the headlines were "Bush would have won in case of a full recount."

Honestly, the recount and the SC stopping it isn't what I find upsetting. What bothers me more is that hundreds of thousands of voters were wrongly purged, and most of them were in strongly Democratic counties. What makes it the injustice that it was is that it was no accident. Several county clerks complained to the state election board well in advance of the election that the list (produced by Choicepoint) was largely inaccurate. Unfortunately, most counties went ahead and used the purge list anyway. In the end it may not have made a difference (the affected groups were mostly poor and black, so are less likely to vote than the population at large), but it's still not right.

What was the basis of the purge? 

At some level, it is the voter's responsibility to make sure they are current to vote.

The particular list I'm citing was supposed to be a list of convicted felons. Unfortunately, most of the people on the list were not felons. Many people attempted to correct the error but could not.

And I somehow feel you're a victim of the conservative activist media machine.... Bush was the WORST president of my lifetime.... Al Gore would have been a much better president than Bush... yet the conservative media meme that Al Gore would have been a disaster as President has been drilled into the heads of the electorate... the ONLY reason dubya got re-elected was 9/11.

If you want to compare this traitorous birth certificate nonsense to anything, compare it to the "truthers" who think 9/11 was an inside job..... not to Bush v. Gore, which was a stain on our democracy....

http://articles.cnn.com/2001-03-11/politics/palmbeach.recount_1_gore-buchanan-gore-and-reform-party-butterfly-ballot?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS

This birther BS was BOGUS FROM DAY ONE...... show us your papers?.... your papers, please..... we're sorry, but your legal certificate of live birth from Hawaii isn't good enough for us... we need a long form.... in triplicate please.... oooh look, it's a smudge on the original........are you kidding?... really?....  yet you, like far too many smug rightists, accuse the prez of playing political games on an issue that the Republicans and their media minions should have repudiated and never allowed as debate.... go figure.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRq6Y4NmB6U[/youtube]

Imagine what Fox News and KRMG had argued over the past decade if the Supreme Court voted 5-4 against a Florida recount and Al Gore's brother had been governor of that state and called the election for him..... oh, I forgot... putting yourself in someone else's shoes has never been a strength of the pseudo-libertarian wing of the Republican party... typical.

Red,
Do you verify your voting status??  How would one know to do that?  And why would one feel the need if you had voted for some time?

The Dims are still pissed because they spent so much money to rig win Florida and it didn't turn out in their favor.

... and Republicans live in an alternate universe in which the wealthy are constantly victimized by powerful union members, minimum wage workers, and welfare queens...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Why do people care so much about how the rich are making more? What do you want, to take their money and give it to you?

I would probably start here:
TULSA COUNTY
VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES
(City of Tulsa unless shown otherwise)
Agency Address Phone # Days/Hours
Tulsa County Election Board 555 North Denver 596-5787 M-F 8:00-5:00


If one votes on a regular basis and stays out of trouble, there is probably not a reason to check.  I will agree with Nathan that bogus felony charges are probably not a reason to verify your voter registration status.  One source I checked indicated 70 some thousand, not hundreds of thousands were in that situation. Still unacceptable though.

A change of address can affect your registration.  Not voting for a long time will take you off the rolls in OK.  I believe one vote every 4 years (as in Presidential elections) is sufficient to keep you on the rolls.  I had my parents check my registration when I was in the Navy when it came time to vote against Jimmy Carter since I hadn’t been around to vote in local elections for some time.  Since I had voted in 1972, that was sufficient to keep me current.  The point is that I wasn’t sure so I checked.  And, I checked well before the election.  I voted by absentee ballot that year.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00965/money-graphics-2006_965498a.jpg)

You are free to believe all three.  I disagree with Bush being the worst in my lifetime.  I don't think AlGore would have been a good President but I do agree things would have been different.  I believe you are a victim of the Liberal Agenda and MSM.

I think LBJ was the worst President in my lifetime.  Over 40,000 killed in 'Nam after LBJ suceeded in painting Goldwater as a warmonger for the election.

You are forgetting they believe there is a fixed amount of wealth.

+1

. . .and for some reason they don't have any of it, so it must be because the rich folk aren't sharing.

Red,
LBJ was only there until 1968, escalating it for three of those 66-68.  Then Tricky carried it on for the next 7 years!  And LBJ inherited it from Kennedy, who got it from Eisenhour, who got it from France....right on down the line... it was all about the money!

And it was closer to 55,000 killed.

Speaking of which (what a wonderful seque!) - the VietNam Memorial traveling wall is coming to Tulsa the week of Sept 11 for a week long visit.  Sponsored and arrangements made by the Union JrROTC.  Put it on your calendar today!  Don't forget!  I will be reminding from time to time.

All totaled, about 60,000 killed or missing, over 155,000 wounded and many more scarred for life.

Out of those 60,000 killed or missing over 35,000 were confirmed killed from 1965 through 1968.  More than 1/2 total lives lost in the entire conflict in those FIVE years LBJ oversaw the war.  As you recall, he became POTUS on Nov. 22, 1963 and would have left office in Jan. 1969.  From 1945 through 1964 we had only lost 401 servicemen in Vietnam.

I like how Dims try to pin Vietnam on Nixon.  He basically walked into the same situation President Obama did.  How are we coming again in getting those troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan on his promised time-line?

Iraq was exactly as promised.

Afghan?  Well, who knows, but since it has escalated dramatically (supported more than wholeheartedly by Boner and company) I can't see whether we will meet the publicized date of 2014.  Since nobody from either side is actually gonna get Bin Laden, I say start withdrawing today.  (And no, I would not recommend invading Saudi just to get Osama.  Too much complication.)

Whether today or 2014, the end result will be the same.

Nixon's situation was dramatically different in at least one area - he wanted to be there and try to "win".  Because he was just another ignorant idiot.

Eisenhower, please learn how to spell Eisenhower.

We were pulling out by spring '73. 1973-1968= 5.  Good enough for me to not have to go to 'Nam.  I was just graduating from Tron school.

Yes, it started with the leftovers from the French but LBJ did the big escalation after winning the '64 election by convincing the voters that Goldwater was a war monger that only wanted to nuke Viet Nam.  There was also a little thing about the Gulf of Tonkin or something like that.

People who think our country is divided now over war either weren't here for the 60s or have conveniently forgotten them.

Then "taking from the rich" shouldn't be necessary to increase wealth equality.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkVH4z5Aazw&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

back on topic!

Historic Moment: GOP’s Trump Becomes First Presidential Candidate to Deliberately Use the Word ‘F*ck’ in Stump Speech
The GOP's Slide into Degeneracy Continues http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/04/29/pres-trump-to-saudis-ya-not-gonna-raise-that-fckin-price/

enjoy...now stay on topic!
The Birth-er certificate

Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Eisenhower.

Ok, that's better.  I will probably have to practice it some more, though!


Infamous quote;
If you remember the 60's, you weren't there...

We were still rotating new guys in until late 1974.  Ex-neighbor got sent in late 73, got shot mid 74 (leg wound - hurt, but not critical) and there were new guys coming in when he went out.  By then we were "at peace" for the last 2 years, but still shooting people.

LOL...that's a good one!

I wish I had a picture of a light bulb.

Actually, if the wealthy get a big tax cut, then they'd have more money to give to me.  Back in the day, I got a scholarship from a wealthy person to go to a private university over a "public option," and years later a "bursary" from presumably wealthy people in the UK so I could go to the Britten-Pears School....

...and in the 90s (despite those bad old Clinton taxes), I nearly had an offer to have my career financed by a generous opera donor who loved the La Traviata production I performed along with the soprano and tenor...... the three of us sang at his penthouse on Lake Shore Drive just down the street from the Drake Hotel, but only one of us would get the payola.... and that's why I hate tenors to this day....

How much is that doggie in the window? (woof, woof, woof)
The one with the waggly tail
How much is that opera singer in the window? (woof, woof, woof)
I do hope that singer's for sale

So, please feel free to send your generous tax-deductible donations of $1500 apiece to the Opera Jeff Foundation and be designated a Premium Silver Benefactor including free admission to my Summer Wine & Cheese Tulstravaganza at my 1928 Owen Park bungalow, offering stunning views of the BOk Center and the downtown skyline.... and an official from the NASL will also be there to hit you up for investment interest (and it don't come cheap) in USRufnex LLC so we can bring high level pro soccer back to Tulsa....

But, seriously, there was indeed a time in the 80s when I believed labor unions were too strong, taxes on the well-to-do were too high (with too many loopholes), the government had too many regulations on business, the EPA was heavy handed, and federally funded "abortion on demand" was reprehensible.  I stereotyped all liberal anti-war types (including my aunt) as shrill Jane Fonda wannabe's, and I trusted the "supply-side" Reagan Administration to handle the federal deficit over tax-and-spend "Fritz-n-tits."  I believed that Republicans were more likely to "know right from wrong" than the Dems, who seemed perpetually wishy washy in comparison when they weren't busy trying to convince us Reagan was going to start a nuclear war with the USSR... I was told by the college young Republicans to support the privatization of social security because "it'd never be there for us when we get old, anyway".......

Then, I took inventory of all the sacrifices I had to make in the name of austerity.... my Pell Grants were cut year after year, my wages to try to make up the difference while a full time college student for work at retail stores or restaurants flatlined throughout the 80s.... my student tax exemption was gone and my payroll taxes were raised substantially.... if that weren't enough, a National Direct Student Loan I qualified for one fall semester was no longer available in the spring (thank you, Gramm-Rudman), forcing me to work graveyard shifts at Village Inn to make up the difference...

But thank God that Reagan lowered taxes to a 28% rate for those most able to pay combined with the Gramm-Rudman budget cuts that fixed the federal deficit once and for all... /snark.

Somehow, I don't think a small increase percentage-wise in federal income tax is going to force wealthy taxpayers to start working graveyard shifts at a waffle house... we're talking about the difference between the income tax rates for the wealthiest under Clinton (39.6%) versus the rates under Bush II (35%) which are still much lower than the 50% top marginal rate during Reagan's first term and the 70% top rate in place the previous decade....

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/2010_budget_high-income.cfm

Oh, back on topic.   I think The Donald has finally jumped the shark.

(http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/jump-the-shark.jpg)

Here you are:

Geez, now I have to find a picture of a violin but I don't have one to take a picture of.  Imagine one.

Hmmm. We wouldn't want somebody who ignores the last 80 years of tax history to be accused of being a "bleeding heart liberal," now would we.... imagine that.

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

(http://www.zekeburlbaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/bleeding_heart_liberal___wingnut_conservativee.png)

Why would you want to ignore the last 80 years of tax history?  I haven't.

I can see clearly that we taxed our way out of the Great Depression, right up to WWII.

Forgot to add: You obviously made it through school so the Pell grants that you lost and those that remained obviously went to someone more needy.  Welcome to the world of affirmative action etc.

That's a fine light bulb, but I was looking for an idea...

Pardon me.  I thought for a moment that you "saw the light" that taking from the rich isn't necessary.

Not going to happen. That's hardwired.

No more than taking from the poor. I'm getting frustrated that every time it comes time for the rich to hold up their end of the bargain, they change the effing law. Were it not for the deal in the 80s to use Social Security money to shore up the general fund, they wouldn't have been able to have their tax cuts then. But now that it's time for them to kick in to repay the money they borrowed from the trust fund, they claim we've got to gut Social Security. What's up with that?

I don't think that expecting someone to hold up their end of a bargain is "taking."

Where is your compact fluorescent bulb?  Save some money.  Plus, very soon you won't be able to replace that with incandescent - just a couple more years of Tommy's old bulb left.  May need to stock up?

I don't know what "bargain" I made with the government. Could you please explain? Maybe not because in your mind all money earned (except by the poor of course) belongs to the government and not the earner.

I expect you will when you find that rich gets into 5 figure salaries.

They're in the attic, probably run 10 hours per year at the most.  No toxic waste with a normal incandescent.  Have you seen the pictures of the burning compact fluorescent bulbs? Plus, they are not hard wired.  I have to plug them in each time I want them to come on.

From your previous posts, I expect your income to be high 5 figure, maybe low 6 figure.  What do you think is a fair tax rate for you in percentage?   To keep it simple, let's just consider Federal Income tax.  Not marginal rates but overall.

You personally didn't. Social Security tax was increased so that income tax could be reduced. That was the deal. Sorry you weren't around for it. Talk to Mr. Raygun.

And no, all money doesn't belong to the government. Enough money to pay for what we the people have voted for the government to do does.

I believe I mentioned it in an earlier thread, but without looking at my 1040, it was around 15% this year. Stupidly low, given the income.

And yet, nathan, you still gotta pay a higher percentage the guido.  I have definitely received the impression, and correct me if I am wrong, that you work on a W-2 basis.  You have no opportunity to manipulate that to achieve the "proper" ratio" of W-2 income to dividend (or better yet, ISO!!) to achieve your "proper" financial goals.  Hence, you have neither the right nor the gravitas to sit on high and pronounce enlightenment on how badly you are mistreated by the system.  (You shoulda gone to law school!  Or at least MBA school!)

But he is an island.  A rock unto himself with no real connection (nor obligation) to society or anyone else.  He IS the rugged individualist characterized (caricatured?) in all the long gone, but not forgotten Marlboro ads. (Dare I say the 'most interesting man'...no, that's too much.)  He is above the lowly great unwashed masses of people, and as such he and 'his kind' should have the perks and benefits.


Ok, will try to lighten up some...it is just too, too much to ignore!

Red,
I had one that started to blow up on me.  The base charred, lots of hissing and sizzling.  Luckily it stopped of its own volition.  Better stock up on those 'cause they are gonna disappear.  All the places I still use them means I need about 15 or 20 for a lifetime supply.  (Not many and not used much.)

I didn't ask what you paid.  I asked what you thought would be a fair percentage.

3% more.  How about it Red, is that too much??

And keep all the exemptions, deductions and exclusions that are in place now, including the long term capital gain treatment of stock/bond type investments that are made by an individual who actually purchases that investment (and holds for one year).

What should be eliminated - should NEVER have happened - is for one person to benefit from preferential treatment of having someone else pay for a so-called "investment" - the ISO, or Incentive Stock Option, and then have it treated as anything other than ordinary income.  There is NO investment component to it.  There is no building of companies, creation of jobs, or any other valid component of free enterprise capitalism involved in that process.  It is a grotesque mockery of capitalism (as put forth in testimony by the most successful captains of industry - you know who they are; the ones guido poo-poos as just not relevant).

The ONLY thing it contains is scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours cronyism between boards of directors.  With the entire rest of the US tax base subsidizing the process.  To the tune of enough trillions of dollars so that instead of the US debt being paid off, as was realistically in process for about 2015 or so, we are now deeper in debt than anyone, anywhere in the history of not just the world, but the entire solar system!  And maybe the galaxy!!

For me? Probably around 30%. Yes, I would not be terribly opposed to my tax doubling. I'd like a bit of warning so I can plan for the new tax rate, but otherwise, fine. The various governments do a lot for me and are drowning in red ink. Cutting spending isn't realistically going to close the funding gap, as most of the increase is in social security and unemployment extensions, much less pay off debt. (Treasury yields are strongly indicating that we have no need for fiscal restraint at present, but it's gotta be done sometime)

I am weird though. I think the people who gain more benefit from the infrastructure our taxes pay for and have a greater ability to pay should shoulder more of the burden. I'm perfectly OK with people making $8,000 a year paying zero income tax. I don't really need people who already have enough misery to pay out of some sense of "fairness."

30% of your Federal Adjusted Gross Income directly to the Feds in income tax is quite generous.  You are certainly more generous than I am.  We really need to get that line on Form 1040 for a voluntary individual increased tax contribution.  I would be very opposed to my tax doubling.   I am at 16% of Federal AGI for Federal Income Tax. Then of course we throw all the other taxes like state income tax, sales tax, car tags, gasoline tax...  It's been a lot of years since I've seen as much as 50% of a pay raise in my take home check.

Single with no dependents on the Fed tax gets $5700 standard deduction, $3650 personal exemption.  No one making less than $9350 pays Federal Income tax.  I have no problem with that.  This year Oklahoma finally matched the Federal standard deduction. Now if OK would match the personal exemption, that would help the little guy too.  Full time minimum wage is about $15,000. per year based on $7.25/hr.  I know there are jobs where tips are counted etc but as a common starting point I believe there should not be too many primary wage earners only making $8000/yr. 

I don't see that I use that much more infrastructure than someone with less income.  I use different infrastructure.  Someone riding a city bus uses the same roads that I do.  Public transit is subsidized all over the country (which I don't mind).  City parks are nice.  They typically don't generate any revenue (that I am aware of) and represent a loss of property tax and cost money to maintain.  I get charged rent on the ground my hangar is on at RVS and have to provide the Tulsa Airport Authority (TAA) with liability insurance in case someone gets hurt in my hangar and decides to sue TAA. Is the City of Tulsa a named insured on your home owners insurance?  The City of Tulsa (or TAA) gets about $.13/gallon on all the fuel sold at either TUL or RVS.  There are other fees involved at the airport depending on whether "you" are a business or just a private plane owner.  I voted for Vision 2025 but have yet to attend an event at the BOK Center.  There were some community improvements in Bixby too but I don't know what they were.  I almost always vote in favor of school issues but I have no children.  I think I am not getting a free ride on infrastructure.

Come on, Red, do you think 3% would be too much an increase??  Stick your neck out a little here...  nathan and I have both stepped up and made a definitive statement.

I will live with whatever is forced upon me regarding taxes.  Being single, no dependents, no mortgage interest deduction, getting only the standard deduction and not living paycheck to paycheck I think I am paying my fair share.  Give me the opportunity to buy something I might like such as a (real) trolley system for downtown Tulsa and I might be interested.  Bixby is over 9% total sales tax now. I reluctantly voted for the last increase since they listed some items I wanted.  I forget at the moment what they were.  I also voted for the last bond issue or whatever it was for Bixby.  Giving a blank check to the Feds or the State for business as usual is not for me.  I realize we cannot vote for every line item.  As long as there are things that are part of an agenda such as subsidies for corn based Ethanol for fuel, I will resist a tax increase.  I do not want to starve children or require someone to lose everything because of cancer (my dad died from cancer).  You and I will never agree on everything to cut and I don't expect to agree on everything.  At this point, I want more examination of expenditures before I agree to a tax increase.  Since I believe I am paying a fair share, I will not get into a bidding war of whether an increase should be 3%, 5% or whatever.  I asked Nathan what percent he favored since he stated he was definitely in favor of an increase in taxes.

We are in similar boat, except for spouse, so we both are getting slammed pretty good.

This 3% number I am talking about is not for the future, new or pending items.  It would be to pay the bill that we have already run up.  (And 3% may not be enough at this point...)

Accompanying cuts in spending - defense department is good place to start, with items like the no bid Halliburton type contracts immediately come to mind.

I am never "in favor" of an increase, but I am willing to put up with it to help out my kids and grandkids and lighten the abomination they are being saddled with.  Since it was OUR generation that has trashed their world (in SO many ways!)  Well, if you are paying single, you probably are paying a percent or two more right now, so you are off the hook.  guido on the other hand benefits from the 14% FICA savings too much, so he should have to pay.

Parents; greatest generation
Us; worst generation


Subsidies for any area of agriculture are wrong.  Subsidies for big oil is extremely wrong - there is 8 billion plus right there that would help.

Subsidies for education are an investment, not a subsidy.  An investment with a very short payback.

Defense spending has many social programing issues built in.  If we choose to do it that way fine but expect to pay $600 for a toilet seat or hammer.  Disclaimer, I work in the defense industry. I agree there are areas to save but disagree that defense needs to be gutted.  That is not in our best interest.

Subsidies for oil appear to depend on size.  Some of the most despicable subsidies appear not to apply for big oil but only for little oil. You know, your OK neighbor with a couple of marginal producing wells.

Our parents were the greatest generation because they beat the Axis powers.  Our generation has made some mistakes but I doubt we are the worst.  Good intentions gone bad just need correcting.  Nathan and I will probably disagree on what needs to be corrected but hey, thats a democratic republic. (Notice I did NOT say democracy, which we are not.)

Not saying to gut.  Saying to right size.  And reinstate the draft.  Without much in the way of deferments or exemptions from service.  Couple of major benefits; first, everyone gets the opportunity to do their civic duty.  Second, pay for draftees is considerably less. 

I mentioned somewhere here that I had support from military projects.  And while there is a sizable cost due to paperwork and the whole idea of mil specs, the idea of a $600 hammer is truly crazy.  The hammer costs $50 (triple retail) and $550 goes to CIA covert ops.  Of course we buy several hundred thousand of those "$600" hammers.  And don't forget the toilet seats!

Who do you think writes the tax code?

If everyone took a 3% increase, I think it would represent sound fiscal policy and I wouldn't personally object.  I've actually objected to the last couple of tax cuts on the state level and look where that's put us.  Hell, even a 1% increase is something.

Having one child a year away from graduating from college, and the other graduating from HS in a couple of weeks, doubling my taxes right now would be pretty brutal.  As well, I'm trying to accelerate my retirement savings so I don't have to work to 67 unless I want to.  I'm hoping I'll be in a position in 10 years to assume a more relaxed pace, but doubling my taxes would pretty much wipe out the additional savings I'm trying to do right now.

Well, 3% seems pretty nominal to me, even if it is really aggravating.

It is also the number that would have occurred and been imposed on the richest of the rich who so famously, through their trained lap dogs, the RWRE shot down the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.  That's all it is - 3%.  That's what took us from surplus and a paid off Federal deficit, to a $15 trillion dollar boondoggle that has been foisted on our kids and grandkids.

I assume by "everyone" you mean the 53% that actually pay federal income tax; correct? Because a 3% increase on those 47% owing no federal income tax equals what again?

Yes I know, my position is a result of my Koch brother and Murdochian indoctrination with a little RWRE thrown in for good measure.

Were you actually IN the military or did you do work FOR the military.

Yep, the 53% who pay taxes, and cut 3% from the EITC or whatever other gimmicks are used to pay people for unproductive lifestyles.  Not welfare, not SSI benefits (that comes under budget cuts), but the people who are getting more back from the IRS than they are paying in each year.

Everyone shares the burden.  However, this comes with the simple caveat: no tax increase until a corresponding blind across the board federal budget cut, no more sacred cows everyone has a skin in the game.  Everyone, including the government can figure out how to cover 3% less to spend.

It doesn't matter if they "don't pay" taxes now.  If you raise their taxes 3% they should get 3% less back.

Exactly what I was trying to say but may have mangled it.  Sheen gets it.

How's tricks with the goddesses these days?

Keep ignoring that they pay payroll taxes and sales taxes, among others.

(http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_6.gif)

No more than we ignore all the payroll taxes large corporations pay as well as property taxes, local taxes, and all the jobs they provide which wind up paying into the system.

What is your deal with "payroll taxes" and "sales taxes"? Everyone who has a job or buys something pays those. But not all of us pay federal income tax, which in my world, is far far more than my payroll tax. Do you really believe those who owe nothing in federal income taxes are contributing fairly to those that do pay them?

back on topic....

Figures that aox would give all the credit to Obama and none to the SEALs who actually risked their lives and carried out the mission.

Another example of mass psychosis....thanks Guido for proving up. Where is "no credit"

Our Navy SEALS deserve huge appreciation. They followed their orders and carried out the operation close to perfect.

Figures that your playmates would try to give more credit to Bush than Obama.

Care to explain who my playmates are?

Where was the appreciation for the SEALs in your stupid pic. The way I saw it, the only person taking credit was Obama.

Saw this FB as a repost. Something to think about (not the slap):



I will give Obama points for his decision not to nuke Osama's site from orbit, and risk never knowing for sure if we got him, and having our best/bravest go in there to identify and personally take him out.

It just floors me that people that he said HE did it.  Listen to his address again from last night.  He thanked those involved, from the intelligence gatherers to the foot soldiers performing the op to Director Pineta.

During this time especially it floors me to see people harping on something he never said.

I'm sure others have said it was his responsibility.  He was on watch, the CIC, he issued the order.  Intelligence and hard work of those that preceded him were just as responsible.  But make no mistake.  We took our eye off the ball from 03-09.  Only one person to blame for that mishap.  I'd have to think had we not gone into Iraq then Bush would be the one taking the credit for this.

And yes, I am also well aware of what the prisoners we had at Gitmo contributed to this op.  Does it mean rendering is still within the Geneva Accords?  I'll let those better suited make that decision.

So, people who are posting these incessant stupid posts on FB, remember this ... you can't fix stupid.

Would you be so wishy washy if a Republican had pulled the trigger on this op?  Seriously.  Talk about damning with faint praise.

In this moment where the guy who was instrumental in killing 3,000 Americans gets whacked, you are concerned about whom to give credit? I think I was one of the first that praised Obama's presidential appearance last night and how he gave complete props. Now, you and the forum cop comes in b!tching at me about it. What's the matter with you people?

And by the way, I am impressed that you were able to give full credit to Obama for "pull[ing] the trigger on this op" while in the same post thoroughly ignore the SEALs who actually finished bin Laden off. How about ripping TTC for posting a pic where Obama presumptively takes sole credit for the success instead of coming after me? You are despicable.  

That's an absurd argument.  Sorry.  Me no play.

Come on and lighten up a little.  It's just a photoshopped humor piece, satire never hurts especially with the sense of relief a lot of people are feeling today.  I don't think anyone on here has ignored the fine job the brave SEALs did.  Yes I've caught some stupid comments online elsewhere by people who make it sound like President Obama flew in and shot Bin Laden himself, but I really don't think that's what wevus was getting at.  He's perfectly welcome to defend himself, I just figured I'd help tone down the rhetoric a little.

Who? Rummy? Cheney? Rove? Murdoch? Colonel Sanders? The Dark Hand?

(Seriously: great post, I agree with the points you made.  I didn't catch him trying to make it a "me" moment either and I believe he actually did have some praise for President Bush and those before him).

I would tend to agree since he mentioned that Bush was one of the first people he called after they got the confirmation that he was in the 'dirt nap' status...oh wait, 'fish nap'?  You get my point.

Shark bait.  I used to fish with bacon...wait you don't think...?

Only took 2 1/2 years to do what Bush wouldn't do for 7 years.  That is the bottom line.

I'll bet that would have ticked off a lot of people if Bush had succeeded in getting OBL.

I wouldn't be included in that.  Even though I didn't care for the man as President, the sooner we got that asshat, the better.  But as I said, he evidently felt the need to finish what Dad wouldn't.  Or couldn't?

And it's obviously ticked some off already that Obama has.  I saw where some Fox News Heads were saying we shouldn't have killed him.  What?  Really?

I hadn't heard that.  I may have heard that the FNH reported that others have said that but I dismissed it as stupid and don't remember the wording.

I heard it was said, but truthfully haven't been able to verify it yet.  Maybe in the context of wishing that we'd taken him alive instead of killing him, but then it's likely a very public and costly trial would have been done.  Not something alot of victims' families would have wanted, I'm sure.

First I have heard of how it came to be.  They didn't even tell GB and Canada they thought maybe he might have been there.  They also never had visual confirmation from what was in the article.  Osama's codename was "Geronimo".  They figured Osama would be heavily guarded. 

I wonder if they were 1000 feet from their military school was that they would protect him possibly?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden)

Its horrible to think that they believe our troops should take incoming fire from somebody like Osama and risk their lives (even more) take him alive.  They did what they needed to do.

This is partly fair.  He did give up a lot of the manhunt to local tribes.  But I believe we still had people on it.  It was like trying to hit 1 person in a whole country.  He did say he wasn't worried about him and he didn't spend much time thinking about him.  In context that saying is true.  He did seem to be marginalized.  As he had to use couriers to send messages.  Each message was a risk on his life, etc etc.

Exactly.  One has to wonder how significant OBL was to Al Qaeda leadership at this juncture.  I would guess there was and is a succession plan in place and AQ will continue, perhaps with more resolve after this attack.  His slaying is still a symbolic victory, though I honestly don't think it does anything to further disrupt the day-to-day operation of Al Qaeda.  I had speculated as late as last week OBL had probably been dead for a few years since there were no recent videos or reputed activity out of him.

Best case scenario is power struggle.. which I doubt since it isn't centralized.

This is what Obama did.  Made the call to go in.  Not sure who picked the place/time, probably not Obama.  
The call would be difficult because 1)  If Osama went in or out at any point or rotated places.  One mistimed operation and he's gone (a.k.a. he got lucky)   2) it was in Pakistan and we just sent a seal team into a residential neighborhood basically.  (said he would when he ran, McCain said Pakistan was a soverign nation and we can't do things like that)  

They weren't sure he was in there in the first place.  Luckily he was.  If he wasn't, I wonder what the news would have been?  Cause we blew up a helicopter in a neighborhood (area) basically.  


*Osama Wife wasn't human shield and wasn't killed, 12 yr daughter there*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1383106/Osama-Bin-Laden-dead-Daughter-12-saw-shot-wife-NOT-human-shield.html?ito=feeds-newsxml (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1383106/Osama-Bin-Laden-dead-Daughter-12-saw-shot-wife-NOT-human-shield.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)

My take was that, pretty much since Tora Bora, Bin laden had been marginalized from an operational standpoint. He remained as their "spiritual" head (for lack of a better term) but for all practical purposes the group had atomized and turned to people like Zarqawi in Iraq, and the groups in Yemen and Indonesia, etc to advance the cause.  I think this is why Bush said that Bin Laden didn't matter -- and honestly, I think he was right at the time -- but it was a massive miscue from Bush on the domestic PR front, and I think was one of those major elements that undermined his ability to govern so much of the country. 

 

This foundation is one of the very worst things about America. Today the right-wing lunatics at the Heritage Foundation are crediting George W. Bush and the Patriot Act for the killing of Osama bin Laden http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/02/morning-bell-bin-laden-dead/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell .   Heritage gets lots of it's money from Coors. Since no one I know would drink that p!sswater, it's hard to get an effective boycott going, but it's worth reminding people at the bar  Quick Trip.

"Bin Laden’s elimination vindicates U.S. strategy in the region, started under President George W. Bush,"
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier this week, you told a group of journalists that you thought the idea of sending Special Forces to Pakistan to hunt down bin Laden was a strategy that would not work.
BUSH: Yes.

Q Now, recently, you've also --

BUSH: Because, first of all, Pakistan is a sovereign nation.

9/11 was a spectacular intelligence failure that occurred on Shrub's watch. Typical of the right wing, they'll take all the credit and hand out all the blame in any situation, despite all evidence to the contrary.
http://mediamatters.org/research/200805220002

Certainly you misspoke.  There isn't and never was Al Qaeda in Iraq or other associated terrorists.

I understand what President Bush was trying to say: There were far larger objectives we needed to worry about as they had marginalized OBL likely within the first few months in Afghanistan.  Unfortunately, we all had the expectation from the rhetoric leading up to the Afghani invasion that OBL would be rooted out and/or killed.  That was a major objective of that invasion along with getting the ruling Taliban out of power, if I recall correctly.  I think he was trying to say in his own bumbling way that the head of OBL was no longer a necessary objective in winning the WOT.

Well, they sure weren't there when we decided to invade, but lets just say it was a market ripe for new franchisees.

There you go Conan. This idiot proves my entire point, without even using "satire".

Sure there was, just not until after Hussein was no longer around to suppress them.

My tongue was bleeding from biting it after heir's comment.

That'll lern ya.  ;D And btw, I know most everyone is appreciative of the SEALs, I just wish I would read more about them than about how Obama/Bush. Articles like these is what sorta set me off.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/02/bin-laden-death-reax-the-shameless-and-stupid/

I'm a little weary already of the pats on the back to POTUS Bush for this as well.  Yes, I recognize it took a team to make this happen as well as executive policies which have been in place since the Bush days, but the honest truth is, those who deserve the biggest credit of all were those who went in on Sunday and carried out the mission.  I also don't get real lathered up about the "My, Me, I" video with POTUS Obama Sunday night.

Sadly, we may never get to see the faces, much less know the names, of those that actually risked their lives to deliver AMERICA this victory. I hope I am wrong.

As for Obama's speech, I had no problem with it at all.

Is this really what Fox is presenting relative to the OBL situation, or is Mediamatters being stupid again?

http://mediamatters.org/research/201105030016

They have to know they are appreciated.  I doubt we will ever know or it may be many years in the future.  To reveal their identities would make them instant targets.

Yes. The most civil your tongue has ever appeared. :)

There are some on the far right claiming this, but I highly doubt you'll hear it from any of the pols. Not to mention, I'm sure some of the Rs on the intel committees have seen the pictures/video of the ambush.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKzy_hnllrg&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Anblew Brightfart gets his due....

Sometimes the truth hurts, doesn't it?  Hence the pain in bitten tongue....

The difference is that Obama told Paneta to go after Bin Laden.  While Bush got on national television and said he didn't think it mattered if we got Bin Laden and he didn't really care if we did or not.  Several times.

Not to mention that he went away to the wrong country to 'not look for' Bin Laden.

Well, that's what happens on the steady diet of 'magic Kool Aid'.  Maybe if they didn't overdo the Kool Aid they could remember what the rest of the world has seen and not sound so derivative (RWRE script) and out of touch. 

That's gotta be how Mark Levin metabolizes his daily dose of Murdochiabread - he's a lawyer!


 

Bill Mahr, now there's a nice, center of the road, balanced....left hand wingnut.  He has as much credibility with me as the Fox news guys do with you.  I watched him long ago on HBO but tired of his politics. 

He's not really a leftist. He's more anti-Republican at the moment. Before our most recent war in Iraq, he was clearly more little l libertarian than anything else.

Nope. He's this guy:

(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGdDQuXG7v1CeyO50LjP5f1i1OU2jzGi5ye49LUeLEGUSCT_z2gg)

I believe you need a new prescription for eye glasses to see a bit more clearly.

I will agree he is anti-Republican.

You need to go back and watch his old stuff.

I watched his old stuff in its first issue.  At first he wasn't too awful. Listening to the "other side" was interesting. As time went on, he became unbearable.