• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

What Obama Has Said about His Own Birth

cheetah69

Well-known member
Steve said:
you guys are delusional. Period.

care to debate the facts that show Obama's childhood story was a fabrication?

or any other one of his lies?

like his faked selective service application?

his fake social security number?

or would you prefer to call names and throw insults?

I don't debate with birthers much like I don't debate those who believe in the tooth fairy. You're making a fool of yourself. find a new hobby.
 

cheetah69

Well-known member
Do you mean like the sobering sad and regretful night that came on the first Tuesday of Nov. 2010. What did they say about that night Oh I remember it was the LARGEST DEFEAT OF THE DEMS. IN MODERN HISTORY. :wink: And if the unemployment rate is still sitting near double digits, even if he gets on I don't see Obama's chances in 2012 to be something to party over. Well that is if the Dems allow a fair election IE no Black Panthers at polling station, No ACORN registering DEAD people and NO Unions taking to the streets protecting their interests/ pay offs.[/quote]

Haha. I like that you guys are so gleefully stupid and optimistic based on what happened in November of last year. What was it called, " a shellacking!!"?" Rejoice in it. That was ugly. But remember, those who voted and got Obama in the wh in 08 didn't bother with the election in 10. They'll be back in 12. And I'm sure after your republican candidate (palin, pawlenty, Romney, limbaugh?) gets trounced, you guys will have more disgustingly idiotic excuses like the Black Panthers and ACORN. You fail.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
I am not worried about the election in 12. In order for the libs to win they will have to do what the conservative election of 10 told them to do. If they continue to push their lib agenda they may as well start packing their bags..also their luggage
 

Tam

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
Do you mean like the sobering sad and regretful night that came on the first Tuesday of Nov. 2010. What did they say about that night Oh I remember it was the LARGEST DEFEAT OF THE DEMS. IN MODERN HISTORY. :wink: And if the unemployment rate is still sitting near double digits, even if he gets on I don't see Obama's chances in 2012 to be something to party over. Well that is if the Dems allow a fair election IE no Black Panthers at polling station, No ACORN registering DEAD people and NO Unions taking to the streets protecting their interests/ pay offs.

Haha. I like that you guys are so gleefully stupid and optimistic based on what happened in November of last year. What was it called, " a shellacking!!"?" Rejoice in it. That was ugly. But remember, those who voted and got Obama in the wh in 08 didn't bother with the election in 10. They'll be back in 12. And I'm sure after your republican candidate (palin, pawlenty, Romney, limbaugh?) gets trounced, you guys will have more disgustingly idiotic excuses like the Black Panthers and ACORN. You fail.[/quote]

Face it Obama was able to charm his way into the hearts of many as he had no record to judge him on. That is what you get when you vote for a JR. SENATOR. for President :wink: BUT he now has a record and let's just say it is not what most people expected. :wink: Trillions more in debt, Unemployment rates close to double digits and not expected to go down for years, record high home foreclosures, gas prices expected to reach $5. a gallon and more broken promises than anyone could imagine.

And denial of the Black Panthers and ACORN involvement of the 2008 election doesn't change the facts. INTIMIDATION CHARGES WERE BROUGHT AND WON it was Holder that dropped the charges to protect his buddies. And ACORN was defunded for their efforts and had to change their name. :wink:

BTW were you one that believed Obama was going to pay your mortgage and fill your gas tank once he got elected?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

My guess is the slush fund he was going to use wasn't QUITE big enough to pay back everyone so he just concentrated on the Unions and the Wall Street FAT CATs that really BOUGHT him the White House. Not only did he not fill your tank, he is using your money to pay back who he thinks will get him another chance in the Oval Office :wink: :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
What lies? Are sealed records the proof of lies? Once more, you guys are delusional. Period. You've not presented anything new in this debate about his place of birth. Why have the cases been thrown out? Why did the Republican governor of Hawaii verify his birth? Why can't any of you answer those questions?

I know you all hope that in 2012, he will somehow be left off the ballots in several states. It's not gonna happen. So I just suggest you prepare again for another sobering, sad and regretful night come the first Tuesday in November 2012.

Why did the new Dem. Gov. say that obama's vital records are written down and may not include a long form BC?

and you are a liar, just like obama.

Birds of a feather, I guess.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Cheat wrote.. [/quote]


how can a person that is to stupid to figure out a simple HTML command lecture a bunch of folk who obviously can master the basic computer skills?

but I always did like helping people learn.. so here goes..

each command or function must precede the intended writing and then follow with an end command.. usually by adding a / to the original command.. really simple.. for example [quote.] she isn't really smart just a smart ass[/quote.] ( I added a period (little dot) so you could see what it should look like),

or you could use the little buttons at the top of the topic box.. and the preview button (at the bottom) to see what it looks like...


and if you want to go back and fix some of the awful ones there is an edit function.. but that might be to much learning for one day for you..
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
Haha. I like that you guys are so gleefully stupid and optimistic based on what happened in November of last year. What was it called, " a shellacking!!"?" Rejoice in it. That was ugly. But remember, those who voted and got Obama in the wh in 08 didn't bother with the election in 10. They'll be back in 12. And I'm sure after your republican candidate (palin, pawlenty, Romney, limbaugh?) gets trounced, you guys will have more disgustingly idiotic excuses like the Black Panthers and ACORN. You fail.

I'm interested in how you arrived with such confidence at the part I bolded. While I agree that the last election may be over-rated and 2012 election is a long way off and almost anything can happen, if I were a betting man I'd not be doubling down on Obama at this point.

I think a fellow on another forum put it best as it relates to how voters feel about Obama at this time. This guy is not a poltical animal at all but sometimes participates in the political forum there.

He's from Minnesota, one of the bluest of the blue states, and when discussing Obama's re-election chances said something along the following lines: "I've met lots of people who say they voted for Obama in 2008 but say they won't be voting for him again. But I haven't met a single person who said they didn't vote for Obama in '08 who say they'll vote for him in 2012."

Obama got an unusually high turnout among groups that often don't bother to participate in national elections. Will they turn out again in such numbers? Perhaps you're right and they'll be back.

I'm thinking though that the pubs are really going to have to screw the pooch to lose the next one.
 

cheetah69

Well-known member
I'm interested in how you arrived with such confidence at the part I bolded. While I agree that the last election may be over-rated and 2012 election is a long way off and almost anything can happen, if I were a betting man I'd not be doubling down on Obama at this point.

I think a fellow on another forum put it best as it relates to how voters feel about Obama at this time. This guy is not a poltical animal at all but sometimes participates in the political forum there.

He's from Minnesota, one of the bluest of the blue states, and when discussing Obama's re-election chances said something along the following lines: "I've met lots of people who say they voted for Obama in 2008 but say they won't be voting for him again. But I haven't met a single person who said they didn't vote for Obama in '08 who say they'll vote for him in 2012."

Obama got an unusually high turnout among groups that often don't bother to participate in national elections. Will they turn out again in such numbers? Perhaps you're right and they'll be back.

I'm thinking though that the pubs are really going to have to screw the pooch to lose the next one.[/quote]

I don't doubt that a victory in 12 will probably be a bit more difficult than the slaughter in 08. But I'm comforted and therefore confident with the knowledge that regardless of how low Obama's numbers are, they are ALWAYS higher than any possible Republican candidate. Hell, Obama is still the most popular entity out of dc. Couple that with the already-stated fact that young folks (the group that really showed up for Obama) don't normally bother with midterms AND the resurging of his numbers and surely you could see that the odds are in Obama's favor. With history and the state of affairs, like him or not, a betting man would vote on Obama retaining the WH in 12.
 

cheetah69

Well-known member
Steve said:
Cheat wrote..


how can a person that is to stupid to figure out a simple HTML command lecture a bunch of folk who obviously can master the basic computer skills?

haha. steve this isn't my stomping ground. How I get my message across isn't as important as my message. You read what I'm saying. That's all I'm concerned about. You wanna give tutorials on proper posting proceedings? have at it.

And you feel "lectured?" Haha. You would.
 

cheetah69

Well-known member
And denial of the Black Panthers and ACORN involvement of the 2008 election doesn't change the facts. INTIMIDATION CHARGES WERE BROUGHT AND WON it was Holder that dropped the charges to protect his buddies. And ACORN was defunded for their efforts and had to change their name. :wink:

BTW were you one that believed Obama was going to pay your mortgage and fill your gas tank once he got elected?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

You're too busy buttressing an already stupid argument with sensationalism and bull. There was no resurgence of the Black Panther party. There were two loony negroes at a polling place who had no official relationship with the REAL BP party. But leave it to FOX to spread that crap and for fools to believe it. As far as ACORN is concerned, if they were guilty of anything it was of REGISTRATION fraud. Not VOTER fraud. So they could have gotten Daffy Duck to register. When it came down to counting votes, that wouldn't have mattered. Unless, of course, there was a Daffy Duck to actually show up. Try doing more than soaking up the lies and stupidity on FOX and TRY thinking for yourself.

Oh and the Youtube clip is classic right wing spin. The woman never said Obama was gonna pay for anything you twit. She said she woudln't have to worry about some things. But of course because you (and the youtube vid creater) have a narrative to uphold you spin it that way. Grow up.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
I don't doubt that a victory in 12 will probably be a bit more difficult than the slaughter in 08. But I'm comforted and therefore confident with the knowledge that regardless of how low Obama's numbers are, they are ALWAYS higher than any possible Republican candidate. Hell, Obama is still the most popular entity out of dc. Couple that with the already-stated fact that young folks (the group that really showed up for Obama) don't normally bother with midterms AND the resurging of his numbers and surely you could see that the odds are in Obama's favor. With history and the state of affairs, like him or not, a betting man would vote on Obama retaining the WH in 12.

Not sure I agree with the ALWAYS higher part.

A Zogby poll from early January shows Obama losing to Christie by 3 percentage points and tied with Romney.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.cfm?ID=1937

For the record, I don't give a flip about polls. There's only one that matters and it's on election day.

The power of the office is huge in a presidential election and I'm sure Obama will use it to his advantage. But Carter and Bush I held that power as well and look what happened to them.

As for the comment about Obama being the most popular entity out of DC, I agree. But I think you assume that the pubs are going to nominate a DC insider as their next presidential candidate. I doubt they will. I think you'll see moderate pub governor carrying the flag the next time around.....at least I hope so.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
And since you brought up polling numbers and the various group that supported Obama in '08, here's an interesting article that looks at each of those groups in '08 versus results post-election 2010.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2010/11/obamas-poll-numbers-point-his-defeat-2012

Start with voters who call themselves independents. Obama won 52 percent of them in 2008; now, according to Gallup, he is at 42 percent. Obama's party as a whole fared even worse among independents in the midterms, losing them to Republicans by 19 points. If Obama does anywhere near that badly in 2012, he'll lose.

Next, women. In 2008, Obama won 56 percent of female voters. Today, he's at 49 percent. If that number doesn't improve, he'll be in deep trouble. (Obama is also down with men, from 49 percent in 2008 to 44 percent now.)

Even younger voters, a key part of Obama's coalition, are peeling away. In '08, Obama won 66 percent of voters 18-29 years of age. Now, he's at 58 percent. That might seem pretty good, but not when you consider his deterioration among other age groups. Obama has dropped 5 percentage points among voters in and around middle age, and 8 percent with voters above 65. If those trends continue, he'll lose.

Then there are white voters. In '08, Obama won 43 percent of whites. Now, he's at 37 percent -- a dangerously low number for his re-election hopes. He won 67 percent of Hispanic voters in 2008; now, he's at 58 percent. Even support among black voters, a bedrock for Obama, has ticked downward; after winning 95 percent of blacks in '08, he's now at 89 percent.

Just one group has stuck with Obama through it all. In '08, he won 58 percent of people with graduate degrees. Now, he's at 59 percent. It appears that academic types will be with Obama always, but they're not enough.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
An actual analysis by a conservative, instead of assumptions from a liberal.

I like your work WW. :lol:

One has to also look at the added congressional seats added to conservative leaning states after the last census.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Steve said:
Cheat wrote..

how can a person that is to stupid to figure out a simple HTML command lecture a bunch of folk who obviously can master the basic computer skills?


cheetah69". said:
* said:
haha. steve this isn't my stomping ground. How I get my message across isn't as important as my message. You read what I'm saying. That's all I'm concerned about. You wanna give tutorials on proper posting proceedings? have at it.

And you feel "lectured?" Haha. You would.

you will never get your unimportant message across if you can't learn how to separate it from the others' more important, well informed, properly formatted messages.

*[quote.] this message was fixed to show what a post should look like :? [/quote.]
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Steve said:
Steve said:
Cheat wrote..

how can a person that is to stupid to figure out a simple HTML command lecture a bunch of folk who obviously can master the basic computer skills?


cheetah69". said:
* said:
haha. steve this isn't my stomping ground. How I get my message across isn't as important as my message. You read what I'm saying. That's all I'm concerned about. You wanna give tutorials on proper posting proceedings? have at it.

And you feel "lectured?" Haha. You would.

you will never get your unimportant message across if you can't learn how to separate it from the others' more important, well informed, properly formatted messages.

*[quote.] this message was fixed to show what a post should look like :? [/quote.]

Cheet's no idiot Steve. He knows how to use the quote function. I suspect he's doing what he's doing for some other reason.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Steve said:
Steve said:
Cheat wrote..

how can a person that is to stupid to figure out a simple HTML command lecture a bunch of folk who obviously can master the basic computer skills?


cheetah69". said:
* said:
haha. steve this isn't my stomping ground. How I get my message across isn't as important as my message. You read what I'm saying. That's all I'm concerned about. You wanna give tutorials on proper posting proceedings? have at it.

And you feel "lectured?" Haha. You would.

you will never get your unimportant message across if you can't learn how to separate it from the others' more important, well informed, properly formatted messages.

*[quote.] this message was fixed to show what a post should look like :? [/quote.]

Cheet's no idiot Steve. He knows how to use the quote function. I suspect he's doing what he's doing for some other reason.

he / she is a liberal.. thus.. an (well not the sharpest crayon in the box)
 

Tam

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
I'm interested in how you arrived with such confidence at the part I bolded. While I agree that the last election may be over-rated and 2012 election is a long way off and almost anything can happen, if I were a betting man I'd not be doubling down on Obama at this point.

I think a fellow on another forum put it best as it relates to how voters feel about Obama at this time. This guy is not a poltical animal at all but sometimes participates in the political forum there.

He's from Minnesota, one of the bluest of the blue states, and when discussing Obama's re-election chances said something along the following lines: "I've met lots of people who say they voted for Obama in 2008 but say they won't be voting for him again. But I haven't met a single person who said they didn't vote for Obama in '08 who say they'll vote for him in 2012."

Obama got an unusually high turnout among groups that often don't bother to participate in national elections. Will they turn out again in such numbers? Perhaps you're right and they'll be back.

I'm thinking though that the pubs are really going to have to screw the pooch to lose the next one.

I don't doubt that a victory in 12 will probably be a bit more difficult than the slaughter in 08. But I'm comforted and therefore confident with the knowledge that regardless of how low Obama's numbers are, they are ALWAYS higher than any possible Republican candidate. Hell, Obama is still the most popular entity out of dc. Couple that with the already-stated fact that young folks (the group that really showed up for Obama) don't normally bother with midterms AND the resurging of his numbers and surely you could see that the odds are in Obama's favor. With history and the state of affairs, like him or not, a betting man would vote on Obama retaining the WH in 12.
Cheetah you seem to have forgotten one simple fact about the US elections. It is not the Dems or the Republicans that decide elections it is the INDEPENDENTS. AND shown in fine style the INDEPENDENTS have woke up along with some Blue Dog Dems and soft Republicans that voted for him and they see Obama for the Far Left Liberal he is even if you don't. They have revolted against his PROGRESSIVE AGENDA by giving the Dems the shellacking they deserved in 2010. SO IF I were you I wouldn't be counting on the same election results in 2012 NO matter how many DEAD people the DEMS manage to sign up to vote. :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
cheetah69 said:
You're too busy buttressing an already stupid argument with sensationalism and bull. There was no resurgence of the Black Panther party. There were two loony negroes at a polling place who had no official relationship with the REAL BP party. But leave it to FOX to spread that crap and for fools to believe it. As far as ACORN is concerned, if they were guilty of anything it was of REGISTRATION fraud. Not VOTER fraud. So they could have gotten Daffy Duck to register. When it came down to counting votes, that wouldn't have mattered. Unless, of course, there was a Daffy Duck to actually show up. Try doing more than soaking up the lies and stupidity on FOX and TRY thinking for yourself.

NICE TRY :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn6h-xeXwcM&feature=player_embedded

Not that I agree with many Dems but this is a Pretty damning interview toward the Obama Administration from a pretty well connected Democrat. Notice where he said the Guy with the billyclub was the leader of the BP and when he testified a group of BP were sitting in the room to intimidate him. Notice how he mentions ACORN and the thousands of voters they registared and how they will not be making sure these people are legal voters? We are not talking about daffy duck we are talking about people walking into a polling station and claiming to be someone they are not and people being intimidated into not questioning them.

BTW ask yourself What would make a LIFE LONG DEMOCRAT with lots of connections like Bartle Bull campaign for a Republican even before he witnessed the Actions Obama's Administration took over blatant Vote Intimidation that he personally witnessed and testified to?

You need to watch something besides MSNBC if you want to see the light of day Bartle Bull was talking about. :roll:
 

cheetah69

Well-known member
I don't really place too much on polls either. I was JUST reading one from 07 that had clinton at 52% and Obama at 20% among dems. And we know how that turned out. But for right now, that's all we got. And for the most part, those making claims of "ONE TERMER" are doing so based on wishful thinking and not much proof or evidence otherwise.
 

Latest posts

Top