- This topic has 340 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
PadreBrian.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 15, 2009 at 6:00 PM #431783July 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM #431074
partypup
Participant[quote=pri_dk]Questions:
If any of us were to run for President, how would we prove we were born in the US?
Is anyone in this discussion able to provide more proof than a birth certificate?
If all of our past Presidents were required to produce more official proof than a state-issued birth certificate, could they have done so?[/quote]
I don’t know the answers to questions 2 or 3, but I had to present a certified live birth certificate when I took the CA Bar (in addition to fingerprints and an extensive background check). This is apparently more documentation than is currently required of a presidential candidate. Which is not a comforting fact.
July 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM #431290Participant[quote=pri_dk]Questions:
If any of us were to run for President, how would we prove we were born in the US?
Is anyone in this discussion able to provide more proof than a birth certificate?
If all of our past Presidents were required to produce more official proof than a state-issued birth certificate, could they have done so?[/quote]
I don’t know the answers to questions 2 or 3, but I had to present a certified live birth certificate when I took the CA Bar (in addition to fingerprints and an extensive background check). This is apparently more documentation than is currently required of a presidential candidate. Which is not a comforting fact.
July 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM #431580Participant[quote=pri_dk]Questions:
If any of us were to run for President, how would we prove we were born in the US?
Is anyone in this discussion able to provide more proof than a birth certificate?
If all of our past Presidents were required to produce more official proof than a state-issued birth certificate, could they have done so?[/quote]
I don’t know the answers to questions 2 or 3, but I had to present a certified live birth certificate when I took the CA Bar (in addition to fingerprints and an extensive background check). This is apparently more documentation than is currently required of a presidential candidate. Which is not a comforting fact.
July 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM #431649Participant[quote=pri_dk]Questions:
If any of us were to run for President, how would we prove we were born in the US?
Is anyone in this discussion able to provide more proof than a birth certificate?
If all of our past Presidents were required to produce more official proof than a state-issued birth certificate, could they have done so?[/quote]
I don’t know the answers to questions 2 or 3, but I had to present a certified live birth certificate when I took the CA Bar (in addition to fingerprints and an extensive background check). This is apparently more documentation than is currently required of a presidential candidate. Which is not a comforting fact.
July 15, 2009 at 6:19 PM #431808Participant[quote=pri_dk]Questions:
If any of us were to run for President, how would we prove we were born in the US?
Is anyone in this discussion able to provide more proof than a birth certificate?
If all of our past Presidents were required to produce more official proof than a state-issued birth certificate, could they have done so?[/quote]
I don’t know the answers to questions 2 or 3, but I had to present a certified live birth certificate when I took the CA Bar (in addition to fingerprints and an extensive background check). This is apparently more documentation than is currently required of a presidential candidate. Which is not a comforting fact.
July 15, 2009 at 6:23 PM #431079Participant[quote=dbapig]May I add something interesting.
McCain was NOT born in USA. Well, the mainland of USA that is. He was born in Panama, inside a US Naval base where his father was stationed at.
I find it interesting that both candidates in 2008 POTUS election were NOT born in mainland of USA. Obama in Hawaii and McCain in Panama…[/quote]
It is odd, I agree. However, the McCain issue was addressed — on the merits. He presented a live certificate of birth and proof that he was born on a U.S. military base, which qualifies as U.S. soil and therefore makes him a natural-born citizen.
I think the only thing the tin foil crowd want is for Obama to present evidence as McCain did.
July 15, 2009 at 6:23 PM #431294Participant[quote=dbapig]May I add something interesting.
McCain was NOT born in USA. Well, the mainland of USA that is. He was born in Panama, inside a US Naval base where his father was stationed at.
I find it interesting that both candidates in 2008 POTUS election were NOT born in mainland of USA. Obama in Hawaii and McCain in Panama…[/quote]
It is odd, I agree. However, the McCain issue was addressed — on the merits. He presented a live certificate of birth and proof that he was born on a U.S. military base, which qualifies as U.S. soil and therefore makes him a natural-born citizen.
I think the only thing the tin foil crowd want is for Obama to present evidence as McCain did.
July 15, 2009 at 6:23 PM #431585Participant[quote=dbapig]May I add something interesting.
McCain was NOT born in USA. Well, the mainland of USA that is. He was born in Panama, inside a US Naval base where his father was stationed at.
I find it interesting that both candidates in 2008 POTUS election were NOT born in mainland of USA. Obama in Hawaii and McCain in Panama…[/quote]
It is odd, I agree. However, the McCain issue was addressed — on the merits. He presented a live certificate of birth and proof that he was born on a U.S. military base, which qualifies as U.S. soil and therefore makes him a natural-born citizen.
I think the only thing the tin foil crowd want is for Obama to present evidence as McCain did.
July 15, 2009 at 6:23 PM #431654Participant[quote=dbapig]May I add something interesting.
McCain was NOT born in USA. Well, the mainland of USA that is. He was born in Panama, inside a US Naval base where his father was stationed at.
I find it interesting that both candidates in 2008 POTUS election were NOT born in mainland of USA. Obama in Hawaii and McCain in Panama…[/quote]
It is odd, I agree. However, the McCain issue was addressed — on the merits. He presented a live certificate of birth and proof that he was born on a U.S. military base, which qualifies as U.S. soil and therefore makes him a natural-born citizen.
I think the only thing the tin foil crowd want is for Obama to present evidence as McCain did.
July 15, 2009 at 6:23 PM #431813Participant[quote=dbapig]May I add something interesting.
McCain was NOT born in USA. Well, the mainland of USA that is. He was born in Panama, inside a US Naval base where his father was stationed at.
I find it interesting that both candidates in 2008 POTUS election were NOT born in mainland of USA. Obama in Hawaii and McCain in Panama…[/quote]
It is odd, I agree. However, the McCain issue was addressed — on the merits. He presented a live certificate of birth and proof that he was born on a U.S. military base, which qualifies as U.S. soil and therefore makes him a natural-born citizen.
I think the only thing the tin foil crowd want is for Obama to present evidence as McCain did.
July 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM #431088Participant[quote=Arraya]The reason is news is because market making software was stolen and COULD BE used to front run orders if someone wanted use it maliciously. Where the tin foil hat crowd goes off is that they immediately assume it was being used by GS for that purpose.
Don’t ever become an investigative journalist, lawyer or detective. Actually, it sounds like you are playing defense attorney for GS.
Frequent rumors of large wall street firm illegally manipulating markets, then admits it has a program that can, in their words, “manipulate the market it unfair ways”
No, no story there. I’m not even really interested in where the Russian sent it in europe, either. Sure, the story is the thief. Right.
Just like those two guys that disappeared after they got caught with 134 billion in bonds on the boarder of switzerland. The story was the thief, not who sent them, how the escaped or who was the customer.
Nope, no story there.
Go to sleep america… Go to sleep…
Conspiracies are for the weak minded and gullible. Which is why we need a cyber-czar to take care of all those nasty rumors. We would not want a bunch of unemployed pissed off people reading a bunch of CTs on the internet.
It could get ugly…
“[/quote]
Arraya, I love how conspiracies never exist – until they are discovered. Was there a conspiracy to fabricate the existence of WMD in order to deceive the American people to invade Iraq? Many of us thought yes and were branded conspiracy theorists. A few years later, this information becomes mainstream news and somehow sheds its conspiracy label.
Was there a conspiracy to “out” Valerie Plame, despite the protests of the Bush administration? After much hemming and hawing, we eventually got the truth on that one, too.
Was there a conspiracy among big banks and Hanky Panky Paulson to loot our Treasury through TARP? Well, the mainstream news would have us believe last Fall that that was just crazy talk. Now members of the House are calling for a Fed audit. Why? Because they don’t trust where the money went, and only the truly foolish now believe that Hank wasn’t colluding with Goldman to enrich their coffers at taxpayers’ expense.
Yep, conspiracy theories are only for the crazy whackjobs – until the naive finally come to their senses and embrace them. And then they call it “breaking news”. LOL.
July 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM #431304Participant[quote=Arraya]The reason is news is because market making software was stolen and COULD BE used to front run orders if someone wanted use it maliciously. Where the tin foil hat crowd goes off is that they immediately assume it was being used by GS for that purpose.
Don’t ever become an investigative journalist, lawyer or detective. Actually, it sounds like you are playing defense attorney for GS.
Frequent rumors of large wall street firm illegally manipulating markets, then admits it has a program that can, in their words, “manipulate the market it unfair ways”
No, no story there. I’m not even really interested in where the Russian sent it in europe, either. Sure, the story is the thief. Right.
Just like those two guys that disappeared after they got caught with 134 billion in bonds on the boarder of switzerland. The story was the thief, not who sent them, how the escaped or who was the customer.
Nope, no story there.
Go to sleep america… Go to sleep…
Conspiracies are for the weak minded and gullible. Which is why we need a cyber-czar to take care of all those nasty rumors. We would not want a bunch of unemployed pissed off people reading a bunch of CTs on the internet.
It could get ugly…
“[/quote]
Arraya, I love how conspiracies never exist – until they are discovered. Was there a conspiracy to fabricate the existence of WMD in order to deceive the American people to invade Iraq? Many of us thought yes and were branded conspiracy theorists. A few years later, this information becomes mainstream news and somehow sheds its conspiracy label.
Was there a conspiracy to “out” Valerie Plame, despite the protests of the Bush administration? After much hemming and hawing, we eventually got the truth on that one, too.
Was there a conspiracy among big banks and Hanky Panky Paulson to loot our Treasury through TARP? Well, the mainstream news would have us believe last Fall that that was just crazy talk. Now members of the House are calling for a Fed audit. Why? Because they don’t trust where the money went, and only the truly foolish now believe that Hank wasn’t colluding with Goldman to enrich their coffers at taxpayers’ expense.
Yep, conspiracy theories are only for the crazy whackjobs – until the naive finally come to their senses and embrace them. And then they call it “breaking news”. LOL.
July 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM #431595Participant[quote=Arraya]The reason is news is because market making software was stolen and COULD BE used to front run orders if someone wanted use it maliciously. Where the tin foil hat crowd goes off is that they immediately assume it was being used by GS for that purpose.
Don’t ever become an investigative journalist, lawyer or detective. Actually, it sounds like you are playing defense attorney for GS.
Frequent rumors of large wall street firm illegally manipulating markets, then admits it has a program that can, in their words, “manipulate the market it unfair ways”
No, no story there. I’m not even really interested in where the Russian sent it in europe, either. Sure, the story is the thief. Right.
Just like those two guys that disappeared after they got caught with 134 billion in bonds on the boarder of switzerland. The story was the thief, not who sent them, how the escaped or who was the customer.
Nope, no story there.
Go to sleep america… Go to sleep…
Conspiracies are for the weak minded and gullible. Which is why we need a cyber-czar to take care of all those nasty rumors. We would not want a bunch of unemployed pissed off people reading a bunch of CTs on the internet.
It could get ugly…
“[/quote]
Arraya, I love how conspiracies never exist – until they are discovered. Was there a conspiracy to fabricate the existence of WMD in order to deceive the American people to invade Iraq? Many of us thought yes and were branded conspiracy theorists. A few years later, this information becomes mainstream news and somehow sheds its conspiracy label.
Was there a conspiracy to “out” Valerie Plame, despite the protests of the Bush administration? After much hemming and hawing, we eventually got the truth on that one, too.
Was there a conspiracy among big banks and Hanky Panky Paulson to loot our Treasury through TARP? Well, the mainstream news would have us believe last Fall that that was just crazy talk. Now members of the House are calling for a Fed audit. Why? Because they don’t trust where the money went, and only the truly foolish now believe that Hank wasn’t colluding with Goldman to enrich their coffers at taxpayers’ expense.
Yep, conspiracy theories are only for the crazy whackjobs – until the naive finally come to their senses and embrace them. And then they call it “breaking news”. LOL.
July 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM #431664Participant[quote=Arraya]The reason is news is because market making software was stolen and COULD BE used to front run orders if someone wanted use it maliciously. Where the tin foil hat crowd goes off is that they immediately assume it was being used by GS for that purpose.
Don’t ever become an investigative journalist, lawyer or detective. Actually, it sounds like you are playing defense attorney for GS.
Frequent rumors of large wall street firm illegally manipulating markets, then admits it has a program that can, in their words, “manipulate the market it unfair ways”
No, no story there. I’m not even really interested in where the Russian sent it in europe, either. Sure, the story is the thief. Right.
Just like those two guys that disappeared after they got caught with 134 billion in bonds on the boarder of switzerland. The story was the thief, not who sent them, how the escaped or who was the customer.
Nope, no story there.
Go to sleep america… Go to sleep…
Conspiracies are for the weak minded and gullible. Which is why we need a cyber-czar to take care of all those nasty rumors. We would not want a bunch of unemployed pissed off people reading a bunch of CTs on the internet.
It could get ugly…
“[/quote]
Arraya, I love how conspiracies never exist – until they are discovered. Was there a conspiracy to fabricate the existence of WMD in order to deceive the American people to invade Iraq? Many of us thought yes and were branded conspiracy theorists. A few years later, this information becomes mainstream news and somehow sheds its conspiracy label.
Was there a conspiracy to “out” Valerie Plame, despite the protests of the Bush administration? After much hemming and hawing, we eventually got the truth on that one, too.
Was there a conspiracy among big banks and Hanky Panky Paulson to loot our Treasury through TARP? Well, the mainstream news would have us believe last Fall that that was just crazy talk. Now members of the House are calling for a Fed audit. Why? Because they don’t trust where the money went, and only the truly foolish now believe that Hank wasn’t colluding with Goldman to enrich their coffers at taxpayers’ expense.
Yep, conspiracy theories are only for the crazy whackjobs – until the naive finally come to their senses and embrace them. And then they call it “breaking news”. LOL.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.