American Politics

[Meg 368]

I'd love to know what is so difficult about obtaining a birth certificate. My parents showed up at the county building to get a copy of my sister's birth certificate and had it in an afternoon. In fact, they got birth certificates for all of their children in less than an hour.

It depends on the state.

The document I received is obviously a computer print-out from a database. I do not know where the originals are stored. It is quite possible they are stored in an off-site facility. In such cases, it is usually a pain to retrieve the documents. I know that, in the case of DC, many documents are stored in facilities in the mountains.

As is mine and I know the originals weren't stored at the building where we got them printed.

It's understandable that getting the original could take several weeks, or even a few months, but years?

As I understand, Hawaii's has a law not to release the originals at all. While you and I may think that's ridiculous, doesn't each state have the right to handle it's own stupid bureaucracy the way it sees fit?

[hym 358]

As I understand, Hawaii's has a law not to release the originals at all. While you and I may think that's ridiculous, doesn't each state have the right to handle it's own stupid bureaucracy the way it sees fit?

Okay, fair enough. However, that begs the next question: If this is indeed true, why wasn't this fact mentioned? The Obama administration could have done quite a bit to deflate the demands for his original birth certificate if he had simply pointed people to the Hawaii legislation indicating that the original documents are never to be released. As much as I think the "birther" debate is stupid, I can't help but feel that Obama is at least partially responsible for it lasting this long.

[Easy Bakes 253]

As I understand, Hawaii's has a law not to release the originals at all. While you and I may think that's ridiculous, doesn't each state have the right to handle it's own stupid bureaucracy the way it sees fit?

Okay, fair enough. However, that begs the next question: If this is indeed true, why wasn't this fact mentioned? The Obama administration could have done quite a bit to deflate the demands for his original birth certificate if he had simply pointed people to the Hawaii legislation indicating that the original documents are never to be released. As much as I think the "birther" debate is stupid, I can't help but feel that Obama is at least partially responsible for it lasting this long.

to get people worked up over this NON Issue.

I thought this debate was over last year,and out of the blue Obama releases this document and gets

the whole thing back in the news when he cold have just let it rest, no one was making an issue of this topic any more and now its the same debates were were having before.

And again its to late hes got one more year left.

[Cobraroll 138]

As I understand, Hawaii's has a law not to release the originals at all. While you and I may think that's ridiculous, doesn't each state have the right to handle it's own stupid bureaucracy the way it sees fit?

Okay, fair enough. However, that begs the next question: If this is indeed true, why wasn't this fact mentioned? The Obama administration could have done quite a bit to deflate the demands for his original birth certificate if he had simply pointed people to the Hawaii legislation indicating that the original documents are never to be released. As much as I think the "birther" debate is stupid, I can't help but feel that Obama is at least partially responsible for it lasting this long.

Well... I don't know what you have been reading, but the fact that the State of Hawaii doesn't release full birth certificates under normal circumstances was mentioned several times in the Norwegian press. I guess it's a well-known fact over there as well, I mean, the slightest bit of research would have lead to that legislation. After all, our journalists, living two oceans away from the state in question, found out quite early. I think the Obama administration did point it out, but mentioning this in the news on the subject doesn't make for a good conspiracy story. It looks badly like a case of discarding facts to make the story more exciting.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

One thing that I find interesting about the whole birther debate: McCain was definitely not born in the USA. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. A law was passed almost a year later, giving him citizenship. Is it "natural born" if it took an act of Congress to make him a citizen?

Meg, Hym: What do you think of a Trump/Huckabee ticket? How long do you think the Donald would last if they got elected?

I think that would be tantamount to the republican party shooting itself in the foot.

Couldn't happen to a stupider bunch. How many repubnicans would support the ticket regardless of who was on it?

[Larks2242 251]

One thing that I find interesting about the whole birther debate: McCain was definitely not born in the USA. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. A law was passed almost a year later, giving him citizenship. Is it "natural born" if it took an act of Congress to make him a citizen?

Wasen't he born on a military base? I believe anyone born on an American base reguardless of the country is a US citizen.

[Meg 368]

As I understand, Hawaii's has a law not to release the originals at all. While you and I may think that's ridiculous, doesn't each state have the right to handle it's own stupid bureaucracy the way it sees fit?

Okay, fair enough. However, that begs the next question: If this is indeed true, why wasn't this fact mentioned? The Obama administration could have done quite a bit to deflate the demands for his original birth certificate if he had simply pointed people to the Hawaii legislation indicating that the original documents are never to be released. As much as I think the "birther" debate is stupid, I can't help but feel that Obama is at least partially responsible for it lasting this long.

Well... I don't know what you have been reading, but the fact that the State of Hawaii doesn't release full birth certificates under normal circumstances was mentioned several times in the Norwegian press. I guess it's a well-known fact over there as well, I mean, the slightest bit of research would have lead to that legislation. After all, our journalists, living two oceans away from the state in question, found out quite early. I think the Obama administration did point it out, but mentioning this in the news on the subject doesn't make for a good conspiracy story. It looks badly like a case of discarding facts to make the story more exciting.

It was mentioned frequently here as well. It is a case of disregarding the facts to make the story more interesting.

One thing that I find interesting about the whole birther debate: McCain was definitely not born in the USA. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. A law was passed almost a year later, giving him citizenship. Is it "natural born" if it took an act of Congress to make him a citizen?

Wasen't he born on a military base? I believe anyone born on an American base reguardless of the country is a US citizen.

I would think so as well. But, if that is true, why was there a need to pass a law a year later making people in his situation citizens? I read this but it doesn't really address that question.

Technically it was a military "installation" not a "base". Maybe there is a difference legally; I don't know. The whole question seems rather silly to me.

Meg, Hym: What do you think of a Trump/Huckabee ticket? How long do you think the Donald would last if they got elected?

I think that would be tantamount to the republican party shooting itself in the foot.

Couldn't happen to a stupider bunch. How many repubnicans would support the ticket regardless of who was on it?

I think a lot people vote the party ticket, regardless. which, imho, is taking the lazy way out and not using your brain. Which is one reason I'm registered as independent. Excuse me "unaffiliated". For some reason, "independent" was not one of my choices.

Back in 2008, many Republicans were not excited about McCain as a nominee. He was too moderate for them. So they put Palin on the ticket to "energize the Republican base". It did that but it also sent most moderates screaming in the other direction.

There are a lot of people who did not buy the "Obama as savior" routine but refused to put Sarah Palin one heartbeat away from the Presidency. I'm not convinced that the Republican party has learned. The problem is, the crazies can win primaries but are much less likely to win a national election.

[hym 358]

Well... I don't know what you have been reading, but the fact that the State of Hawaii doesn't release full birth certificates under normal circumstances was mentioned several times in the Norwegian press. I guess it's a well-known fact over there as well, I mean, the slightest bit of research would have lead to that legislation. After all, our journalists, living two oceans away from the state in question, found out quite early. I think the Obama administration did point it out, but mentioning this in the news on the subject doesn't make for a good conspiracy story. It looks badly like a case of discarding facts to make the story more exciting.

It was mentioned frequently here as well. It is a case of disregarding the facts to make the story more interesting.

If it was mentioned on the news, then I retract my previous comment. (The fact that even after 2 years of reading most "birther" articles I had seen, I never saw a single AP, MSNBC, ABC, CNN, FOX, BBC, or Reuters article mentioning that Hawaii doesn't normally release the original document, is a very sad statement about the quality of the press.)

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well... I don't know what you have been reading, but the fact that the State of Hawaii doesn't release full birth certificates under normal circumstances was mentioned several times in the Norwegian press. I guess it's a well-known fact over there as well, I mean, the slightest bit of research would have lead to that legislation. After all, our journalists, living two oceans away from the state in question, found out quite early. I think the Obama administration did point it out, but mentioning this in the news on the subject doesn't make for a good conspiracy story. It looks badly like a case of discarding facts to make the story more exciting.

It was mentioned frequently here as well. It is a case of disregarding the facts to make the story more interesting.

If it was mentioned on the news, then I retract my previous comment. (The fact that even after 2 years of reading most "birther" articles I had seen, I never saw a single AP, MSNBC, ABC, CNN, FOX, BBC, or Reuters article mentioning that Hawaii doesn't normally release the original document, is a very sad statement about the quality of the press.)

So, now which horse has the bit in its teeth? The fourth estate seems to be running the whole shebang. Nothing like "managed" information to keep the pot boiling. Herr Goebbels was very good at that.

If you people won't learn from history, then the God in whom you trust, help you.

[Easy Bakes 253]

and now another news cycle removes a hot political issue from view.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

and now another news cycle removes a hot political issue from view.

Depends on what you might call 'hot'. The hot item right now is the death of Osama. Obama is making hay while the sun shines.

[Easy Bakes 253]

and now another news cycle removes a hot political issue from view.

Depends on what you might call 'hot'. The hot item right now is the death of Osama. Obama is making hay while the sun shines.

true and as a distraction to the other problems he should be addressing

it works wonders.

hopefully this wont give any momentum to the health reform.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

and now another news cycle removes a hot political issue from view.

Depends on what you might call 'hot'. The hot item right now is the death of Osama. Obama is making hay while the sun shines.

true and as a distraction to the other problems he should be addressing

it works wonders.

hopefully this wont give any momentum to the health reform.

I guess we see where your priority lies.

How about fixing your broken political machine? We just put a new set of wheels on ours.

[FreewayofFlight 41]

Oh my government can't get anything done,

I sit here waiting for something, but nothing gets done,

they keep sayin', I'm right, you're wrong, so long, get gone, don't belong,

the tea can be real good until the brew gets too strong,

the dome is the magnet, warring parties are the poles,

instead of the people, color power is the goal

they cover their ears, while they scream 'LA LA LA',

but we'd get thrown in jail if we staged a coup d'etat.

We kinda oughta try, 'cause they can't fix it right,

we can't be fooled by words, their charismatic might

they may have power, but they are no god,

they're about as real as that girl Heidi's bod.

Oh my government, can you get something done?

I'm waiting, maybe I should be the one to run.

I swear I can do better, more than blow hot air,

I'll even treat the people like they're actually there.

There's chaos on the Mall, it's Antietam on the Hill,

and there's no way to stop, 'cause no one has the will

I thought there was change, maybe something to believe in,

now all I see is a simple chance to get a win.

I've been lied too before, but this is kind of sad,

maybe I'll see their job in a help wanted ad.

Your pretty words can only sway me so much,

it's getting hard to believe you and your articulate crutch.

Oh my government, come and get something done,

it'll take far too long to correct what's begun.

You say you can fix, this but there's serious doubt,

come on and prove me wrong, or I'll vote you out.

  Edited May 3, 2011 by FreewayofFlight  

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well said, but when you vote out the party of sweetness and light, all you get is the party of light and sweetness.

Elephants and Donkeys are all very well,

But both are herd animals, or can't you tell?

Our government up here in the north

Is like herding cats, but often of worth.

We just changed the picture from centrist to split

And now wait to see if the result's worth warm spit.

  Edited May 4, 2011 by A Nonny Moose  

[Larks2242 251]

Back in 2008, many Republicans were not excited about McCain as a nominee. He was too moderate for them. So they put Palin on the ticket to "energize the Republican base". It did that but it also sent most moderates screaming in the other direction.

There are a lot of people who did not buy the "Obama as savior" routine but refused to put Sarah Palin one heartbeat away from the Presidency. I'm not convinced that the Republican party has learned. The problem is, the crazies can win primaries but are much less likely to win a national election.

I still think he would have had a much better shot if he chose T-Paw instead of Palin, who was originally the front runner.

[FreewayofFlight 41]

I feel like I could vote Republican, but the only thing that is keeping me from supporting the GOP is same-sex marriage. I want to see same-sex marriage legalized and until that happens I'll continue to vote Democrat for the Executive and Legislative offices that represent me.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

I feel like I could vote Republican, but the only thing that is keeping me from supporting the GOP is same-sex marriage. I want to see same-sex marriage legalized and until that happens I'll continue to vote Democrat for the Executive and Legislative offices that represent me.

The hell of only having two choices is that you can't get a real change. Both parties have essentially shaken down to the center, with one slightly left, the other somewhat right. No matter what happens, for the people it is a no win situation. Big money controls both parties, and in some cases it is the same big money.

Your machine is broken, and what you do about it is up to the citizens of the U.S.

It is true that time wounds all heels. Look what happened to our separatist party on Monday last. Pouf! All gone but a tiny rump. We got sick of centrist politics, and the centrist party came third for the first time ever. We now have a government that is more than a little right, treading very carefully for the next four years to keep their majority while being faced with some real live social-democrats in opposition. It is like the immovable object meeting the irresistible force. There are going to be a lot of interesting by-products.

[Duke87 1,070]

I feel like I could vote Republican, but the only thing that is keeping me from supporting the GOP is same-sex marriage. I want to see same-sex marriage legalized and until that happens I'll continue to vote Democrat for the Executive and Legislative offices that represent me.

Now that's just being simple-minded. Not all Democrats support same sex marriange, and not all Republicans oppose it. You have to look at the opinions of each individual candidate. Going by the standard views of their party is a cop-out and isn't guaranteed to produce accurate results.

[Easy Bakes 253]

think we would need a good ol' Revolution to get any real change here.

or a total collapse of the whole dang sysytem.

[FreewayofFlight 41]

Historically speaking, most of the Republican front-runners in the previous elections have stated that they believe in 'traditional families' (code: No Gays/Lesbians are getting married under my watch.) Although I am a registered Democrat, I am actually more Centrist. Same-sex marriage is simply the the swing issue.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

What happens to minorities is irrelevant. Democracy is supposed to be the greatest good for the greatest number, and splintering over silly issues is what keeps the pot boiling. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau said that the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, and he was right. Now it is time for someone to step up to bat and hit this issue out of contention in the U.S.

It is time for the puritanical attitudes to go away. What kind of people are you that make such a fuss about trivia while the ship of state sinks?

[Duke87 1,070]

What happens to minorities is irrelevant. Democracy is supposed to be the greatest good for the greatest number, and splintering over silly issues is what keeps the pot boiling.

Which, as some are wont to point out, is why the US is a Republic, not a Democracy. Our system is (in theory) supposed to make sure that minority groups get their voice heard and get a say rather than just telling them "sorry, you're outvoted". This is why small states get the same two senators that large states get. This is why it normally takes 60% of the senate to be on board in order to pass legislation. A system such as this forces compromises, as opposed to just letting the majority tell the minority to go pound salt. And thus, indeed, achieves good for a greater number.

Of course, in practice, our senators and congressmen represent their cronies and their investors, not their constituents, so the system doesn't work as it was intended to.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

What happens to minorities is irrelevant. Democracy is supposed to be the greatest good for the greatest number, and splintering over silly issues is what keeps the pot boiling.

Which, as some are wont to point out, is why the US is a Republic, not a Democracy. Our system is (in theory) supposed to make sure that minority groups get their voice heard and get a say rather than just telling them "sorry, you're outvoted". This is why small states get the same two senators that large states get. This is why it normally takes 60% of the senate to be on board in order to pass legislation. A system such as this forces compromises, as opposed to just letting the majority tell the minority to go pound salt. And thus, indeed, achieves good for a greater number.

Of course, in practice, our senators and congressmen represent their cronies and their investors, not their constituents, so the system doesn't work as it was intended to.

I have iterated that your system is busted. Your Senate is a complete bust. We are seriously thinking of getting rid of our "chamber of sober second thought". The House of Commons is representative of the people because ridings are allocated by population. For the next federal election we are adding about 90 new ridings. I have the 2011 census on my desk right now.

How would it work if you abolished the Senate?

[Duke87 1,070]

I don't see how that would fix any problems, since it isn't the nature of the senate that's causing problems.

What you need to do to fix the problem of representatives not representing is get corporations out of the campaign financing business and shut the special interest groups up. Problem is, the former is not practically possible and the latter is unconstitutional.

Of course, there's also the greater concern that America is very much in the midst of an identity crisis. Two halves of this country have some very different ideas about how we should be building our future, and until we can resolve that, we're not going much anywhere. Can't shoot for any goals if you can't decide what your goals are.

[Larks2242 251]

How would it work if you abolished the Senate?

Why would we do that?

Just switch the majority and try to get more of the same party seats in 2012 so they own congress and senate, plenty of seats of politicians holding the US back such as Joe Liberman & Herb Kohl will be up for grabs, hopefully someone better can overtake them.

Gonna try hard to oust Bill Nelson

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

How would it work if you abolished the Senate?

Why would we do that?

Just switch the majority and try to get more of the same party seats in 2012 so they own congress and senate, plenty of seats of politicians holding the US back such as Joe Liberman & Herb Kohl will be up for grabs, hopefully someone better can overtake them.

Gonna try hard to oust Bill Nelson

Why not? Many countries run with a unicameral legislature. The savings in government expenses would be a sufficient reason. The deflation of some national egos would be another.

[FreewayofFlight 41]

Abolishing the Senate would not work because the balance of power would be solely in the hands of the most populous states. California, Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois would have considerable influence on passing legislation in Washington. The less populated states like Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska and South Dakota would be pretty much ignored.

We could abolish the House of Representatives, but that would put 435 self-serving Congresspeople out of a job.

[Duke87 1,070]

Just switch the majority

Eh. A senate controlled by Republican scumbags isn't really any different than a senate controlled by Democrat scumbags. They're all still scumbags. The letter next to their names just serves as a distraction from that.

[Easy Bakes 253]

I don't see how that would fix any problems, since it isn't the nature of the senate that's causing problems.

What you need to do to fix the problem of representatives not representing is get corporations out of the campaign financing business and shut the special interest groups up. Problem is, the former is not practically possible and the latter is unconstitutional.

Of course, there's also the greater concern that America is very much in the midst of an identity crisis. Two halves of this country have some very different ideas about how we should be building our future, and until we can resolve that, we're not going much anywhere. Can't shoot for any goals if you can't decide what your goals are.

Exactly its not the system its the people running it.