Donald Trump is a "Birther" (and he's going to run for President)

[meesterperfect]

He said 'they're taking our jobs!', classic South Park :1orglaugh





Trump you're a fool! Tycoon accused of discrediting Republicans by suggesting Obama may be a Muslim

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ns-suggesting-Obama-Muslim.html#ixzz1In0ZcPnD

dude, uh man,......sir?
they are taking our jobs.
at least he's saying it and not pretending its not true like pretty much all the sell out politicians we have in office.

as far as the bc thing goes, he's says it seems like he's hiding something, thats all.
and it does.
i like how he said people who question it are made to feel like bad people to a point where tey are afraid to talk about it.
its true too.

 

[Danglyparts]

dude, if he doesn't win, he's just going to write a check and buy this country anyway...call himself the ceo of america enterprises or somethin crazy like that
either that or he will win, and run it for a few years and then "give it up" and go back to the hoolywood industry, almost exactly like a certain mayor me all know.....

 

[NYRICAN21]

Donald Trump is a JOKE just like GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann (MN) they are very loose in thier wording and not credible in this arena... They are both just like the folks in the Teabag Party...

 

[NYRICAN21]

One important thing that many fail to realize is the fact that, even the President of the United States has the same basic rights to privacy as does any member of this country. Granted, as he is a public figure, and in the public eye, that expectation is not a great as someone such as the people on this board, but he has privacy rights just the same.

To many, producing your birth certificate does not seem like that big a deal, and on the surface that belief would be correct. However, upon a more in depth examination, one realizes that something else would arise from it...setting a precedence! In short, if President Obama were to cave in this incidence, he would be opening the door to stranger and more intrusive requests for himself, and future Presidents. Once you open the door, even slightly, it's hard if not impossible to ever shut it again.

Finally, the fact still remains that President Obama is in a no-win situation regarding the whole birth certificate matter anyway, because those who claim they "don't believe" will never be convinced regardless of what President Obama were to produce. They would claim it was a forgery or something like that. Thus, nothing he could do will put the matter to rest.....in large part due to the fact that the whole driving force behind the "birther" movement isn't where President Obama was born to begin with! So what is the point again exactly?

Just read your piece.. good point about the POTUS privacy,, here's the real deal... It because he is Black..! :eek: that's the main fact of their stupid argument... "he was not born here", "he's a socialista", "he has communist tendencies" "he favors Islam/Muslims"... anything to place a minute sense of FEAR into the very un-inform U.S. PUBLIC :anonymous

 

[D-rock]

Hmmm...Donald Trump. Aren't we basically talking about a guy that hit it big in real estate a long time ago and has basically failed at almost every major business venture he's be a big part of for the last two maybe three decades now?

You'll have to excuse me if I don't have faith in Trump's ability to get us out of anything. The only reason he was able to stay afloat and had his ass saved all that time is because he became as much of a celebrity than just some rich businessman.

 

[Jagger69]

Eh, just throwing it out there.

Wow....obvious tabloid trash that a lot of less-than-informed people might read and tend to take seriously (hence, the proliferation of such publications) and you decide to just "throw it out there"? :surprise:

Since you profess to have no particular stance on the subject I would respectfully suggest that henceforth you consider informing potential readers that such sources are not objective and should therefore not be taken as factual or credible references before you decide to "just throw it out there". Such a preemptive action helps to limit the spread of misinformation that is often disguised and presented as being actual fact when, in fact, it is total bullshit like the source you cited.

Better yet, just use a credible and factual source maybe? :dunno:

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Wow....obvious tabloid trash that a lot of less-than-informed people might read and tend to take seriously (hence, the proliferation of such publications) and you decide to just "throw it out there"? :surprise:

Since you profess to have no particular stance on the subject I would respectfully suggest that henceforth you consider informing potential readers that such sources are not objective and should therefore not be taken as factual or credible references before you decide to "just throw it out there". Such a preemptive action helps to limit the spread of misinformation that is often disguised and presented as being actual fact when, in fact, it is total bullshit like the source you cited.

Better yet, just use a credible and factual source maybe? :dunno:

Just because a source is right-leaning doesn't automatically disquallify it. Just as I used a WND source here, I've no doubt used NY Times sources before as well (left-leaning, clearly). And if people aren't smart enough to read a source and form an opinion free of influence, they are airheads. :2 cents:

 

[Jagger69]

Just because a source is right-leaning doesn't automatically disquallify it. Just as I used a WND source here, I've no doubt used NY Times sources before as well (left-leaning, clearly).

Right-leaning?? How about tipped all the way over? Scott, who are you kidding here? You're comparing WND to the New York Times? More like the New York Post from a credibility standpoint! You could use a number of right-leaning sources whose credibility could be legitimized but WND sure ain't one of 'em.

And if people aren't smart enough to read a source and form an opinion free of influence, they are airheads. :2 cents:

If you consider WND to be a legitimate source of information then I don't know how you can justify referring to others as "airheads" for believing the same thing you do. People are influenced by the information they receive via a number of media, legitimate or not. That's the purpose of such media and for people to believe what they see, hear or read doesn't make them "airheads"....it simply makes them ill-informed.