New Evidence regarding Obama

[AAFitz]

Obama's birthplace aside, it is a fact he did not grow up in mainland America and literally grew up in a foreign country for 80% of his time under 18 years old, and Obama did not step a foot into the lower 48 until he was 18 years old.

That's where his unAmericanism comes from. Growing up in America is an invaluable and irreplaceable part of understanding what it means to be an American.

You mind saying that in the face of children from American servicemen and women who have lived most of their lives in places like Germany?

Probably not, since they are serving our country (as it is), as compared to fundamentally transforming it (into something else)....

So does this still mean their children do not understand what it means to be American as much, simply because they do not live here as you suggested was an invaluable and irreplaceable , or that it is replaceable if their parents are serving in the military?

In this case (again, the exception), these children have American parents who are serving in the military, and most likely the parents are not Pinko Commie Socialists...

So as long as one does not have Pinko Commie Socialists as parents one very much can understand what it means to be American by not living in America, so living here is very much not an irreplaceable part of it as you just stated and defended repeatedly?

[AAFitz]

If Scotty is making the case for the Hawaiian independence movement, then our beliefs weirdly dovetail yet again.

I would say he isn't really making a case for anything.

[saxitoxin]

Probably not, since they are serving our country (as it is), as compared to fundamentally transforming it (into something else)....

Earlier you seemed to indicate you were opposed to Obama's decision to stop deportation proceedings against non-citizen U.S. military veterans.

Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.

[spurgistan]

If Scotty is making the case for the Hawaiian independence movement, then our beliefs weirdly dovetail yet again.

I would say he isn't really making a case for anything.

ITT: spurg dramatically lowers the bar for "making a case."

[comic boy]

My friend thinks she is a vampire and I had a hell of a job to persuade her to try my garlic stew , got there in the end though. I have however long since given up expecting a prompt and honest response from the phat one , sometimes life is just too short !

[Woodruff]

I'm not sure if you guys willfully ignore what the other is actually trying to say or what, but I do find it amusing.

It's all based on AA hearing "you can't be American if you don't grow up in America" when what I said was "growing up in America in invaluable to learning what it means to be American" It's entertaining to me because it's such a simple statement. The truth is those guys bury their heads in the sand, and their intolerance absolutely prevents them from hearing what is said, because it does not fit into what they believe, so they reject it, redefine it, call some names, twist it some more to make it fit for themselves, and end up saying insane things like the above.

AA this is not so much directed at you as it is Woody, but you did start all this!

Yes, because Woody keeps asking you to answer that bleeping question. So it makes sense you'd direct the accusation at me that my intolerance is preventing me from hearing what is said...except you aren't saying it. You keep avoiding it. So there's nothing for my alleged intolerance to prevent me from hearing.

[Woodruff]

Obama's birthplace aside, it is a fact he did not grow up in mainland America and literally grew up in a foreign country for 80% of his time under 18 years old, and Obama did not step a foot into the lower 48 until he was 18 years old.

That's where his unAmericanism comes from. Growing up in America is an invaluable and irreplaceable part of understanding what it means to be an American.

You mind saying that in the face of children from American servicemen and women who have lived most of their lives in places like Germany?

Probably not, since they are serving our country (as it is), as compared to fundamentally transforming it (into something else)....

So does this still mean their children do not understand what it means to be American as much, simply because they do not live here as you suggested was an invaluable and irreplaceable , or that it is replaceable if their parents are serving in the military?

In this case (again, the exception), these children have American parents who are serving in the military, and most likely the parents are not Pinko Commie Socialists...

I suspect you'd consider me a Pinko Commie Socialist, given that you don't seem to understand what those words mean. So you don't believe my children, which did in fact spend six years of their lives as children in Germany, have a good understanding of what it means to be an American?

Growing up in America is an irreplaceable part of understanding America. I understand definitions are a tough one lately, but irreplaceable does not mean exclusive, that is, growing up in America is not the only way to learn about America (obvious!).

Then you shouldn't call it irreplaceable. Because irreplaceable means that it cannot be replaced by other means. Phatscotty, redefining words yet again.

[maasman]

I'm going to stand up for scotty on the irreplaceable thing here (mostly because I absolutely love playing devils advocate).

I think what he means to say is, you can't replace growing up in America for growing up somewhere else. Now just taking this sentence into account and nothing else he's said, he is absolutely correct here. Growing up in a country is irreplaceable no matter where it is. You can't substitute growing up in America for growing up anywhere else in the world really, hence it is irreplaceable.

Now, whether or not this has any effect on leadership ability of said country, or anything else that's been said is up for debate, but taking that word at face value scotty is correct here.

Disclaimer:
I'm not saying he doesn't have a different definition here, just taking everything from this ONE part at face value

[Symmetry]

I'm going to stand up for scotty on the irreplaceable thing here (mostly because I absolutely love playing devils advocate).

I think what he means to say is, you can't replace growing up in America for growing up somewhere else. Now just taking this sentence into account and nothing else he's said, he is absolutely correct here. Growing up in a country is irreplaceable no matter where it is. You can't substitute growing up in America for growing up anywhere else in the world really, hence it is irreplaceable.

Now, whether or not this has any effect on leadership ability of said country, or anything else that's been said is up for debate, but taking that word at face value scotty is correct here.

Disclaimer:
I'm not saying he doesn't have a different definition here, just taking everything from this ONE part at face value

I see what you're trying to say, but a few years abroad shouldn't be seen as some kind of deficit, it should be seen as a benefit. Irreplaceable seems like the wrong word.

I don't agree with your sentiment, but I do see what you're getting at, and I can't for the moment think of a way to express it better, but there's also a fair chance I've misunderstood your sentiment.

[maasman]

Perhaps, and by no means do I personally think it should matter (I honestly think anyone in the world should be able to become president since I doubt we'd vote in a foreigner anyway).

I'm just arguing semantics really, just because I'm bored.

[Symmetry]

Perhaps, and by no means do I personally think it should matter (I honestly think anyone in the world should be able to become president since I doubt we'd vote in a foreigner anyway).

I'm just arguing semantics really, just because I'm bored.

Fair enough, I've done the same for Scotty in the past.

[Baron Von PWN]

Obama's birthplace aside, it is a fact he did not grow up in mainland America and literally grew up in a foreign country for 80% of his time under 18 years old

Just to clarify this, the figure is 27%, not 80%. From 0-5 and 10-18 he was in Hawai'i, which has been affiliated with the U.S. since 1898. The telephone area code of Hawai'i is 808, the principal industries are sugarcane farming and tourism, the anthem is Hawaii Pono'i and the governor is Dog the Bounty Hunter.

Scotty clearly considers the time to be "growing up" as after the point in which we remember things (DERP how could he learn about amurukuh if he can't remember it) and whatever time period is needed to make 5 years 80% of obama's growing up hood. In which case ageas 1-4 don't count as you hardly remember any of it anyways and you are fully "grown up" by ten. As we all know people don't change much after their 10th birthday.

[Phatscotty]

Saxi is right.

Anyways, when does schooling impact children the most. Ages 5-10, or 10-15?

[saxitoxin]

As we all know people don't change much after their 10th birthday.

Anyways, when does schooling impact children the most. Ages 5-10, or 10-15?

guys

wut about pubes

?

[Baron Von PWN]

As we all know people don't change much after their 10th birthday.

Anyways, when does schooling impact children the most. Ages 5-10, or 10-15?

guys

wut about pubes

?

Irellephant

[Phatscotty]

Did Barak Obama travel to Pakistan in 1981?

[Symmetry]

Did Nixon go to China?

I think the dude was guilty of something.

[saxitoxin]

Did Barak Obama travel to Pakistan in 1981?

we should probably head this one off at the pass ... http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/passport.asp

I would be curious where YouTube user Lea11011 got information from an "FBI dossier." The release of personal information from FBI files to the public is restricted under the Privacy Act to persons born more than 110 years ago or upon presentation of a death certificate or obituary from a wide-circulation newspaper or academic journal.

I'm open to the idea that Lea11011 led a crack team of commandos into the FBI to recover the information, or that there was a leak in the FBI who decided to divulge information to YouTube user Lea11011, but - whatever the case - I think it's reasonable to expect Lea11011 offer some explanation before we take his/her video - whose contents he/she claims come from Obama's "FBI dossier" - too seriously.

[Woodruff]

I'm going to stand up for scotty on the irreplaceable thing here (mostly because I absolutely love playing devils advocate).

I think what he means to say is, you can't replace growing up in America for growing up somewhere else. Now just taking this sentence into account and nothing else he's said, he is absolutely correct here. Growing up in a country is irreplaceable no matter where it is. You can't substitute growing up in America for growing up anywhere else in the world really, hence it is irreplaceable.

To say that it is irreplaceable for understanding America is NOT accurate, and he is not correct. And that was his exact statement..."Growing up in America is an irreplaceable part of understanding America." It is entirely possible to understand America without having grown up here, thus it is replaceable, thus it is not irreplaceable.

What he probably meant is that it was "highly valuable" (or something of that nature), but there is no question that the term "irreplaceable" is simply a false statement. And to compound it, as usual when given the opportunity to recant, he refuses to recognize it (or at least admit to it).

[maasman]

I think you're misreading what I wrote, or I didn't explain myself well enough.

You do not necessarily need to grow up in America to understand it; however, you can not replace growing up in America for anywhere else.

So in essence, yes growing up in America is irreplaceable, and since you tend to learn things while you're growing up, growing up in America is an irreplaceable part of understanding it.

By no means do I think you can't understand America by not growing up here.

[maasman]

[Phatscotty]

there is more to it than tax rates. But your illustration does show that Reagan's cuts are what unleashed the 80's and paved the way for the roaring 90's and extended well beyond. Yeah yeah I know Bill Clinton invented the internet and gets all the credit cards...

Also, notice that Clinton's rates were during "good times". Obama's tax hikes would kick in at the height of the Great Recession...at the height of the European Debt Crisis, right at the cusp of our Double Dip and 4-5$ gasoline normalcy and fast approaching the fiscal cliff.

Bill Clinton is with us presently, as far as rates go
1 week ago


If Obama's idea for the economy worked, and we were actually growing and jobs were being created at even half the level the President promised and got elected on,(5 million new green jobs?), Obama would not have half the resistance to the tax increases. If Obama's ideas worked and the economy was growing again, I myself would not be as vocal against the tax hikes. However I am sad to realize the economy has not turned the corner. 8-10% Unemployment is going to be the new normal for at least the next 3 years, and Europe is not going to help this one bit and will most likely make the 8-10 go to 9-12% Unemployment as "normal"

[maasman]

Well, I'll give you that you at least have legitimate reasons why it's different. It's a lot better than shouting socialism at a tax hike.

[Phatscotty]

Well, I'll give you that you at least have legitimate reasons why it's different. It's a lot better than shouting socialism at a tax hike.

a tax hike, to me, would strengthen socialism/redistribution/government power/more debt (since they will no doubt immediately borrow against what they are entitled to by law). I also look at that as a direct pullout of whatever amount of money from the private economy. Not a good idea right now

I just think we are putting the zonkey in front of the cart. It's the private sector jobs that produce the money for the public sector. Tax paid at public jobs, really they are just taxing themselves. Public sector does not create anything, and that is not to say it isn't necessary, but we have to acknowledge it's the private sector where wealth is created and that's what needs to grow right now. Real wealth vs printed and confiscated and inflated wealth...

[huamulan]

The public sector produces money for the private sector as well. The government buys arms and construction materials from private providers and people on public salaries/welfare will use their income to buy goods and services from the private sector. It's also worth bearing in mind that governments provide significant economic incentives to the private sector to do things such as develop green technology and employ more people (without which incentives the private sector usually won't bother doing these things).

Money flow in a capitalist economy looks something like this:



What, really, is the point in shrinking the public sector?