Let's Put Obama's Birth Location To Rest

Donald Trump's Show's
His True Color "GREEN"

What Does it Mean When a Person is
"Green"?



The term “green” refers to someone who is not yet
experienced in a particular field or activity. Being green can
apply in many facets of life, but the term is probably most often
used in conjunction with someone who is new at his or her
profession, position, or hobby.



If a newly hired police officer on the beat mishandles a
situation, it might be attributed to that officer being green.
Later, after the officer gets some experience under his or her
belt, the department would not expect the same kind of mistakes
or misjudgments on the officer’s part. The same can be said
of a lawyer who has recently passed the bar and has not yet
handled many cases. Medical interns are another example of people
who could be said to be green. (OH, AND ALSO DONALD TRUMP!)

Factcheck.org



If Donald Trump worked for us, we’d have to say:
"Donald, you’re fired — for incompetence."
The successful developer and TV celebrity says he’d make a
good president, and maybe he would — we take no stand either
way about that. But when it comes to getting facts straight, he
fouls up again and again on the basics of President Barack
Obama’s birth. As a rookie reporter, he just wouldn’t
make it.

He claims the president’s grandmother says
Obama was born in Kenya. In fact, the recording to which he
refers shows Sarah Obama repeatedly saying through a translator:
"He was born in America."

He claims that no hospital in Hawaii has a record
of Obama’s birth. Hospital records are confidential under
federal law, but Honolulu’s Kapi’olani Medical Center
has published a letter from Obama calling it "the place of
my birth," thus publicly confirming it as his birthplace.

He insists that the official "Certification
of Live Birth" that Obama produced in 2008 is "not a
birth certificate." That’s wrong. The U.S. Department
of State uses "birth certificate" as a generic term to
include the official Hawaii document, which satisfies legal
requirements for proving citizenship and obtaining a passport.

He claims that there’s no signature or
certification number on the document released by Obama. Wrong
again. Photos of the document, which we posted in 2008, clearly
show those details.

He says newspaper announcements of Obama’s
birth that appeared in Hawaii newspapers in 1961
"probably" were placed there fraudulently by his
now-deceased American grandparents. Actually, a state health
department official and a former managing editor of one of the
newspapers said the information came straight from the state
health department.

He claims "nobody knew" Obama when he
was growing up and "nobody ever comes forward" who knew
him as a child. "If I ever decide to run, you may go back
and interview people from my kindergarten," Trump said.
Well, two retired kindergarten teachers in a 2009 news story
fondly recall teaching a young Barack Obama.

---

Q
What is the difference between a certification of live birth and
a birth certificate in the state of Hawaii?

In: Law & Legal Issues,
Hawaii, Birth Certificates

A
"Certification of Live Birth" is a short-form birth
certificate. The information included in the document may differ
from state to state. A "Certification of Live Birth"
from Hawaii will include the name and sex of the person, date of
birth, hour of birth, island of birth, county of birth, mother's
maiden name, mother's race, father's name, father's race, date
accepted by registrar, a certificate number and seal. The seal
may be different depending on the year it was printed.

A "Certificate of Live Birth" is the
long-form birth certificate and contains more detailed
information, including signatures of doctor(s), witnesses, vital
statistics (length and weight), etc.

According to the Department of Hawaiian
Homelands:

Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth
and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian
Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian
qualification.

The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts
both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and
Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government
records documenting an individuals birth. The Certificate of Live
Birth generally has more information which is useful for
genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live
Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides
specific details of a person's birth. Although original birth
certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their
greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer
issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a
copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of
Live Birth.

So, a long-form Certificate has additional
information on it that that is useful for genealogical purposes.
However, both the certificate and the certification are certified
government records providing prima facia proof of the information
they contain.

BELOW A COPY OF CERTIFCATION OF LIVE BIRTH FOR
ONE BARACK OBAMA II BORN AUGUST 4, 1961 County of Birth Honolulu

ENOUGH SAID ALREADY! PUT
IT TO BED YOU LOW INFORMATIONAL BIRTHERS
AND DO SOME RESEARCH INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO THE LIKES OF TRUMP!

YEAH, RIGHT, THAT WILL
BE THE DAY!

A little bit more about Trump, Birthers and Obama's Birth Certificate... Like we really need it... I found out who started all this.. it came from OBAMA NATION by the weasel Jerome Corsi... What a cockroach! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOOXWybFVj8

thethinkingblue

The Two Americas and Deficit Reduction

The Two Americas and How
They Look At Deficit Reduction

Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful job April 13th making it clear that much of the country, many of the American voters do not believe that we are all in this together. They do not believe that those who fall on bad luck and have nowhere to turn should get help.

They believe in individualism and think that we are all on our own. They are so delusional and it's hard to understand where they are coming from because not all Republicans could possibly have escaped hardships for sure. How can they think we are all on our own?

What would we do without our infrastructure? How would we survive without the help of our government to provide all the necessities that keep us safe and secure? How could we afford to get an education and educate our children? How would we travel if roads were not available? Who would we call if someone was threatening our wellbeing? Where would we go if we feel violently ill or have been injured? What if any one of us was to lose our income, how would we feed our children and keep a roof over their heads until we find another place where we can earn a living wage?

So many questions to which the people who call themselves Republicans or Libertarians have no answers to. How can they be so fooled? How can they be so misled? Please watch this amazing broadcast of The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell and hear him tell us what we already knew. That there really are two Americas and one is going to destroy the other by its sheer ignorance.
thinkingblue

Lawrence O'Donnell breaks down Obama's speech today on the deficit reduction

PS:Excellent Essay by Paul Krugman

April 17, 2011

Let’s Not Be Civil

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Last week, President Obama offered a spirited defense of his
party’s values — in effect, of the legacy of the New
Deal and the Great Society. Immediately thereafter, as always
happens when Democrats take a stand, the civility police came out
in force. The president, we were told, was being too partisan; he
needs to treat his opponents with respect; he should have lunch
with them, and work out a consensus.

That’s a bad idea. Equally important, it’s an undemocratic idea.

Let’s review the story so far.

Two weeks ago, House Republicans released their big budget
proposal, selling it to credulous pundits as a statement of
necessity, not ideology — a document telling America What
Must Be Done.

But it was, in fact, a deeply partisan document, which you might
have guessed from the opening sentence: “Where the president
has failed, House Republicans will lead.” It hyped the
danger of deficits, yet even on its own (not at all credible)
accounting, spending cuts were used mainly to pay for tax cuts
rather than deficit reduction. The transparent and obvious goal
was to use deficit fears to impose a vision of small government
and low taxes, especially on the wealthy.

So the House budget proposal revealed a yawning gap between the
two parties’ priorities. And it revealed a deep difference
in views about how the world works.

When the proposal was released, it was praised as a
“wonk-approved” plan that had been run by the experts.
But the “experts” in question, it turned out, were at
the Heritage Foundation, and few people outside the hard right
found their conclusions credible. In the words of the consulting
firm Macroeconomic Advisers — which makes its living telling
businesses what they need to know, not telling politicians what
they want to hear — the Heritage analysis was “both
flawed and contrived.” Basically, Heritage went all in on
the much-refuted claim that cutting taxes on the wealthy produces
miraculous economic results, including a surge in revenue that
actually reduces the deficit.

By the way, Heritage is always like this. Whenever there’s
something the G.O.P. doesn’t like — say, environmental
protection — Heritage can be counted on to produce a report,
based on no economic model anyone else recognizes, claiming that
this policy would cause huge job losses. Correspondingly,
whenever there’s something Republicans want, like tax cuts
for the wealthy or for corporations, Heritage can be counted on
to claim that this policy would yield immense economic benefits.

The point is that the two parties don’t just live in
different moral universes, they also live in different
intellectual universes, with Republicans in particular having a
stable of supposed experts who reliably endorse whatever they
propose.

So when pundits call on the parties to sit down together and
talk, the obvious question is, what are they supposed to talk
about? Where’s the common ground?

Eventually, of course, America must choose between these
differing visions. And we have a way of doing that. It’s
called democracy.

Now, Republicans claim that last year’s midterms gave them a
mandate for the vision embodied in their budget. But last year
the G.O.P. ran against what it called the “massive Medicare
cuts” contained in the health reform law. How, then, can the
election have provided a mandate for a plan that not only would
preserve all of those cuts, but would go on, over time, to
dismantle Medicare completely?

For what it’s worth, polls suggest that the public’s
priorities are nothing like those embodied in the Republican
budget. Large majorities support higher, not lower, taxes on the
wealthy. Large majorities — including a majority of
Republicans — also oppose major changes to Medicare. Of
course, the poll that matters is the one on Election Day. But
that’s all the more reason to make the 2012 election a clear
choice between visions.

Which brings me to those calls for a bipartisan solution. Sorry
to be cynical, but right now “bipartisan” is usually
code for assembling some conservative Democrats and
ultraconservative Republicans — all of them with close ties
to the wealthy, and many who are wealthy themselves — and
having them proclaim that low taxes on high incomes and drastic
cuts in social insurance are the only possible solution.

This would be a corrupt, undemocratic way to make decisions about
the shape of our society even if those involved really were wise
men with a deep grasp of the issues. It’s much worse when
many of those at the table are the sort of people who solicit and
believe the kind of policy analyses that the Heritage Foundation
supplies.

So let’s not be civil. Instead, let’s have a frank
discussion of our differences. In particular, if Democrats
believe that Republicans are talking cruel nonsense, they should
say so — and take their case to the voters.

Absurdities About The Sanctities Of Life

MORE FUNNY FORWARD CARTOONS

We share this world with other species, believing we are the superior animal. That is why when we parallel other breeds to the preposterousness we humans live by, it turns out to be more than funny; IT'S SCANDALOUSLY HILARIOUS. Enjoy!

MORE FUN

Click For Funny Cartoons

CLICK FOR YOUR LIFE EXPLAINED IN GRAPHS

HEY WASN'T THAT US?

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FUN

Video Fun

Fun Links

Just Fun

Sit back have a glass of wine and LAUGH UNTIL IT HURTS.

Lastly, a word from George Carlin, world's greatest philosopher.

The Sanctity Of Life

Does The GOP Lie? You Betcha!

Does The GOP LIE? YOU BETCHA!

The GOP LIES!
If you have ever wondered if in fact the GOP LIES, well this can put your wondering at rest at last. John Kyl, blatantly told an out and out lie on FOX the other day and did not even skip a beat while doing so… “well over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does (Abortions)”. When was called on this outrageous and very destructive lie (abortion is actually well under 5% of what Planned Parenthood does), Kyl’s office released a BUGABOO claiming that: “his remark was not intended to be a factual statement”

SAY WHAT?

Now we have a new REALITY coming from the GRAND OLD PARTY, "Hey, don’t take anything we say as factual statements… All our rhetoric is NOT INTENDED TO BE FACTUAL…"

Yeah, like we didn’t know that already? They have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they only wish to incite and enrage people to HATE ONE ANOTHER so that the LOW INFORMATIONAL VOTER (who usually votes republican) WILL CAST THEIR VOTE FOR THIS LYING PARTY.

Tis a pity and will eventually bring our nation to its knees or WORSE! thethinkingblue

While John Kyl keeps lying on the percentages of abortions Planned Parenthood has performed, one question goes unanswered... Who will defend a woman's choice to have one? Perhaps the excerpt below will help those who still question this right.

Why Abortion is Moral - Abortion questions answered

[[EXCERPT]] Anti-abortionists claim fetal dependence cannot be used as an issue in the abortion debate. They make the point that even after birth, and for years to come, a child is still dependent on its mother, its father, and those around it. And since no one would claim its okay to kill a child because of its dependency on others, we can't, if we follow their logic, claim it's okay to abort a fetus because of its dependence.

What the anti-abortionist fails to do, however, is differentiate between physical dependence and social dependence. Physical dependence does not refer to meeting the physical needs of the child - such as in the anti-abortionist's argument above. That's social dependence; that's where the child depends on society - on other people - to feed it, clothe it, and love it. Physical dependence occurs when one life form depends solely on the physical body of another life form for its existence.

Physical dependence was cleverly illustrated back in 1971 by philosopher Judith Jarvis Thompson. She created a scenario in which a woman is kidnapped and wakes up to find she's been surgically attached to a world-famous violinist who, for nine months, needs her body to survive. After those nine months, the violinist can survive just fine on his own, but he must have this particular woman in order to survive until then.

Thompson then asks if the woman is morally obliged to stay connected to the violinist who is living off her body. It might be a very good thing if she did - the world could have the beauty that would come from such a violinist - but is she morally obliged to let another being use her body to survive?

This very situation is already conceded by anti-abortionists. They claim RU-486 should be illegal for a mother to take because it causes her uterus to flush its nutrient-rich lining, thus removing a zygote from its necessary support system and, therefore, ending its short existence as a life form. Thus the anti-abortionist's own rhetoric only proves the point of absolute physical dependence.

This question becomes even more profound when we consider a scenario where it's not an existing person who is living off the woman's body, but simply a potential person, or better yet, a single-cell zygote with human DNA that is no different than the DNA in a simple hair follicle.

To complicate it even further, we need to realize that physical dependence also means a physical threat to the life of the mother. The World Health Organization reports that nearly 670,000 women die from pregnancy-related complications each year (this number does not include abortions). That's 1,800 women per day. We also read that in developed countries, such as the United States and Canada, a woman is 13 times more likely to die bringing a pregnancy to term than by having an abortion.

Therefore, not only is pregnancy the prospect of having a potential person physically dependent on the body of one particular women, it also includes the women putting herself into a life-threatening situation for that potential person.

Unlike social dependence, where the mother can choose to put her child up for adoption or make it a ward of the state or hire someone else to take care of it, during pregnancy the fetus is absolutely physically dependent on the body of one woman. Unlike social dependence, where a woman's physical life is not threatened by the existence of another person, during pregnancy, a woman places herself in the path of bodily harm for the benefit of a DNA life form that is only a potential person - even exposing herself to the threat of death.

More Here: Why Abortion is Moral - Abortion questions answered

Those who wish to force their beliefs on others should not be allowed to make laws regarding those beliefs. Most who oppose the rights women have over their own bodies belong to some religious based belief system and would like to do away with the separation of church and state altogether. If they were to ever get their own way on this, all will lose freedom not just those who can think outside the religious box. I once saw a bumper sticker that hits it right smack on the head... DON'T LIKE ABORTION THEN DON'T HAVE ONE! thinkingblue

Hate and Bigotry and the Right To Burn H

Hate and Bigotry and the Right To Burn Holy Books

Who has the RIGHT to cause Murder, Misery and Mayhem?

This world is full of strange and bizarre happenings, mainly due to irrational action by mankind. That said… Why would anyone deliberately provoke a hotspot region with publically burning their religious book of authoritarian writings based on fictional evolutionary histories?
What was in it for that delusional Pastor Terry Jones?

Notoriety that feeds his humongous, monstrous EGO, that’s what? People like Jones do not have scruples; they are incapable of THINKING TWICE,knowing that certain behaviors will bring about harmful reactions or responses from others. They are psychopaths’, people with antisocial personality disorders, manifesting in perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior.

CASE IN POINT: {{{ A day later, Florida pastor Terry
Jones said he did not feel responsible for the deaths. He said:
"We don't feel responsible for that. Of course, that is what
they used. Of course that is very obvious and they're actually
saying that. But of course Islam, and as we see their history, I
believe they will use any excuse and if they don't have an
excuse, they will simply use the excuse that America is in
Afghanistan, America is involved in Islamic countries and they
should get out.

Pastor Terry Jones: 'I may put Mohammed on trial'

US President Barack Obama on Saturday described as
"outrageous" the killings in Afghanistan triggered
after the burning and called the desecration of any holy text
"an act of extreme intolerance and bigotry".}}} More Here:

Terry Jones should be arrested and tried for treason. Foreign people (ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY HATE US) watch what we say and do much more closely than we do. Back in World War II, we lost thousands of lives, learning again and again that “loose lips sink ships”. What this so called pastor is purveying through his actions and thoughts is HATE and BIGOTRY. He learned early on that he could make a BIG SPLASH by capitalizing on the hate we Americans have provoked by preempting 2 wars, using the terrible event of 9/11 as a weapon instead of just going after the few who caused such an atrocity upon our soil. Why must we sit ideally by and say nothing. This man should be put away for his own safety but more so for the wellbeing of our fellow human beings. It's beyond outrage! It’s beyond sad! thinkingblue

---

Quran protests spread to turbulent Afghan east

Rahmat Gul And Rahim Faiez, Associated Press

JALALABAD, Afghanistan – Demonstrators battled police in
southern Afghanistan's main city on Sunday and took to the
streets in the turbulent east for the first time as Western
pleas failed to halt a third day of rage over a Florida
pastor's burning of the Quran.

An officer was shot dead in a second day of clashes in the
city of Kandahar, said provincial health director Qayum
Pokhla. Two officers and 18 civilians were wounded, he said.

In Jalalabad, the largest city in the east, hundreds of
people blocked the main highway for three hours, shouting for
U.S. troops to leave, burning an effigy of President Barack
Obama and stomping on a drawing of a U.S. flag. More than
1,000 people set tires ablaze to block another highway in
eastern Parwan province for about an hour, said provincial
police chief Sher Ahmad Maladani.

The violence was set off by anger over the March 20 burning
of the Quran by a Florida church — the same church whose
pastor had threatened to do so last year on the anniversary
of the Sept. 11 attacks, triggering worldwide outrage.

The protests, which began Friday, also appear to be fueled
more broadly by the resentment that has been building for
years in Afghanistan over the operations of Western military
forces, blamed for killing and mistreating civilians, and
international contractors, seen by many as enriching
themselves and fueling corruption at the expense of ordinary
Afghans.

Coverage of the trial of a group of U.S. soldiers charged
with killing Afghan civilians and the publication of photos
of some posing with dead bodies added to the anger.

Thousands of demonstrators in the previously peaceful
northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif poured into the streets after
Friday's Muslim prayer services and overran a U.N. compound,
killing three U.N. staff members and four Nepalese guards.

On Saturday, hundreds of Afghans holding copies of the Quran
over their heads marched in Kandahar before attacking cars
and businesses. Security forces opened fire and nine
protesters were killed but the governor of Kandahar said
officers had only fired into the air. He said 81 were wounded
and 17 people, including seven armed men, had been arrested.

Military commander Gen. David Petraeus and the top NATO
civilian representative in Afghanistan, Mark Sedwill, said
they "hope the Afghan people understand that the actions
of a small number of individuals, who have been extremely
disrespectful to the holy Quran, are not representative of
any of the countries of the international community who are
in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people."

The Taliban said in a statement emailed to media outlets that
the U.S. and other Western countries had wrongly excused the
burning of the Quran as freedom of speech and that Afghans
"cannot accept this un-Islamic act."

"Afghan forces under the order of the foreign forces
attacked unarmed people during the protests, killing them and
arresting some, saying there were armed people among these
protesters, which was not true," the Taliban said.

The governor of Kandahar said he and the main leaders of the
protests in the southern city had reached an agreement that
would end the demonstrations in exchange for the release of
those who were arrested. He said they released 25 people but
did not provide details. MORE HERE
___

American Dream or AMERICAN NIGHTMARE

When an American Dream is turned into an American Nightmare... brought to you by the Republican Party and Rick Scott Governor of Florida

Amplify’d from www.thethinkingblue.com

(States tangle with teacher tenure--As momentum for school reform grows and state budgets continue to shrink, the system of teacher tenure is under increasing scrutiny)

This was the headline on MSNBC news the other day. Normally, I would hear or read something like this and just shake my head in helpless sorrow thinking how sad it is that politicians are going after one of the most important vocations (teaching) in our culture by threatening layoffs and union busting, giving excuses that they must, because budgets have to be balanced! My thoughts would always turn to… “there’s nothing I can do about it but feel sadness”. Only this time, this distressing news got more than a sorrowful head shake from me… because it HIT-HOME! My daughter (a single mother) was threatened with dismissal from her teaching job—one that she spent 5 years of her life juggling, the raising of her 2 children, while going to school and working as a teaching paraprofessional, all in air at the same time so to achieve her dream of becoming a teacher.

What brought this threat about? Why did the Powers That Be pick my daughter as a victim to the latest red herring gimmick brought to you by politicians seeking to keep their own jobs by destroying those of others? Oh they threw up a smoke screen first, demonizing teachers as ineffective, inefficient freeloaders who can get away with not doing their jobs 100% because they have the luxury of not being fired “NO-MATTER-HOW-UNPRODUCTIVE-THEY-MAY-BE!”

Well, I found out the answer and let me tell you, it ain’t pretty. My daughter was up for tenure renewal after working hard at her job for four years. These same POWERS THAT BE had put pressure on the Principal of her school, telling him to go after any teacher that was eligible for Tenure Renewal (the last time this will probably happen because collective bargaining was on the chopping block) and find anything on them that would justify (unjustly) a reason for dismissal so there will be one less teacher salary and one less Teacher Tenured.

{{Being tenured does not guarantee a job but the process to fire a tenured teacher is a long and difficult task. Teachers who are tenured are entitled to due process and the administration must prove the teacher failed to meet an obvious and defined standard.}}

My daughter’s name was thrown into the eradication hat because her class of last year scored low on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. This class had an unequal amount of slow learning students many with behavior problems. Does that sound fair? Her class was not the only one who scored low but since the other teachers weren’t up for Tenure Renewal, their jobs were safe. I ask again DOES THAT SOUND FAIR? A more accurate question would be, IS THIS WHAT WE WANT FOR OUR BELOVED AMERICA; Kangaroo Courts, Unfairness caused by Propaganda Machines and Totalitarian Administrations? Is that what we elected our leaders to bring about? Then why are they behaving this way (and getting away with it)? We are all slated to lose in this scheme, not just teachers. As Brave New Films’ end their videos… PSSSST DO SOMETHING! Please sign the petition below: thinkingblue

Subject: Florida Budget Cuts vs. the American Dream Hi, Governor Rick Scott's proposed budget would cut funding for public schools, lay off thousands of state workers, and give corporations a $1.5 billion tax cut. But worst of all, Republicans in Tallahassee are pushing a permanent, across-the-board funding limit that would prevent the state from ever restoring these draconian cuts. I signed a petition urging Governor Scott and my legislators to oppose these cuts. Can you join me at the link below?

Rick Scott was once the CEO of Columbia/HCA, a massive hospital chain. The federal government fined Columbia/HCA for Medicaid and Medicare fraud. That fine, a jaw-dropping 1.7 billion dollars, is the largest in American history. Read more at www.thethinkingblue.com

 

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/bxdtj