TED Conversations

Ted Barnes

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Obama's birth certificate

Personally I think this whole topic is absolutely ridiculous, but recent polls have shown 1 in 4 Americans doubt the President's origins of birth.

3 questions to guide this topic

1 - Why is it important that the American president be born in America?

2 - Today, the president released his official birth certificate to the public. Why do you think Donald Trump, the Tea Party, and others doubted his place of birth to begin with?

3 - Does racism factor into this attack on the president?

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

    • +1
    Apr 28 2011: 1. Because, besides the Constitution, it would be assumed that a nation born baby would grow up conscious of the problems, situations, systems, and people of the nation. Actually one of the best policies in my opinion, makes sense.

    2. The Tea-Baggers are new wave Republican party, of course they are going to try and discredit their opponents that's like a huge part of the campaigns in this country when thinking left or right. They are for corporate America, the following is pure opinion: Obama actually is trying to fight against it, I feel he just doesn't know how or doesn't want to die because of it. Originally it was Republicans creating the rumors of his origin, the Tea-party is no new act, just a new name (which will probably get votes in this nation).

    3. Even if it does it would never be admitted, ever. However is race considered into the voting in America? Yes, but not totally but a huge percentage.

    The fact one in four Americans doubt the Presidents birth. Shows how crappy either A. our education is B. our media C. our entertainment have become for the public. From three of our major sources of information we are not giving proper information (well-rounded, unbiased, and/or from all points of view) about current events. In fact referencing the documentary "This film is not yet rate" about 95 percent of American entertainment is owned by 6 major corporations. (Disney owns about a sixth of our entertainment). Indeed we must rely on our family members/communities in which we place ourselves into or are born into to be where we gain information. However those who are internet-literate and capable of finding less bias information tend to be in small circles (opinion). Seriously comedy central has better news, but it is nothing but pauses for laughs and brief commentary, forcing the viewer to do more research (more opinion).

    Until we have "civil rights" "constitution analysis" and/or "political philosophy" for classes in high schools, we're just asking to keep being a dumb nation. Christianity is over 60 percent, the majority of them vote bible, and bible brought us to war, twice.
    • thumb

      Ted Barnes

      • 0
      Apr 28 2011: I can't argue with any of that except for one point....the Christian population is much higher than 60 percent.
      • thumb

        Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

        • 0
        Apr 28 2011: I under shot it to be nice, and to give Christians a break. What is it?
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: It's more around 85 percent
    • thumb

      Chris Aldon 20+

      • 0
      Apr 28 2011: I don't think it is fair to blame a religion for any of America's wars. Which two are you talking about?
      • thumb

        Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

        • 0
        Apr 28 2011: Iraq, Afghanistan ...

        And yes, I do. In fact a good amount (pretty much all) of those who voted for war after 9/11 were voted in by Bible, mostly Republicans.

        SO you are half right, those who didn't advice our founding fathers warning are to blame, those people usually are Bible people. Thinking God will let them into heaven with a "I'm sorry" and "here's a hundred bill for the church, it's Christmas" If they are playing stupid or really just that fundamentalist is a much better question.
        • thumb

          Sky F

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: I'd guess it was a confounding variable, and that being Christian and that supporting war both share a common cause.

          I don't think religion causes war.

          I think being susceptible to persuasive people through lack of critical thinking caused both the convincing of war and the belief in religion.

          I believe this because I believe you can be religious and not support war... but it's a lot less probable for you to be Christian, support these wars, and have an autonomous mind.

          Watch out for those hidden variables in causal relationships, they'll get ya.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: Woah woah, religion has historically caused war so that's overstepping it a little bit. I'm not convinced our wars currently are solely based on religion, I think they are motivated by a lot of different elements with religion only being a fraction of that.
        • thumb

          Sky F

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: Ted, did you even read what I said? Correlation not causation brodude.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • +1
          Apr 28 2011: I did read what you said. I'm just not buying it.

          "I think being susceptible to persuasive people through lack of critical thinking caused both the convincing of war and the belief in religion." This follow the herd idea is not a new one.

          "I believe this because I believe you can be religious and not support war... but it's a lot less probable for you to be Christian, support these wars, and have an autonomous mind." I think the words being Christian and having an autonomous mind contradict themselves somewhat and definitely a lot less common. Especially if we revert back to your previous statement about people lacking critical thinking being easily persuaded into war and religion almost completely proves that. Christians and other religious people love the comfort of the herd.

          So yes, if you want to nitpick it, then humans are really the ultimate cause of war, but a lot wars have been inspired by religious beliefs and fanaticism. A lot of innocent and not so innocent people have perished because of the ideals of superiority religion has helped instill. So maybe religion didn't directly cause wars, that doesn't mean it wasn't the main reason for engaging in them and that doesn't mean we can let it off the hook.
        • thumb

          Sky F

          • 0
          Apr 29 2011: Yawn. Ya don't get it.

          Religion is an identity to be exploited, hence why it plays a role in gaining support for a war.

          The root of the problem to all of this, the common cause, I'm proposing is lack of critical thinking. That is to say that the relationship between religion and war-support is only seemingly a causal one, but that it is actually more reasonable to believe it is only a correlation relationship.

          I say this because the difference between religious people who support the war and religious people who don't tends to be the ability to think slightly more autonomously. This suggests that it isn't religion that is the cause, but only a correlation.

          I'm not being nitpicky I'm suggesting the root of the problem, because that is where the true solution lies, and as such, the place where focus should be.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • 0
          Apr 29 2011: That makes sense. Religion is the tool to control the masses but not the direct cause of it.
      • thumb

        Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

        • 0
        Apr 28 2011: No religion didn't directly cause war in America's case, but those who ran and used Bible as the campaign in anyway have a better shot winning than those who do not. So, the overlapping majority who voted yes to Iraq were Republicans and majorly voted in by Bible.

        So, again no religion cannot directly be linked, but... this article may interest you Sky and Ted.

        http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-08/us/atheist.soldier_1_tours-discrimination-bible?_s=PM:US

        War and religion go hand and hand pretty nicely for the U.S military. Which military being 1/4? 1/5? of percent population of our nation. there is really not a lot of critical thinking go around at all in social circles.

        **We need adults in this conversation thought. They are the people who need something to talk about besides weather not just saying that is the case here at TED, but just another generalized speculation of my local state of New Jersey (perhaps there are trends), which is the most densely populate state of a melting pot. Indeed I would hope that I can get a feel for America by being in such a diverse place.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: Not quite sure what you mean in your last paragraph. I'm an adult and I'm in the debate, and if you mean older adults than me (mid 20s), I'm not so sure we should be wasting our time. ! We need to get my generation and the new generation involved in these discussions so we can shape a better tomorrow.

        • Austin R 20+

          • +1
          Apr 28 2011: Religion had nothing to do with these wars. Iraq was primarily due to oil, secondarily due to the president feeling he needed to respond to 9/11, and lastly, due to our imperialistic ambitions. Afghanistan was purely to eliminate the imminent terror threat, not because they are Muslim.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • 0
          Apr 28 2011: I'm not sure the president feeling like he needed to respond to 9/11 had much to do with the invasion of Iraq at all. I think like your first point stated, it was mainly for oil and corporate short-term profit. IMO, I think this "imminent terror threat" is a load of bullshit too. The same reasons applied in Afghanistan and the fact that it is a strategic stronghold in the region. I think this terror alert nonsense is just that...nonsense. You can't go to war with an idea...or an ism. Medgar Evars said it best "You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea." Now, you CAN go to war for resources and profit, and that's exactly what we did using terrorism as the fear tool to get us in the door. But honestly guys, if this is where the discussion is heading, I have a new topic up called "The role of America in the Middle East" that might be a more valid forum for it.

        • Austin R 20+

          • +1
          Apr 28 2011: The main reason Bush invaded Afghanistan was Al Qaeda, though, of course other motives where involved. Sadly, we have long overstayed our welcome there. And I admit "imminent terror threat" was the wrong choice of words. Our troops completed the mission a while ago, yet we are still there because of those ulterior motives you suggested.

          Alright, I'll quit furthering this tangent we got on.
        • thumb

          Ted Barnes

          • +1
          Apr 28 2011: I understand it is hard to talk about the president in any form or fashion without thinking about our ongoing occupation in the Middle East. There's a lot of evidence suggesting "Al-Queda" is nothing more originally than a CIA creation that was later adopted by actual groups. You know you see on the news all the time "Al-Queda" did this or that but mainly that has just become a blanket term for terrorists because they had to give a face to the evil. At any rate, I believe even though we made a mistake ever invading the Middle East without further investigation into 9/11, and DEFINITELY made a mistake turning our weapons to Iraq, that doesn't change the fact we are there and we as a nation have to deal with the repercussions of our actions and face up to the reprehensible acts we have committed. I'm no military strategist so I'm not sure what the best course of action is now, but one thing is certain, this occupation of the Middle East and the war and turmoil we have caused has generated a ripple effect throughout that entire region and is going to get worse before it gets better.
      • thumb

        Nicholas Lukowiak 50+

        • 0
        Apr 28 2011: Absolutely, but older generations got to fix their "lack of carrying" 70's and 80's up a bit in my opinion.

        Staring at T.V's and reading newspapers saying/thinking/creating thoughts of "I hope this turns out alright" "God bless our Troops" "America is still the greatest nation" "Trickle down economics"

        It wasn't fair because they did not have internet/technology like we do now. But now they do, take a 20 minute course from a relative (a child preferred they have most patients) and know how to use browser and even word, perhaps connect with old friends on facebook I don't know why not.

        Anyways technology is the biggest idea on TED and we need to use it for more than toys, music, and entertainment. These are tools. Computer majors my heart goes out to you, having to learn so much useless stuff to get a degree for it. Most of it is learned as the job is done anyways. Why internships are so rare and valuable. Start mini-businesses and network (Just some experience talking).

        Edited: Austin I absolutely agree, no question.

        However those who made the decisions are in there by popularity and academic thinking (competition) put them there.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.