John Sununu to Soledad O’Brien: You should be embarrassed!

1)     CNN should be embarrassed!

As John Sununu bluntly put it…this country has a job problem, and CNN keeps talking about “birther” and Donald Trump.

Soledad O’Brien thought it was legit to bring up the “birther” issue because Donald Trump is a high level supporter/surrogate for Romney. And she wanted someone from Mitt Romney’s campaign to acknowledge that Donald Trump is wrong on the “birther” issue.

Watch the video exchange between John Sununu and Soledad O’Brien by clicking here. Be warned that it is very funny—I could not stop laughing.

While there are 24 million of people—as reminded by John Sununu—are either unemployed or underemployed, CNN will try to distract people from Obama’s job and massive spending record with the “birther” issue.

Let’s face it…Obama may or may not be natural-born citizen, but the fact is that he has been the President for over 3 years. And as much as many people—myself included—want to roll back the damages that he has caused, we can’t. What people can do is to vote in November to ensure that he can’t go on for another 4 years.

2)     “Birtherism” was not first started by Republicans

“Birtherism” was not started by Republicans since Obama’s run for White House back in 2008. About 40 years before, ironically, George Romney—Mitt Romney’s father—faced the same issue started by the then prominent Democrat U.S. Representative Emanuel Celler who expressed “serious doubts” on whether George Romney was eligible to be President because George Romney was born in Mexico. Celler announced that…the question should not be allowed to go unanswered. Many constitutional law experts argued that he was eligible since both his parents were U.S. citizens.

“I am a natural born citizen. My parents were American citizens. I was a citizen at birth,” George Romney said. The Congressional Research Service had to advise people that its analysts agreed with George Romney. (Click here to read the article from Chicago Tribune).

So, “birtherism” was fair game when Democrats started it. When it was brought up by Republicans in 2008, “birtherism” was not “fair”. Congress did not act to verify Obama’s eligibility, did it?

 3) Romney was not reluctant to provide his birth certificate…

Here it is…

Nothing to hide—Romney's birth certificate

Nothing to hide—Romney’s birth certificate

Ch3 Nguyen


5 comments on “John Sununu to Soledad O’Brien: You should be embarrassed!

  1. ah come on- Romney’s “birth certificate” is a clear forgery- hell- it even says “void” on it. And he has still refused to answer the question of whether or not he is a unicorn. ( )

    But seriously. Come on. No one ever questioned the facts behind Romney’s fathers birth. Nor did they claim every piece of the multitude of evidence was a forgery and part of a decades old conspiracy.

    The debate was the meaning of a “natural born citizen” . Distasteful maybem but fair enough. THAT has NOT been the debate surrounding Obama…

    • I think the “birther” movement was on longer than necessary because Obama did not release his birth certificate back in 2008. Why didn’t he?
      Back in 1967, George Romney was questioned whether he was eligible to be President. I understand the 2 issues are not exactly identical. If people want to know, the presidential candidate should just release it. It’s too bad Obama did not do so in 2008. And it led people to believe he had something to hide.
      If you read the Chicago Tribune article, Democrats made a big deal out of it….
      …In George Romney’s case, most of the questions were raised initially by Democrats who cited the Constitution’s requirement that only a “natural born citizen” can be president.
      As early as February 1967 – a year before the first 1968 presidential primary – some newspapers were raising questions as to whether George Romney’s place of birth disqualified him from the presidency.
      By May 1967, U.S. congressman Emmanuel Celler, a Democrat who chaired the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, was expressing “serious doubts” about George Romney’s eligibility.
      The next month, another Democratic congressman inserted a lengthy treatise into the Congressional Record in which a government lawyer – writing in a “personal capacity” – argued that George Romney was ineligible for the White House because he was born outside U.S. territory….

      • But of course in George Romneys case the official record showed he was born outside of the US- Unlike Obama.
        So why should Obama have been required to take the extraordinary step of releasing not only is short form- but his long form birth certificat-e something that has never been demanded of any president or presidential candidate?

        There is a monumental difference between the two cases…

  2. We still haven’t seen the results of a DNA test explicitly stating that Mitt Romney isn’t a unicorn. Why is he taking so long to release that to the public? Look, I’m not saying he is a unicorn — you can believe that if you want to — I just think it distracts us from the discussion we should be having.

    • hahaha…I loved the “unicornism” too. But Romney proved he is a natural-born citizen so he is eligible to be President. Why would the “unicornism” people care if he is unicorn or not? Is it irrelevant to the office of presidency?
      Like I say I love humor in the U.S.
      Where else in the world people can joke like this to the future 45th President?
      They can’t in China, Cuba, Vietnam or North Korea for sure.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s