1 2
#1404136
Percy Q. Shunn
One can only imagine that you would have the exact opposite reaction if the White House resident was a republican.
5/17/2012 3:24:37 AM
#1404143
Extraintrovert
Not fundie, although it is incredibly stupid, even if there is one good point buried in there somewhere.
5/17/2012 4:01:02 AM
#1404155
Leighton Buzzard
Which part of 'if they will be born before the visit' is confusing you, Colleen?
5/17/2012 4:38:06 AM
#1404164
Whitespirit
So so stupid. this lie has already been nailed so many times on so many sites that only fundies could still repeat it as truth. The Whitehouse does not require unborn things to be registered before the visit, end of story.
5/17/2012 4:58:16 AM
#1404167
Robespierre
Stupid, but fundie?
5/17/2012 5:09:03 AM
#1404176
Mister Spak
This is the homeland security you get when you let fundies run your government. Obama should grow some balls and just shut the whole thing down.
5/17/2012 5:23:41 AM
#1404211
Mayhem
Aside from the fact that it's not true, Coleen can't even read. The registration would have been for babies born by the time of the visit, so they would have been out of the womb, not still unborn during the visit.
5/17/2012 7:28:45 AM
#1404213
John
Silly right-wing stuff ...
Everyone visiting the White House must be identified in advance, including children. You can't register one child then show up with two or three. If you're pregnant, there's a procedure for registering the expected child if you're bringing him or her along after they're born. You just call it Baby Smith, SS# 000-00-0000.
5/17/2012 7:29:07 AM
#1404221
Doubting Thomas
Hey, you're the ones who are whining about how unborn fetuses are people too and should have all the same rights as anyone else. I'd think fundies would be happy about this.
5/17/2012 7:36:37 AM
#1404229
Thinking Allowed
So if the White House is bombed and burned to the ground, they would like to know who was in there at the time. Makes sense to me.
5/17/2012 7:42:19 AM
#1404252
Raised by Horses
Looks like even newborn babies get to participate in the White House's security theater.
5/17/2012 8:12:42 AM
#1404260
Apatheist
It's procedure you idiot. It doesn't make sense but when does hyperactive security have to have reason as it's basis?
5/17/2012 8:39:28 AM
#1404264
Tatsukun
Hmmm... the wife and I would like to visit the WH next year when we are on the east coast, and she's fairly fertile, and I don't trust condoms all that much... might be better to just go ahead and register a kid. LOL, freaks!
I love that the fundies here just accept these lies are true without thinking, and still manage to get their panties in a twist about them.
5/17/2012 9:02:38 AM
#1404274
Osiris
Yeah doesn't it seem ridiculous to treat a fetus like an actual person?
5/17/2012 9:39:37 AM
#1404279
breakerslion
Yeah! Why would anyone want an accurate head count for evacuation purposes?
Oh, and:
http://www.jinx.com/p/the_guild_8_bit_baby_t_shirt.html
5/17/2012 10:39:05 AM
#1404327
Papabear
What is an "unborn child?" They might be blastocysts, embryos or fetuses until they are born. Of course, I have many unborn children. They haven't been conceived. I haven't even met their mother yet, but they're in my mind and ARE unborn.
5/17/2012 1:07:54 PM
#1404353
checkmate
Not fundy, just stupid and bitchy.
I think we can assume that the Secret Service bases this rule on past experience. It might sound silly and it may actually be silly, but I guess they have a reason.
Coleen on the other hand really needs a hobby. How on earth can somebody get so upset about something like this? Get a job, have a kid, plant a garden, something. Just don't sit around all day bitching about goofy crap.
We all know that modern day newborns mean about 100-200 pounds of equipment: the baby carriage, pampers, wiping cloths, powders, bottles, jars, etc. etc.
Just picture a mom showing up at the White House gate with a ton of crap for a newborn junior who's not on the visitor's list. Yes, that could be seen as a disguise for a security risk. It's not really all that unreasonable.
And, imagine the scene when that mom gets sent away.
Depending on how one looks at it, the registration requirement isn't all that stupid.
But, can we expect a red state "everything they do is wrong" bitch to think about things like that? Need I answer?
doing such a thing is just unconstitutional
Unconstitutional?
Please cite the section of the constitution you think is being violated here.
States rights? Checks and balances? The writ of habeas corpus? The right of congress to negotiate treaties?
5/17/2012 2:53:53 PM
#1404362
Old Viking
What's the rule for adults who harbor dirty thoughts?
5/17/2012 3:56:57 PM
#1404368
tracer
Even if this registration requirement were true -- which it isn't -- Coleen here seems to think that it was entirely President Obama's idea.
I'm sure that White House visiting procedures are concocted by Secret Service employees, and that the President is probably unaware of most of them.
5/17/2012 4:31:57 PM
#1404387
Raised by Horses
@Old Viking
All dirty thoughts visiting the White House must be registered beforehand, including a list of persons involved and what equipment they're using.
5/17/2012 5:24:49 PM
#1404396
louislois
Not fundy. Just really fucking retarded.
5/17/2012 6:16:32 PM
#1404405
classic fstdt
It's only crazy if the other guys say it, right?
5/17/2012 7:25:44 PM
#1404406
aaa
What others would call Paranoia, tends to be the standard level of security in high-level politics.
5/17/2012 7:41:23 PM
#1405000
TheReasonator
I'm surprised they're not using this to argue that this counts as recognizing the unborn as human beings, and so that Obama is being inconsistent by supporting abortion.
5/19/2012 5:08:36 PM
#1405996
The_L
Um, no. It's so that if the mom comes in with a baby-shaped bundle, it's very obviously A BABY and not a cleverly-concealed bomb. Because the baby was registered before it was born.
And I'm pretty sure there's probably a check box available for "gender of child is currently unknown," if this procedure even actually exists to begin with.
5/22/2012 1:31:00 PM
1 2