Truthers vs. Birthers: Not All Conspiracy Theories Are Created Equal
Now, as a philo-American, though not an American (I should come clean at this point and declare that I’m definitely not eligible to stand for the position of president of the United States), I don’t have a dog, or a crazy uncle, in this fight. For the record I do not care if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or a manger in a little town of Bethlehem (as many of his supporters seem to think), though I don’t have any reason to disbelieve his official curriculum vitae. Being a believer in free speech, I’m also firmly of the opinion that people are entitled to hold any opinion, no matter how foolish or offensive to others. In fact, being vocal about one’s outlandish beliefs should be encouraged as the best way for the public to quickly assess the person’s mental competency.
You don’t want fools running around while keeping their extreme beliefs to themselves, lest some of them accidentally become czars or something.
But there’s something in this mutual “yo mama” mud-slinging (“Your people are crazy.” “My people? What about your people?”) that does strike me as rather odd, and that’s the assumption of moral equivalence — as if all eccentricities, idiocies, and conspiracy theories were inherently equal. But this is clearly not so. Let us briefly recap:
The birthers believe that Barack Obama lied about the place of his birth so that he could become the president of the United States.
The truthers believe that George W. Bush murdered (by commission or omission) 3,000 of his fellow Americans and caused two trillion dollars worth of immediate economic damage to his country in order to launch two wars that have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, drained another trillion dollars from the Treasury, and provided an excuse to destroy the Constitution and turn America into a police state.
Um, OK.
To put it in fairytale terms (the next closest thing to a conspiracy theory), we are taking here about Pinocchio versus Lord Voldemort on steroids and the stimulus package.
Or to return to uncles once again, it’s the difference between an uncle who wears his underwear on his head and an uncle who sexually molests 6-year-old girls, strangles them, and then buries their bodies in his backyard.
Everything in life, including craziness, is a matter of degrees. That’s why we should be wary of an automatic resort to moral and other equivalence as a debating tactic. To do so risks conceding far too much for the momentary comfort of mental egalitarianism. No country on earth is perfect, true, but the United States has been a hell of a lot better in all respects than the Soviet Union. Democracy (or capitalism) might be the worst system ever invented, as Churchill reminded us, except for all the others. All conspiracy theories are deluded, but not all of them are equally contemptible and dangerous.
The belief that NASA faked the moon landing gave us a few laughs; the belief that the Elders of Zion were conspiring against civilization gave us the Holocaust.
The truth, more often than not, tends to be quite prosaic. On August 4, 1961, Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, of an American mother and a Kenyan father. On September 11, 2001, nineteen al-Qaeda operatives, without prior knowledge by any government (bar that of Afghanistan), used four airplanes as flying bombs against targets in New York and Washington, D.C.
The polls tell us that many, too many, on both sides of politics think otherwise. Personally, however, I would be much more concerned if large sections of my party’s base believed a president to be a mass murderer rather than a con artist. All men might be created equal, but how they choose to pursue their inalienable right to craziness separates the harmlessly eccentric from the dangerously deluded.
There’s another important difference: it’s not possible to be an agnostic truther. Truthers, by their nature, believe a positive. Birthers, OTOH, can simply be agnostic, but still believe that due diligence is called for.
If I buy a house, subject to inspection, I’m not accusing the sellers of selling me a termite infested house. I’m just saying that if it does turn out to be termite infested, the deal’s off.
Another difference is that one “theory” is a true conspiracy theory, which fails precisely because the size and scope of the conspiracy involved make it preposterous on its face.
The other theory, or theories, even if you believe them, aren’t conspiracies, except for some of the more outlandish ones about Gov. Lingle being in on a cover up.
the birthers are people who believe that the current occupant of the White House is un-American because, quite literally, he is un-American. Or to be more precise, non-American.
Not really. It’s clear that The Precedent has very little American sensibilities about him, but that is not a Constitutional qualification, itself. The “birther” theories are several, but they basically split into three categories –
1) Those who believe he was not born in the US and is, therefore, just a naturalized American citizen (which falls short of the Constitutional requirement of a “natural born Citizen”).
2) Those who believe he gained Indonesian citizenship as he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, thereby having to relinquish his US citizenship (as Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship and would have required renouncement of other citizenships) and only be naturalized back at a later date, also falling short of “natural born citizen”.
or, the one I subscribe to:
3) That the class of “natural born citizen”, in original intent, did not include American dual citizens. This was clearly true at the time of the writing, since the Founders rejected the idea of dual citizenship for Americans. It was only later that our nation started accepting the idea, so for one to assume that the original class of “natural born citizens” did not automatically expand to include this new type of citizen.
Just in terms of common sense, only a fool would think that it would be a good idea to have someone who is a citizen of multiple other nations being in control of our Executive branch. I mean, that’s just a crazy idea, itself.
As to how the “natural born” clause arose, there is much direct evidence from the Founders, but a nice one is that of a July 25, 1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.“
Er … I meant to write:
“so one would assume that the original class of “natural born citizens” did not automatically expand to include this new type of citizen.”
And I would just add that the restriction of dual citizens from the class of natural born citizens means that at any point one accepts another citizenship he loses natural born status, never to regain it.
Your forgetting a few things… such as constitutionalists have every right to demand that the constitution be followed and that their be some form of public review….
To argue that somehow their is a “conspiracy” around obama is a joke… it amounts to saying that no US elected official has ever lied and will never lie… Is it so hard for you to believe that elected officials would lie to get wealth and power?
Obama is lying and so are a handful of other ppl because they intend to get something out of it… It takes 3 ppl to make a conspiracy only 2 ppl have seen obama long form birth cert… thus no matter how you cut it their is no conspiracy unless of course obama has seen his birth cert.
Constitutionalists demand that the constitution be followed… the fact that so many ppl come out and call them crazy for demanding the government OBEY THE HIGHEST LAWS OF THE LAND… shows just how pathetic and how far our republic has fallen.
It would take all of 3 hours to prove or disprove all the info about obama… unlike the crazed truthers who no matter if time travel was invented and they were taken back in time to watch 9/11 from start to finish… THEY WOULD STILL BELIEVE 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB BY BUSH.
Even the off handed implying that somehow constitutionalists who want simple legal documents and proof or disproof of a LEGAL FACT are similar to truthers is truly the most crazed thing to ever be written.
So, when the term, “Birthers” was coined in 2008 by a left-winger on Digg – disseminated by JournoList – and was then popularized by the media that’s good…but the term “Teabagger” is bad. Not only is “Teabagger” insulting, it was said by a left-wing journalist!! (by the same MSNBC journalist who popularized the term, “Teabaggers,”) But when the same left-wing journalist says “Birther,” that’s good!
At the same time, *everyone* knows that the media industry is comprised of a demographic that is more than 90% liberal/progressive and registered Democrats and that no one should take them seriously – because they have an agenda to promote! You bewail their control of the narrative …and then spread their memes for them.
You balk at other’s attempts to control what you think and believe through their use of ad hom attacks and their open vitriol against you and your chosen positions, but you engage in the same practice against those who would otherwise stand with you on any number of issues. …and you cannot understand why the ‘conservative movement’ is in such disarray? After all of that and more, you ask yourselves: “Why is the conservative movement so divided?” and, “Why has the level of discourse in America fallen to such depths of depravity?”
Gee! Lemme think…
I think both theories need an honest review. The problem is the generalization that is rampant in declaring the theories ‘crazy, unpatriotic or conspiratorial’ based on the type of individuals highlighting the issue. The shoot the messanger tactic is a rather silly way for de-bunking either of the two theories.
9-11 official version has more holes in it then swiss cheese. And the ‘birther’ issue although seems instigated and political, has some odd details that need to be further investigated. For eg, did you know that Obama birth certificate has now been admitted as amended? (if you dont believe me just do a google search). The question now arises why was it amended?
To silence once and for all parties concerned, both issues need to be ‘independently’ investigated.
To 7. Oliver
While their is little doubt the “official” story for 9/11 has issues… one must remember that it is a national security issue and classified throughout the government. In 75 years when that classification has been lifted the whole and complete story will be told… unless of course old sandy berger gets to it first…
To finish my little synopsis of the “Birther” situation, it is not connected to the actual birth outside of that one category I mentioned. As robotech master pointed out, the label is just meant to be derogatory … belittling and dismissing the legitimate and REQUIRED question of official verification of Constitutional eligibility. No offical body ever checked. None. They all took the party’s word, and no one there checked anything. This is fact.
The D’Onofrio case is out New Jersey, where Roger Calero was on the Presidential ballot. Calero, not only wasn’t born in America nor to American parents, but isn’t even an American citizen TODAY! He’s only a green card holder. And he got onto state Presidential ballots in 2004 and 2008!
So, we request that one of the eligibility cases floating around be heard. The court would open up discovery of the relevant documents needed to establish ones citizenship status, would rule on the operational definition of “natural born citizen” (which it has never done) and would determine if The Precedent is Constitutionally eligible. This is called the rule of law.
Most of these cases have been thrown out on ridiculous arguments of lack of standing – that voters have no right to know if candidates are Constitutionally eligible for the offices they are running for. It’s pretty nutty, truly.
And, it’s not as if these sorts of citizenship issues were shied away from in all cases. Congress moved for the issue of John McCain’s status as a ‘natural born citizen’ – though Congress doesn’t have the power to “make” someone a natural born citizen. But that shows the difference in official scrutiny given.
Truthers THINK their idiotic moronic outlandish theories are real but the majority of BIRTHERS on the other hand are simply asking the question “SHOW us your REAL Birth Certificate and explain WHY you have been hiding it.”No wild theories although his refusal to be open and honest raises all sorts of other questions but just a simple answer from the SELF declared TRANSPARENT President would suffice oh and while you are at it release ALL those COUNTLESS other documents you are HIDING too. So no conspiracy no nuttiness just a simple demand for the TRANSPARANCY he is supposed to love.
Its those that are HIDING things that are the conspirers NOT thiose just asking questions which they have every right to expect answers to.
I should have cited Warren Bonesteel for the “birther” reference, though I agree 100% with robotech master @5, too.
If it is true that the Obamanations BC has been ‘AMENDED” than there is even mor urgent need to see what it says now AND to know what amendments were made when they were made by whom they were made and what the document said PRIOR to being amended on on whose authority and with what evidential proof was the amendment made.
the responses to Chrenkoff’s article above and inevitably after mine, in support of “Birtherism”, only go to show that Birtherism is alive and well on the Right, and it is craziness, averse to reason and logic.
One can argue that 9-11 Trutherism is more sinister, and perhaps it is, but in terms of the non-reasoning behind both conspiracies, the wishful thinking and trivial evasions, the wilful denial of what the anti-Truthers and anti-Birthers are actually saying in rebuttal etc – it is the same refusal to face cold facts that drives all false conspiracy thinking. So ultimately there is no difference. Plus Chrenkoff fails to recognise that by focusing on the Birther nonsense, it distracts from Obama’s disastrous domestic and foreign policies which are leading America and the world to disaster.
We are on the precipice and Birthers are blabbering on about a non-existent conspiracy, and the dire straits we are in continue to worsen. In this sense Birther conspiracy theorising is just as destructive as 9-11 Trutherism for it distracts from pressing issues that affect us all, and so aggravates them.
My theory is that Obama was born of an immaculate conception, as befitting his divine origin. Therefore, just as all other demi-gods, he has no birth certificate.
First came the “Truthers” then the “Birthers.” They were benign enough, and provided comedy relief for weary times. Now we have the newest crackpot conspiracy theorists — the “Racers” — that believe every political disagreement with Barack Obama is due to racism. These whackjobs would be hilarious as well if it weren’t for the fact that they are running the levers of national and state government and are supported by the legacy Media. It’s time that anyone that espouses this view be ignored, and receive the scorn they so richly deserve.
Who pays the lawers to fend off the requests to show the long form?
Is it obama’s own money? If he doesn’t care about his own money, he will care even less about taxpayer’s money.
Is it paid by the democrat party? What do they get for it?
Is it taxpayers money?
My take is that BHO was born out of wedlock and does not want to advertise. Just a guess, but what the heck. All he has to do is produce the documents. Recently saw making the email rounds, a school application of Barry Soetoro listing his nationality as Indonesian. No media attention, but what can I say, this wouldn’t be worth any kind of story. Even if it was true. Thats the MSM for ya!
Truthers just want another reason to hate Bush. While Bush did spend like a drunken sailor to try and buy popularity and grew the government at an alarming pace, he was better than either alternative. Most of the planning of the 9/11 attacks was in place during the Clinton administration. Who failed there?
Larry #13 has a point. Lets just get on with shutting down Obama’s agenda and move on to 2010………
This is really, really easy. Use your common sense folks.
Would you buy a car without a bill or sale or certificate of title?
That’s the Birthers.
Would you buy a car and require the seller to prove to you it’s not an alien built vehicle that will eat you like a Venus Flytrap?
That’s the Truthers.
BHO may have been born out of wedlock, his father may be Frank Marshall Davis, there are so many possibilities from a man who did not write his own autobiographies (wonder if he is splitting the proceeds with Ayers, but then, Billy does not need the $). Unless someone like Giles and O’Keefe get on the story, we may never know.
More seriously, he sure is going to a lot of trouble (and $) to keep this secret. What was that campaign promise, “…the most transparent administration…”. Not so much, I guess.
Doug S Barrack, you can call me HUSSEIN now I won, Obama did indeed attend school in Indonesia not only as an Indonesian but as a MUSLIM. He HIMSELF confirms this when he talks of ‘being told off by the Teacher for pulling faces in KORANIC STUDIES’ in his OWN book. Koranic Studies in Indonesian schools is ONLY taken by Muslims its the LAW the Law at the time also stated that ONLY Indonesian NATIONALS were allowed to attend State Schools which Obama (sorry Barry Soetero anyone seen his NAME CHANGE Document or American nationalisation document no thought not they are on the HIDDEN list) did . I know this how? well I lived in Jakarta myself around that time and am married to an Indonesian myself. He also took ‘mengagi’ the study of correctly pronounced Koranic ARABIC a subject not even normal Muslims take ONLY DEVOUT ones. So the Obamantaion was not only an Indonesian CITIZEN he was also a DEVOUT Muslim.
The difference is that the proof exists to shut up the “birthers” and all that need be done is for Obama to release his documents. Yet he refuses.
What does this mean? Here are a couple of possibilities: (1) There is SOMETHING to hide and he is hiding it at significant cost. (2) There is NOTHING to hide yet he is hiding this nothing at significant cost. If the truth is the former, the expense makes sense; while if it’s the latter, the expense makes no sense, unless going to the expense has some other purpose. And then the question becomes, “what is this other purpose?”
Are there other possibilities? I don’t know, but it appears as a simple either/or: Either there’s “no there there” OR there is. If there’s no there there, then why cause the disruption by not simply proving it? What has Obama to gain by leaving this important question unanswered?
Why do you make the following statements in the quote below ? Why isn’t the demand to show Obama is constitutionally eligible THE most important issue ? It has nothing to do with your beliefs or anyone else’s beliefs, it is a simple matter of producing the document. Obama has spent over 1 million $ to seal ALL his records ! It is a matter of data and factual detail. The Certificate of Live Birth ( COLB )on the Obama website is a fake and not even relevant. The proper long version has never been sighted unless it is the one Lucus Smith unearthed in Mombassa Kenya . Go to The Obama File website for heaps of details.
QUOTE ; ” For the record I do not care if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or a manger in a little town of Bethlehem (as many of his supporters seem to think), though I don’t have any reason to disbelieve his official curriculum vitae. ”
I find these snide blasphemous Jesus manger jokes quite offensive. Why don’t you care ? Why don’t you have any reason to disbelieve his official curriculum vitae ? ( that is not a Birth Certificate ; CV is not a BC ) Is that trust and faith in the man Obama because he has proved himself impeccably truthful and full of integrity ? He has never lied about anything so he couldn’t be lying about his non disclosure of the long version BC ? Obama is the very personification of LIES. How many dozens has he told now ? All easily verifiable on U TUBE in his own words. He condemms himself.
Hitler in Mein Kempf , his ‘ how to ‘ book of evil Nazi strategy suggested telling the most outlandish lies for most people only tell little lies they would not even suspect anyone could tell such massive lies ! Sorry I haven’t the correct quote just my poor paraphrase. Ali Sina has written an extensive article about Obama’s pathological narcissism at FaithFreedom blog. Really worth the read.
” Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself ? ”
People should wear the derogatory slur BIRTHER with pride as it contrasts vividly with the culture of DEATH that Obama and his minions embody.
The teabagger terminology is outright sexually offensive ( look up GOGGLE if you still don’t know the meaning, hint; dangling ‘testes’ ) Still leftist media people chuckle about it ie. Anderson Cooper and even older CNN anchors who should know better than to stoop to the gutter sex jokes. They have no shame.
Keep it simple ; WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ?
I usually find the truth at pajamas media. Not in this article.
A “birther” wants barry to prove his place of birth. It’s that simple. He hasn’t proved it yet. You can get a colb and not have been born in hawaii. You have to see the vital records to prove he was born there. Is that so hard to understand?
The writer of this article has simply fallen for the liberal version of this thing.
a. birthers don’t believe he was born in kenya. That’s what liberals say about us to discredit us. We don’t know where he was born because ONLY THE VITAL RECORDS PROVE WHERE HE WAS BORN.
b. That hospital you said he was born in. Why don’t you try sticking to the facts. It has never been proved, only alleged, that he was born there.
Is this really so hard to understand?
They and the global warming/moon landing deniers are all crazy, stupid and/or badly misinformed to some degree. In rank of inexcusable stupidity, based on how easy or difficult to it is to clear up any confusion with a little Googling, from most dopey on, I would use this order: 1) The Birthers; 2) The Truthers; 3) The Moon Landing Deniers; 4) The Global Warming Deniers.
The truth, more often than not, tends to be quite prosaic. On August 4, 1961, Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii…
Arthur Chrenkoff
If you have some evidence to support this claim, then please post it. In the meantime show some respect for yourself and us by refraining from using the derogatory term birthers to describe people who make up their minds based on evidence.
Bush is blamed for hurricanes to 9/11 and beyond, however, he also had a Democratic Congress that makes all laws and budgets for spending. It was the Congress that signed us to the wars.
I heard someone on the radio cite federal law (could not write down chapter and verse as i was driving) that requires one parent to be citizen for child’s citizenship. Place of birth not at issue. His mother was a citizen, so he would be, too. Example of McCain born in Canal Zone, also all military, diplomatic, and business children born on foreign soil. Also recall the bringing here of kids in Viet Nam fathered by US servicemen. They too would qualify as having one biologacal citizen parent. Maybe someone more versed in law than me could look this up.
Having said that, I am less concerned where Dear Leader is from than where he is taking us.
Also, not to be confused with the 14th amendment which does not pertain to “anchor babies”, but was passed to protect the citizenship of freed slaves who were born in this country prior to Emancipation.
5. robotech
well stated.
call me whatever you want …but show me the birth certificate …then laugh all you want.
24 BC. 4)Global Warming Believers. There, fixed that for you. That’s OK, no need to thank me.
As usual BC you get a bit right and the MAIN thing wrong. Birthers is NOT a conspiracy Birthers is a UNASWERED question the CONSPIRACY is on behalf of those HIDING the answers . Very simple very logical and thus of course completely beyond the capabilities of a PC MC moonbat ‘libtards’ comprehension.
You CLAIMED it BC so please show us the GOOGLE hits for the Obamanations REAL Vault Birth Certificate. If you cannot provide links to this vital information then YOU are guilty of being a Co-CONSPIRATOR in HIDING the Obamantions information. BTW a COLB is NOT a Vault BC.
BTW BC Nice to see you list Global warming DENIERS as part of your theorists please explain why the Eart has been COOLING since 1998 when CO2 levels have continued to rise Green NAZI.This just establishes your moonbat credentials.
This article is grotesque and pitiable in its ignorant and cowardly condescension towards those who are aware of the eligibility issue and care about the rule of law.
The Gray Communist is CERTAINLY a usurper due to his British birth. The problem is, you have to study an bit of jurisprudence in order to know that, and a Supreme court willing to do its job in order to have it established.
Hence the insistence on the FACT that the Gray Communist Usurper has never given any credible evidence of his place of birth.
The Republican party’s cowardice towards Socialist intimidation on this issue disqualifies its leadership, particularly McCain who, being born in Panama, was not eligible either, and Cheney, who failed to ask for objections from the Senate when votes were counted there.
The racist double standard being applied to the Gray Usurper should be exposed and defied.
the real issues are that the administration and the democrat party are not doing their jobs which is upholding the constitution of the USA
below are links which go a long way in explaining where we are and how we got here
I thought obama was juat a marxist ..he does follow the marxist rule book and he has surrounded himself with marxists (do the trolls know he is marxist and by default they are supporting marxism)
..any way after seeing this blog I now see that the marxist part is small potatoes …he is a mental defect …a retard. well at least a narcissist. …and that is bad news for everyone.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html
An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria must be met:
•Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
•Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion
•Is firmly convinced that he is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special, unique, or high-status people (or institutions)
•Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation, or failing that, wishes to be feared and notorious (narcissistic supply)
•Feels entitled. Expects unreasonable or special and favorable priority treatment. Demands automatic and full compliance with his expectations
•Is “interpersonally exploitative” i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends
•Is devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge the feelings and needs of others
•Is constantly envious of others or believes that they feel the same about him or her
•Is arrogant, has haughty behaviors or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted
…so from that stand point he is doing well for a retard.
here is a link for the people who think they can engage a troll with a positive result.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIFcnctnHsE&feature=related
basically that means the trolls are ideological retards.
26. mixplix:
“Bush is blamed for hurricanes . . . ”
Really? Who blamed Bush for a hurricane? I think you might have things a little bass ackwards:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/08/hagee-reneges-retraction/
17. Doug S.:
“My take is that BHO was born out of wedlock and does not want to advertise. Just a guess, but what the heck.”
Right, just a guess (or a wish)
“Recently saw making the email rounds, a school application of Barry Soetoro listing his nationality as Indonesian. No media attention, but what can I say, this wouldn’t be worth any kind of story. Even if it was true. Thats the MSM for ya!”
Even if it was true . . . just a guess. . . . you’d fit right in at Fox. Maybe you should apply for an internship under Jesse Waters or maybe Glenn Beck . . . they deal in your flavor of truth and facts. What the heck.
” McCain who, being born in Panama, was not eligible either”
John McCain III was born on August 29, 1936 at the Coco Solo Air Base on the Atlantic side of the Panama Canal Zone, which was United States territory at the time. His father, John S. “Jack” Mcain, Jr. was a Navy Admiral and stationed at Coco Solo at the time. On 7 September 1977, U.S. President Jimmy Carter signed the Torrijos-Carter Treaty, which set in motion the process of handing over the canal to Panamanian control.
Besides, McCain released all his medical, education and birth records for everyone to see, Obama has refused the requests that he do the same. McCain is eligible to be President, Obama hasn’t proved he is.
The other aspect of the birther issue which I think is the real reason for all of the hiding…Is that he was supported his entire life and education (you know college and law school, money not available to most citizens) through welfare on the basis that he said he was not a citizen. You see that is fraud and that is what many want to know about. I would be happy if he could prove me wrong. So yes just release those records. Oh thats right we are just nut jobs…try again…another fail
Mr. Chrenkoff has a fine article, with the reasonable POV. As pertaining to the unreasonable POV, well, conspiracy theorists will feel free to counsel with their fears, and then share those fears with the rest of us until we decide to not listen to them anymore. God bless America!
Although the serious Truthers have been put in their nut fringe/anti-Israel place, the Birthers are still going because their conspiracy theory has a legitimate question behind it all. To wit: what EXACTLY is the background detail of Barack Obama’s life, not counting his self-promoting autobiographies, that made him suitable to be elected President of the United States? Obama’s staff released…absolutely nothing of consequence. No school or university transcripts, no issues of the Harvard Law Review from his tenure, no records of his community organizing, even his church attendance was smokescreened! So, the Birthers, however illogical, are right in suspecting the qualifications of a President who was sold with the enthusiasm of a new brand of cold cereal on Saturday Morning cartoons.
Conspiracy theories (and both birthers and truthers are conspiracy theorists) are fairy tales for grown ups. The basic plot of a conspiracy theory is that everything in this world would be perfect and fair if it wasn’t for Them. If it wasn’t for Them, there’s no way a poorly qualified socialist could be elected to run this country. If it wasn’t for Them we’d be safe, our security isn’t really so precarious that a bunch of medieval religious maniacs half a world away managed to strike right at the heart of this country, it must have been an inside job. Just add whatever situation bothers you the most, pick a scapegoat (Jews are the historical favorite, but these days you have many options) mix them together and let it stew for a few weeks.
I always questioned the sincerity of trutherism, though. I would say to them, when i encountered them, that if i believed what they professed, i wouldn’t be talking about it. i would be taking up arms against the government. it would revolution time. it would be worse than anything old king george III did pre-1776.
So if you say you believe that Bush was behind 9-11, but you don’t want to get the guns, well… i have to wonder if you really believe it, then.
Of course the other possibility is that democrats are more complainers than doers. which is really plausible, frankly.
Which i guess also gets at the flaw in your argument. yes, in theory trutherism is more dangerous. but i have never heard of truther violence, so maybe in reality it isn’t dangerous after all.
The fact is, the constitution didn’t clearly define “natural-born” citizen, so that even if Obama was born in Kenya (or anywhere outside the U.S.), it probably doesn’t make any difference. Generally, the only definition we have is that a natural-born citizen is one who didn’t need to be naturalized. Consider this: my son was born in Germany. We have a “Consular Record of Birth” which serves as proof of citizenship and makes him a “natural born citizen”. The “birther” explanation of Obama’s Hawaii registration of birth is that the state of Hawaii allowed a resident to obtain a birth certificate for his/her child if the child was born overseas but the family returned to the U.S. shortly thereafter. Without any further information, I would have to assume that this birth registration served the same purpose as the “Consular Record of Birth” — that is, provided Obama with citizenship at birth. I tend to think that even if the bureaucrats “accidentally” conferred citizenship at birth to someone who wasn’t eligible, it can’t be undone — what would you do, require an adult to go through a naturalization process? Deport them?
What’s more, a child cannot surrender his citizenship. Even if the parents naturalize the child elsewhere, the child hasn’t lost his U.S. citizenship. (At least, as far as I know.)
If what I’ve read floating through the internet is true, Obama might be hiding something — if he specifically mentions pondering his birth certificate in one of his books, but then needs to re-order a copy much later, something’s funny. At any rate, he would have needed to show a birth certificate when filling out his forms upon starting a new job, or when applying for a passport. Maybe he scrawled, “die, whitey, die” on it in that moment of contemplation? Probably just like the school transcripts that presidential candidates have historically released, it’s nothing scandalous, just embarassing, like a few Cs from a supposed genius.
All that’s needed to disprove the “birthers” is someone showing a piece of paper, how bleeping hard is that? To prove OR disprove the thousands of “truther” “theories” would be impossible since there’s so many of them. I’ve even seen them say a plane didn’t hit the pentagon for example….ok …so what did and where did the PLANE in all the pictures go? etc etc etc
If I need to PROVE I’m who I say I am just to have a drivers license, I don’t think it’s a lot to ask that the “President” do it too and since McCain (who’s father was an Admiral)had to, seems only fair that Barry do it too. I thought liberals were all for things being faaaair…..
Too bad they didn’t have DNA paternity tests back in 1961, I bet his mother didn’t even KNOW who his “father” was which would explain why he can only dream of who the hell it really is.
“Birthers” is the derisive term that the neocommunists use to dismiss issues that the captive media was not allowed to address.
The place of Obama’s birth is, of course, an issue. Honest people don’t understand his reluctance to simply put his original birth certificate on display.
But, the overwhelming point is Obama’s pattern of non-disclosure. He refuses to disclose his college transcripts, thesis, client list and so on. OBAMA IS HIDING SOMETHING! Birthers want to know what. Just image if a Republican or other honest man tried this.
Now and Then, I didn’t see Bush mentioned in your link. No surprise there, you seldom present convincing arguments or rhetoric.
“By now you’ve probably heard about the lunatic comments of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Cindy Sheehan of the environmental movement, who blamed Hurricane Katrina on President Bush and Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour for not buying into the global warming hype, and not signing up for the thoroughly discredited Kyoto Treaty.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=7391
I’m surprised your claiming ignorance to the “it’s Bush’s fault” conspiracists. I’m sure you’ve been to the plethora of looney web sites.
Leave it to a Canadian (21) to see the obvious about American politics. Barak Obama could end all birtherism with one simple action. Trutherism, OTOH, can never be disproved. There’s no truth certificate being withheld.
The president is at the UN trying to solve the multitude of horrible problems left over from the Bush administration. Doing that, is important. The color of his skin and where he was born…..is not. Back to reality…what a concept eh?
37. Now and Then.
“…you’d fit right in at Fox. Maybe you should apply for an internship under Jesse Waters or maybe Glenn Beck… they deal in your flavor of truth and facts. What the heck.”
You actually watch Fox News?
Thanks, Calvin!
The Constitution merely lays out the framework, the outline, so it specifies that all candidates for President must be “natural born citizens,” but to know what the Framers meant by this term, and why they thought this qualification important enough to put in the Constitution, you have to look at what they were thinking and talking about in the time frame that the Constitution was written i.e the “Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers,” and the writings and correspondence of people like Paine, Madison, Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson.
When you investigate, you will find that they put this provision in the Constitution because they wanted to make sure that any candidate for President was deeply rooted in, knowledgeable about and loved America, its culture, customs and people, and that each candidates loyalty was undivided and given first and foremost to America, our Constitution and Democracy.
As # 4 quotes above:
“As to how the “natural born” clause arose, there is much direct evidence from the Founders, but a nice one is that of a July 25, 1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.””
We see now–when it is too late–why this was an essential threshold qualification, since it is obvious– from his actions, statements and attitude–that Obama is not essentially an American “born and bred” in either knowledge, perception, attitude or affection, but is basically a man of “alienation,” a foreigner, with a foreigner’s—and what’s more a Muslim/Black Nationalist/Marxist foreigner’s perceptions, viewpoint, attitude and agenda–about America and its people, our values and traditions, about Democracy and Capitalism, about Whites and Race, and about how to act and what is important; a man who wants to rule in the tradition of an African tyrant, as a “Big Man,” rather than to govern democratically as a President.
Elizabeth,
Sorry, but you are not correct in your assertion about Obama.. your child (I am assuming) is born of a mother and father that were BOTH US Citizens.. so you have a good case for Natural Born.. Obama on the other hand was born of a mother, ONLY, that was a US Citizen.. The father, however, was British.. dual nationality comes into play.. DEFINTELY not “natural born.”
Obama could very well be an illegal alien. The mother was too young (according to immigration laws at the time that applied to Hawaii) and could not pass US citizenship to the child.
Obama is hiding the truth. Any rational individual that can think, read and study can see he is certainly not a “natural born” citizen, hence not qualified to hold office.
The truth will come out, it always does. Many libtards are going to be shocked to find out their Messiah is nothing more than a liar and a Usurper.
Oh, and one other thing.. all these folks that keep alluding to the fact that “naturalized” is the same as “natural born.” NOT! Natural born was reserved in the Constitution for one reason, and one reason only.. to keep people like Obama from legally holding the Office of the Presidency.. the Constitution does not say a “citizen” or “naturalized” or “illegal alien” or “usurper” or a “dual citizen” can legally hold the office.. IT SAYS, “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” only!
Both need to be put on an atoll where nuclear weapons are tested.
It is true that not all conspiracy theories are created equal, and not all fringe elements are comparable.
In this case, the birther contingent has no evidence, no motive, and no theory – so it would be hard to call them conspiracy theorists. They are simply loony.
The truther contingent, on the other hand, can point to specific documents to support the contention that the Bush administration failed to take even the most basic measures to prevent the attack of 9/11/01, such as the “Bin Laden determined to attack in the US” memo, and the ongoing refusal of the Bush administration to acknowledge or address this threat seriously leading up the attack.
Fundamentally, the difference is very simple. The “birthers” wish to avoid facing the truth, while the “truthers” are interested in discovering it. Obama’s birthplace has no practical impact on the lives of Americans, while the failure of the government to prevent 9/11 has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans. I could go into greater detail about the Bush administration’s Iraq invasion, warrantless wiretaps and other unconstitutional adventures – but the bottom line is the same.
One side is worried about a technicality related to eligibility, while the other side is worried about actually protecting Americans from harm. To use your analogy, I don’t mind if Obama “wears his underwear on his head” – I am much more concerned about the crazy uncle that sexually molested detainees, and has tried to bury the evidence and avoid punishment. The Bush administration openly admitted engaging in criminal acts against the people of the USA – the location of Obama’s birth certificate hardly has the same significance.
Peace.
DS
claiming that Obama was not born in the US puts in the minds of some that he is an illegitimate president. that is a dangerous notion that can lead to violence. i think birthers and truthers are on the same footing.
The key to any conspiracy theory is that the conspirators must be smart, organized, and fanatically secretive. As pertains to the 9-11 theory, the Bush administration ostensibly fails the first test, but if we assumed they were smart enough to pull such an operation off, surely they would have been smart enough to take out the UN buidings instead of the WTC.
David S please expand on your idiotic moronic theory because it is OBAMA and his supporters who have NO EVIDENCE the only evidence applicable is the VAULT BC which he has never provided and is CONTINUING to fight providing so please tell us what CRIME the Birthers have committed merely asking WHY???????????????????
Chrenkoff, my, how superior you are! How deft you compared oranges with shovels and concluded that both categories are actually wheel-barrows!
Yet your superior analysis skips a few essential points, of which I’ll list:
1) all the brouhaha around Obama’s birth-place can be solved with a $12 expense, the fee for having Hawaii HD release for public scrutiny the original papers – why someone of (resembling your) superiority, deliberatedness and kennness prefers a legal battle with considerable financial cost (and worsening PR costs) to this simple venue – a $12 fee?
2) all Obama supporters (including Gibbs) point the the COLB displayed by Daily Kos as solid proof of Obama’s legitimacy – yet that silly manoevere didn’t help Obama’s cause too much, since…
… when the Hawaii HD was queried about their having, that, or a similar document to that COLB, recently or any time in the past, they, after some fidgeting acknowledged that the HAWAII HD WAS NEVER SOLICITED TO ISSUE AN COLB FOR OBAMA, AND NEVER HAS ISSUED ONE, situation that…
… makes Gibbs (and the WH official) LIARS…
Chrenkoff, can you explain why Gibbs & the WH indicates as an AUTHENTIC DOCUMENT a document that is NOT RECORDED AS HAVING BEEN ISSUED BY THE ISSUER (HAWAII HD) ITSELF?
Do it buddy, do it…
3) and one more opportunity, Chrenkoff, for displaying you superior thinking: can you explain why the DNC, at the Denver Convention in 2008 issued two (2) sets of nomination papers for Obama. one of them containing the wording “… satisfied constitutional requirments…”, version that stayed for DNC internal use, and a second version NOT FORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGING/ SKIPPING THE FACT THAT OBAMA SATISFIED THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRMENTS, version which was filed with the state secretaries in all 57 states of the union…
Can you explain this discrepancy/ obfuscation?
Do it, Chrenkoff, great occassion for you to display your mental abilities… do it, and from HuffPo to ACORN to NEA to the WRITERS BLOCK you will hear great applause and ovations…
In case you, or other interested parties need $12 for clearing this absurd anti-Obama conspiracy, don’t hesitate and contact me.
Best regards -
Put as simply as possible, one is a theory of the impossible, the other of the improbable.
There is no conspiracy as far as the so-called ‘birthers’ are concerned. They only want one question answered;
What is Obama hiding?
The Global Warming Deniers should properly read Climate Change deniers as we know the climate is always changing.
To list people who doubt the “global warming” hysteria with “truthers” is foolish and just plain wrong. Considering there is a large group in the scientific community that are not convinced the earth is indeed warming (none would deny that the climate always changes) it hard to classify those who don’t buy into the hysteria as mad.
Peter,
Obama is obviously not hiding a thing. Even the REPUBLICAN government of Hawaii confirmed his birth certificate is genuine. If that doesn’t satisfy the natives, then nothing will.
PJM, please don’t validate the birthers. Sure they may be less violent and have a less offensive odor than their hippie counterparts; but the fact remains that they are incorrect.
Well, the answer to the birth question is dead easy, produce the certificate signed by the doctor attending the birth which shows the time and place of birth along with who the parents are. Done. Finished. Over with. All the sanctimonious lefties could then smile at the right-wing rubes and say, “See I told you so!”. One is left to ask why they just don’t do it.
A harder question to answer is how Obama travelled to Pakistan (as per him own autobiography) when Pakistan was on the State Department “banned list”. He could not have gone there on a US passport. He could not have gotten a passport from another nation without benefit of dual-citizenship or having renounced his US citizenship to become the citizen of the nation issuing the passport. Either circumstance bars him from holding the office of POTUS.
Perhaps he just lied about visiting Pakistan.
I am left to wonder why so many lefty pols have all their records locked away. Remember Kerry promising to release his military records? They are still secret. Perhaps that explains the number of Czars in the the White House, no need for background checks or complicated Congressional Hearings.
55. Oh, golly! If we insist that the constitution be followed (gasp!) there might be (gasp!) violence. Better to pee on the constitution than risk (gasp!) violence…
60. Indeed. As I said in 2. not all suspicions and allegations are allegations of conspiracy. The generic birther theories fail the definition of conspiracy.
As I said, the only version that qualifies as a conspiracy theory is the one that has Lingle hiding something. Even, then, the allegation is a conspiracy theory, but wanting answers isn’t.
13. Larry wrote:
…it is the same refusal to face cold facts that drives all false conspiracy thinking.
Peter writes: And it is the same refusal to face the cold facts that The Won would not be spending thousands, if not TENS of thousands or more, of dollars to keep his birth certificate and other important personal papers hidden that every other presidential candidate has been more then forthcoming in producing for public review if there were not a reason, that makes the so-called ‘birthers’ scoff at the Obamaniacs.
All it would take, as the article states, is The Won’s permission and maybe three hours and ALL the ‘birther’ rumors and innuendo would go away… OR, the biggest scandal on the face of the planet would be revealed for all to see. But we will never know either way, because The Won has hired a literal army of lawyers and paid them more money than I’ll likely see in my career to make sure that We The People cannot get the answer to our simple question;
What is Obama hiding?
63. e,
Too late for that. Birthers aren’t bad, just like Nazis aren’t right-wing. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes truth.
24. BC wrote:
Googling, from most dopey on, I would use this order: 1) The Birthers; 2) The Truthers; 3) The Moon Landing Deniers; 4) The Global Warming Deniers.
Peter writes: Another kook, but what else do you expect from the vaunted BC.
The only ‘proof’ of global warming I have seen is the hot air coming out of Al ‘do as I say, not as I fly around the world in my jetstream and live in a house that uses more electricity than most third world countries’ Gore’s mouth. But I have seen a LOT of evidence, from reliable SCIENTIFIC sources, that global warming ais nothing but bunk!
Try looking up the recent articles on solar activity and its effect on world climate before you try equating ‘global warming’ with Truther-ism or any other conspiracies.
Global warming my @$$. And what was the average temperture this summer where YOU live, BC? Where I live it was about 15-20 degrees F BELOW the regular summer average.
Funny that this was all started by a lawyer who supported Hillary Clinton and was trying to get Obama disqualified prior to the Democrat convention.
I read through all the documents the Dem lawyer (Berg) filed in the case and it boiled down to two issues:
1. Allegedly his mom waited too long to catch a plane back to the US from Kenya and the airline wouldn’t fly her that late in the pregnancy. So they claim she went to the US afterwards and filed a record of birth in Hawaii vice a birth certificate from a hospital.
2. His parents declared him to have Indonesian nationality to enroll him in school there. (Had to be Indonesian to attend. This is also where his ties to Islam come from as the schools he attended were Muslim schools. Kind of like a Jew attending a Catholic private school in the US because it happens to be the best in the area). Legally, for him to obtain(or regain) US citizenship he needed to disavow his Indonesian citizenship and take the citizenship oath to the US, forget who had to witness it.
So for issue 1. Even if true, do you really want the riots and conspiracy theories (the Dems knew and used the ‘black’ man to get Biden the presidency?) that would arise now. Just because some idiot ~20 year old waited too long to get on an airplane?
2. Ok, I think the various oaths for government offices even if not technically the correct format are acceptable- even if the allegaiton is true.
The various claims about multiple passports and travel to ‘prohibited’ areas aren’t based in fact. Most of the supposed ‘prohibited’ countries actually did not have bans on travel by US citizens.
Could be other embarassing info to his mom on the certificate which is why he’s not having it released.
61. Andrew Ian Dodge, the problem with talking about the climate change issue (or whatever they call it these days) is that it’s not a single question. It’s a panoply of questions, different, and often very subtly so. Is the greenhouse effect controversial? No. Is the anthropogenic effect controversial? It’s a trick question, because it’s not a yes/no question. Is AGW a hoax? No. Is the MBH hockey stick a hoax? Yes. Are the IPCC reports hoaxes? No. Have the IPCC reports contained bogus science and math? Yes.
It’s a messy, messy issue. Bottom line, the alarmists are as nutty as the 911 truthers, but the so called (and this term is an offense to the Holocaust victims) “deniers” are largely not denying anything. Just as with the birthers, there’s a huge difference between asking questions and asserting answers.
The big pattern here, when you examine all three issues (9/11, birth certificate, climate change) is that the left are making strong assertions, generally pulled out of their butts, and the right are asking questions and demanding evidence.
And for the record, I have no use for the idiots on the right who are making specious arguments that we’re too small, and the earth is too big, and we can’t affect the earth, etc. All they do is make everyone look stupid.
27. Big Red wrote:
I heard someone on the radio cite federal law (could not write down chapter and verse as i was driving) that requires one parent to be citizen for child’s citizenship. Place of birth not at issue.
Peter writes: And that same law, chapter and verse, states the parent must have been living in the US for a minimum of 4 years since majority. Since The Won’s mother gave birth to him at age 18, the age of majority, she cannot possibly have qualified for the 4 year requirement, which is why BOTH parents would have been required to be US citizens to fall under that law.
One thing the “truthers” seem to forget: if the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are simply based on Bush’s “big lie” on 9/11, then why are those wars still being waged, now by the opposition party? Why, indeed, weren’t those wars simply defunded by democratic majorities in congress (which we’ve had for the past three years)? If it’s a conspiracy to wage wars based on lies, then the whole congress appears to be in on it, as well as the present administration. So why do they only hate Bush for it? And why do they continue to vote for the same politicians who voted for those wars in the first place, like Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid?
Since there’s no rational answer to those questions, there’s obviously no rational reasoning behind the “truthers” movement. But then, rationality is not the strong point of the demented, I reckon.
Middleman–glad you think that the state government in Hawaii is “Republican.”
As a matter of fact, the Democratic machine controlled all levels of state government in Hawaii for 40 years straight (and they’re still there running things) until the anomalous Republican Governor and Lieutenant Governor were just recently elected, but both houses of the Hawaiian state legislature are solidly Democratic, with only a few token Republican members (House 45D, 6R, Senate 23D, 2R), both Hawaii’s Senators and it’s two Representative are Democrats, and Obama got 75% of the vote in an over wheleming turnout.
So, tell me again how the “Republican government” of Hawaii vouched for the authenticity of Obama’s original birth certificate in their charge.
48. Poor Citizen:
The president is at the UN trying to solve the multitude of horrible problems left over from the Bush administration. Doing that, is important. The color of his skin and where he was born…..is not. Back to reality…what a concept eh?
WTF …holy sh!t WTF …I just shit myself laughing. worse then that poor (AND STUPID) citizen really believes this.
see what your up against. how can someone have a dialog with such a retard. lol
48. Poor Citizen wrote:
The color of his skin and where he was born…..is not. Back to reality…what a concept eh?
Peter asks: So if some politician showed up in Washington DC in 2012, and 96 out of 100 people said they knew for a fact that this politician was from Paraguay and used to run a totalitarian state in the jungles of South America, but he said he was here to clean up the messes left behind by Bush and got himself elected POTUS, you would accept him, in spite of ALL FEDERAL LAW stating this person CANNOT serve as POTUS, just because he claims he’s going to ‘do a good job’?
The American educational systems needs to start teaching civics class again. It’s obvious some very important information is slipping through the cracks.
Re: “since the Founders rejected the idea of dual citizenship for Americans.”
Did they really? Did any of the founders or framers say “no dual citizens?” No they did not. Nor did they say that the children of foreigners are not eligible to be president.
The Natural Born Citizen clause stops foreigners from being president, and it stops naturalized citizens from being president, but it does NOT say, and no founder or framer ever said that it bars a child born in the USA to foreigners from being president.
And the evidence for this is overwhelming. The meaning of Natural Born at the time of the writing of the Constitution was simply born in a American colony or born in an early state. This stemmed from British law, and it was irrelevant whether the parents were both foreigners or one was. Natural Born citizenship stemmed from the place of birth.
That is what Natural Born means. You know the term “naturalize.” It comes from Natural Born. In naturalization, a person is made like someone who is natural born, like someone who was born in the country.
So the meaning of Natural Born is the same as Ohio-born or Georgia-born. Under the original meaning, Natural Born is a statement of a geographical fact. A Natural Born citizen is born in the country; a foreign-born person is born outside the country.
That being the case no foreign law can change it. If someone was born in the USA, the fact that he was also a British citizen at the time does not change the fact that he was born in the USA. Obama was born in the USA as shown by the OFFICIAL birth certificate of Hawaii, the facts of which were twice confirmed by the officials of Hawaii.
Obama is therefore a Natural Born Citizen of the USA. He was elected president, and his election was confirmed overwhelmingly by both the Electoral College and the US Congress, and he was sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States.
I’m sure the birth certificate will show up and once he leaves office in 2012 everything he’s signed can be rolled back as null and voided. It will be like have a do-over or mulligan.
RE# 62/Middleman: [...] Peter,Obama is obviously not hiding a thing. Even the REPUBLICAN government of Hawaii confirmed his birth certificate is genuine. [...]
Middleman – the Hawaii HD confirmed nothing, all they did is some lawyerly hedging.
Also, if you really want to show your superior knowledge in this matter, answer any or all three questions from my prior post #58:
1- Obama’s self-defeating defense tactic; 2- the existing & circulated COLB invoked as genuine by the WH having not issued by the Hawaii HD; 3- the two sets of DNC nomination acts, the one submitted to the States AVOIDING TO MENTION THAT OBAM HAS FULLY SATISFIED THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRMENTS…
Do it, middleman, answer in a satisfactory manner these three questions – there is so much need of enlightenment around!
’till then, what wears 3 feet long red shows, has glowing yellow hair, wears enormous pink pants with one green diagonal suspender, has a round, bulbuous red nose, wears a shirt made of twenty different patches, twists and squeals ballons at the corner of 235th Street @ 431 Alley is, and cannot be but a… Obamatroll.
Answer the questions, middleman – it’s called metamorphosis, shed you appearance of clown and become the real you…
56, Larmeau. Very good point about the UN being a sweeter target. I’ve often wondered how the left can believe a “moron” could have pulled off such an evil operation without a single whistleblower coming forward in all these years. He would stand to make millions writing a book.
Then too, I wonder how the hundreds of people involved with the record of Obama could stand united in concealing virtually everything about the man. Let’s hope Orly Taitz and Judge Carter are successful in unraveling all the mysteries behind Obymandius. Even if he is a natural born citizen, don’t we have the right to know who bankrolled his education and trip to Pakistan?
Most likely BHO was born in Hawaii, but I do have a major problem with the so called MSM ignoring the other pertinent records he has not released. Any other candidate, especially a GOP candidate would result in a daily outcry from the media.
How can it be an issue if no one in the media ever brings up the subject.
to: no. 75 and no. 76 anny and bubble…
Yah ok, I guess your right, I heard there are two programs on TV that I know you guys love..this subject of dad.s and birth too..Jerry Springer and Maury..they are shows all about what you guys are so infatuated about. I know you love em dont you? Who.s your daddy…ha ha ha..
Sorry guys, double wide issues aint my thing…stay in your own sandbox. Dont mess with the best.
good luck.
69. Middleman:
63. e,
Too late for that. Birthers aren’t bad, just like Nazis aren’t right-wing. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes truth.
You’re right Middleman, you’ve been lied to for so long you think the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, is from the right side of the political spectrum and you believe it. It’s not enough that the word SOCIALIST is smack dab in the middle of the parties name or the fact that the government decided what products industry would make or what the news papers would print. None of that is leftist, … is it?
http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/
watch and learn Middleman.
QUOTE: “The truth, more often than not, tends to be quite prosaic”
I think I like Red Square’s (over at the Peoplescube) defintion better…He calls it the “current truth”.
Does anyone know for sure what the truth ever is?…Remember, the “truth” about Nixon and China went 180 degrees nearly 40 years later…Until that time we accepted what turned out to be a “current truth” as the way things really were….
46. Anonymous:
“I didn’t see Bush mentioned in your link. No surprise there, you seldom present convincing arguments or rhetoric.”
I didn’t see any quotes from RFK. Jr. in your link, just claims that he said something . . . I’m not surprised.
77. smrstrauss:
Re: “since the Founders rejected the idea of dual citizenship for Americans.”
Did they really? Did any of the founders or framers say “no dual citizens?” No they did not. Nor did they say that the children of foreigners are not eligible to be president.
The Founders spoke about the problems and silliness of split allegiances. This was an issue for them and the War of 1812 was about issues such as this. The Founders even spoke about the need for an American father, to establish natural born status.
As to your notion of American born children of foreigners being ‘natural born citizens’, tell that to Chester Arthur, who went out of his way to hide the fact that his father had not been a naturalized American at the time of Arthur’s birth, destroying and hiding documents pertaining to that fact.
As to what the operational definition of ‘natural born citizen’ is, no one knows. It has never been detailed and needs to be made explicit. This is the Court’s responsibility, as no Constitutional amendment was ever offered to do it. The Court could very easily come out and agree with your assessment, check The Precedent’s birth certificate and history of nationality status, and declare him to be Constitutionally eligible. End of story.
But, the point is that the question of Constitutional eligibility must be addressed and resolved. The fear that many seem to have of even addressing this legitimate, and important, issue is perplexing, at best. When a nation refuses to even check compliance with its most fundamental laws, that is an omen of a coming deterioration or the rule of law – as we have, indeed, seen with the un-Constitutional bailouts, takeovers, and destruction of the integrity of contracts that was allowed with the auto bankruptcy.
If you have faith in your view of ‘natural born citizen’, then you should want one of the eligibility cases heard, the Court stating what you did about ‘natural born citizen’ and the whole problem would be finished. Then, your side would have won and my side would be satisfied that an official body has verified and ruled on The Precedent’s Constitutional eligibility.
In the end, citizens of America have every right to know that people have had official verification of their Constitutional eligibility (along with the details of what that eligibility actually entails) to hold the positions they are in (and, more importantly, to run for those positions they want). That should be obvious to anyone. The fact that it isn’t says a lot about our nation, and it ain’t good.
“You’re right Middleman, you’ve been lied to for so long you think the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, is from the right side of the political spectrum and you believe it. It’s not enough that the word SOCIALIST is smack dab in the middle of the parties name or the fact that the government decided what products industry would make or what the news papers would print. None of that is leftist, … is it?”
Okay, so based on your argument that the word Socialism is in National Socialism, then they MUST be lefties. Just like the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is a democratic republic, right?
79,
You see, this is the problem. Birthers say all Obama has to do is show a birth certificate. Simple. But it’s not that simple, because when it is shown, or you reiterate one has been shown, they then come at you with side missions. The paper has been shown, it’s been verified, and the guy won the popular vote. Suck it up, you have at least three more years of him.
62. Middleman wrote:
Obama is obviously not hiding a thing. Even the REPUBLICAN government of Hawaii confirmed his birth certificate is genuine. If that doesn’t satisfy the natives, then nothing will.
Peter asks: If The Won isn’t hiding ANYTHING, then please explain why he hired an army of lawyers and spent more money than I will ever see in my lifetime (depending on the news article you read anywhere from tens of thousands to 1 million +) to hide his birth certificate, his collage transcripts, his financial aid forms, his college thesis, anything he wrote during his tneure with the Law revie, etc, etc, etc?
Does he simply just have too much money to know what to do with it and decided he would pour it all down the drain to pay these lawyers for nothing?!?
It amazes me how libtards can be so selectively blind. Put a (-R) behind anyone else’s name who tried to do the same things The Won has been doing since 2007 and they would be screaming bloody hell!
I believe it was James Lewis of the American Thinker who said it best: that the courts and the congress are not going to turn out a sitting president because of the upheaval it would cause. In other words it’s too late, except to point out the flaws of this election.
63. e wrote:
PJM, please don’t validate the birthers. Sure they may be less violent and have a less offensive odor than their hippie counterparts; but the fact remains that they are incorrect.
Peter asks: So you, e, have some physical evidence that has eluded all the rest of us? Because I have seen NOTHING that proves one way or the other what has been suggested, except that The Won has spend a mounton of money to keep it all hidden away. That alone says a lot to me.
69. Middleman wrote:
Birthers aren’t bad, just like Nazis aren’t right-wing. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes truth.
Peter writes: Glad to see you finally agree on the truth. Since as any real student of history knows, NAZI stands for German Nationalist SOCIALIST Worker’s Party.
And last I looked, socialism was a cornerstone of the left.
Calvin Ball writes: the only version that qualifies as a conspiracy theory is the one that has Lingle hiding something.
I haven’t heard about that, but that comment illustrates part of the problem with those who discuss this issue specifically their failure to understand how to use the simple facts of this issue to help discredit the MSM.
A few months ago, CNN implied that Lingle had verified that BHO was born in HI. However, the most she’s ever done is reference him being from there on the campaign trail in order to downplay his ties to her state. In other words, contrary to what CNN implied, she didn’t verify he was born there in her official capacity.
The smart way to deal with this issue would be to force CNN to issue a correction in order to make them and those who relied on their reporting look bad. And, all of that could be done without speculating about anything; all of that could be done simply based on simple, easy-to-understand facts.
Unfortunately HI is stonewalling me on my attempts to get a statement from them, and if anyone wants to help get the answers to the questions in the FAX here:
http://24ahead.com/lingle-obama-hawaii
77. smrstrauss wrote:
Did they really? Did any of the founders or framers say “no dual citizens?” No they did not.
Peter writes: I think it could be argued it was said in the fact US law does not recognize duel citizenship. According to US law, you either are a US citizen or you are not.
Other countries may accept duel citizenship. Taiwan, ROC does, as my ex was a citizen of both. But while the ROC accepted my ex was a citizen of Taiwan AND the US, the US considered her ONLY a US citizen. If she were to declare herself a Taiwanese citizen before a US government body, she would be required to renounce her US citizenship first.
To 77. smrstrauss
You really need to learn even some basic law and history…. Being born in the US and being a citizen only started AFTER the 14th amendment… If 2 non-US citizens came to the US and had a kid in 1800 he WOULD NOT BE A US CITIZEN. Their is no way that natural born means being born solely on US ground. That does mean that you aren’t required to be born on US ground in fact it likely does… however it is ONLY 1 OF MANY REQUIREMENTS NOT THE ONLY REQUIREMENT.
82. Poor Citizen:
Peter writes: And as usual, when confronted with facts, the typical libtard suddenly goes into convultions and starts spouting off ad hominum attacks because they can’t refute thr truth. Or answer simple questions.
91. Peter the Bubblehead,
So, the Council of Conservative Citizens, that have documented neo-nazi ties, is not right wing as they think they are?
Kenya was a colony of Britain; it was never a member of the British Union. British means English, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish. Barack Obama’s father was Kenyan, not British. Calling Kenyans British is like calling Indians British.
The difference is simple and glaring:
Birthers want legal documents the current President refuses to provide.
Truthers want documents that have already been provided to be changed to fulfill their vendetta.
93. Peter the Bubblehead:
I think it could be argued it was said in the fact US law does not recognize duel citizenship. According to US law, you either are a US citizen or you are not.
That attitdue in the US changed – which is what I had been originally addressing. The US does, now, officially recognize American dual-citizens. It is written on every American passport:
While in the foreign country:
9. Dual Citizens: A person who has the citizenship of more than one country at the same time is considered a dual citizen. …
It is interesting how this new class of citizenship arises and people are arguing that it must have been included in a highly restricted class of citizenship (natural born) established when this new class was rejected. But, some people seem to think that our Founders would have had no problem with the idea that someone holding citizenship in 72 other nations should be running the Executive branch … crazy. I think we all know how the Founders would ahve reacted to such a proposition.
To 96. Middleman
If they believe what the nazis believe they can not be rightwing… they can be centrist but not rightwing.
Right wingers are INDIVIDUALISTS.
Left wingers are COLLECTIVISTS.
Only COLLECTIVISTS can be racist because only COLLECTIVISTS judge ppl by groupings and the first “grouping” is RACE.
If you are right wing YOU CAN NOT BE RACIST. So if any group is racist then they are not right wing… they could still be centrists BUT THEY CAN’T BE RIGHT WING.
Middleman: Please provide a link to Obama’s birth certificate showing the attending Doctor’s signature, his parents signatures and his birth weight. You know, like what you and I have to provide for passports. Don’t bother bringing up the nice and tidy computer generated copy. We’ve all seen that paraded around as “proof”. I know he has an original somewhere. The hospital in Hawaii says it’s in their records and that they’ve seen it and can vouch for it. I say just let America see it once and for all. Why the need to hire attorneys to fight it? Hmm…
We await the link to his ORIGINAL birth certificate.
C’mon Middleman. You know you’d love to see it to right?
Middleman: Here is the computer generated COPY that we’ve already seen. Can’t wait to see the original you’ll provide for us.
Waiting now for Middleman and his fellow Obama supporters to show us the original. Gee, I am getting curious now. Can’t wait!!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/images/2008/06/13/bobirthcertificate.jpg
Middleman: Now let’s have a look at McCain’s birth certificate. You know, an ORIGINAL birth certificate. See if you can tell a difference Middleman. Think of this as sort of a learning experience…
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11110505/JohnMcCain-Birth-Certificate-long-and-short-form-Colon-Panama-1936
“I believe it was James Lewis of the American Thinker who said it best: that the courts and the congress are not going to turn out a sitting president because of the upheaval it would cause.”
Of course, they aren’t, which is why the whole Birther thing is a big waste of time.
Also, the “natual born” requirement is idiotic and ought to be done away with.
Alas, now Moammar Khadafy has joined in the debate, by claiming that President Obama is his son. But, no matter; even if President Obama was born on Mars, there is little to be done about it now.
100. robotech master,
Your last post I think takes the cake in most ridiculous post to date. Where do you get this stuff? I’m beginning to suspect you’re ten years old and someone told you that rubbish to mess with your head.
So people who are right-wing are individualists who can’t be racists? Well the right-wingers down here in the south sure as hell have me fooled. They all seem to think alike, and quite a few of them sure seem to be racist.
101,
You’ve already seen the certificate. If you don’t take it as being real, then that’s your problem.
104. Dave Surls:
Also, the “natual born” requirement is idiotic and ought to be done away with.
Yep. That pretty much sums up the argument of those arguing against verification of Constitutional eligibility – those who try to demean us by labeling us “birthers”. You guys just don’t like that whole “rule of law” thing. We know.
The ‘natural born citizen’ clause was put in for a very specific reason, and The Precedent is a perfect example of it. So, now you fall back on … “Well, it’s idiotic, anyway.” [paraphrased]
The Constitution is not an a la carte menu, genius.
105. Middleman:
So people who are right-wing are individualists who can’t be racists?
It’s not that individual conservatives can’t be racist, but that conservative ideology isn’t collectivist and, therefore, cannot be racist. Leftist ideology is almost nothing but racist, as it sees little other than collectives – with race and ethnicity being some of the left’s most cherished methods of collective categorization. You guys love your racism. You’re proud of affirmative action and minority set-asides. You cannot get more racist than that – and patronizing and condescending, too.
Never heard of the KKK or the Council of Conservative Citizens being champions of the left.
“On August 4, 1961, Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii,”
Can you prove that? Like with real undeniable proof… like maybe the longform birth certificate that Lord Obama refuses to release?
Mittleman 0 (109)
“Never heard of the KKK or the Council of Conservative Citizens being champions of the left.”
That’s odd; they’re creations of the left and leftist eugenics heroes. Maybe you’ve been getting some biased and BS based propaganda instead of education nitwit. If you’d stop wallowing in the leftist slime that you’ve eaten and regurgitated hundreds of times already you’d be able to find out facts like both groups are funded by the same leftists that back major democrat initiatives. Lie there in the slime, though, I know you can’t be bothered with trying to find out the truth. If you did, your little support group of fellow slugs might pour banishment salt on you and force you from the warm ooze you’re accustomed to. Besides, you like being fed regurgitate rather than thinking for yourself, right?
have another ignorant day
By the author’s own admission Barack Obama was born of a US citizen and a Kenyan Father. This is accepted by the administration as the truth, and I accept this as well. However whether or not he was born in Hawaii as stated is irrelevant, because at the time of Obama’s birth the law stated that a child born of two people from different nations would inherit the citizenship of the Father (Kenyan).
“Fact Check” also accepted this and stated that Obama’s Kenyan citizenship expired when he was 18 years old. And to my knowledge of the Constitution you can not be a duel citizen and be eligible to be the President of the United States. You also cannot be a naturalized citizen; the position requires you to be a “Natural Born” citizen.
So good effort, but you almost got it.
Calling all birthers: The requirement that a parent have lived in the USA for 4 years since achieving the age of majority applies only
to parents who are non-US citizens.
It does N-O-T apply to children of 18 year olds from Kansas who are themselves native-born citizens.
BTW: Any claim to natural-born citizenship CANNOT by invalidated by the actions of the Indonesian government or any other foreign government. Such citizenship can be repudiated ONLY by the person in question after they have achieved the age of majority.
It all boils down to this: If a person is a citizen and is not a naturalized citizen, he or she is natural-born.
For any birther argument to be valid, one of two things would have to be proven. Either (A) BHO is not a citizen at all OR (B) he is a naturalized citizen. In the abscence of that, birther arguments have no standing in the court.
FWIW: John McCain helped fuel all this by producing his birth certificate. Since he was a US citizen and had never been naturalized, he did not have to produce or prove a darned thing. The burden of proof would have fallen squarely on those claiming his ineligibility.
Their squealing insistence would have generated
enough sympathy to have increased McCain’s vote totals.
Both birthers and truthers are throwbacks to the time when “everybody knew” that tomatos were poison and anybody who publicly survived having eaten several of them was guilty of witchcraft.
111. Rashputin,
How about some sources for your allegations?
96. Middleman wrote:
So, the Council of Conservative Citizens, that have documented neo-nazi ties, is not right wing as they think they are?
Peter replies: If they truly believe in National Socialism, then no, they are not.
But I would not know for fact, since I am not a member of said council.
Do these explanations on snops.com make any sense to birthers? Doesn’t the fact that they are fooled by blatant forgeries tell you that this is about something else. In a survey when asked who was more American, Churchill or Marin L. King Jr., these people said Churchill to which 0l’ Winston rolled in his grave.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
and Fact Check – are you guys saying that Fact Check is in on the Obama conspiracy that was started by the Honolulu Advertiser way back in 1961?
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
As for the Truthers – yes most of it is crazy but the fact that the signs where so blatantly ignored and the outcome was so ideologically convenient to the Bush gang – I am sure that when the historical dust clears we will end up with another Bay of Tonki or at best sinking of the USS Maine. Come to think of it as far as Iraq is concerned 9/11 it is like the sinking of the USS Maine.
109. Middleman wrote:
Never heard of the KKK or the Council of Conservative Citizens being champions of the left.
Robert Byrd – Democrat – US Senate, West Virginia; Byrd joined the Ku Klux Klan when he was 24 in 1942. His local chapter unanimously elected him Exalted Cyclops.
The first Klan was founded in 1865 by Tennessee veterans of the Confederate Army. Groups spread throughout the South. Its purpose was to restore white supremacy in the aftermath of the American Civil War. The Klan resisted Reconstruction by assaulting, murdering and intimidating freedmen and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871 the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes. Prosecution and enforcement suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations such as the White League and the Red Shirts started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing Republican voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to white Democrats regaining political power in the southern states.
Middleman, another libtard who doesn’t do his research before making idiotic claims. Typical.
You know, all it takes is a quick Yahoo search…
Oh and one more from that commie site snopes.com about the 14 amendment and stuff:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
113. Dave wrote:
Calling all birthers: The requirement that a parent have lived in the USA for 4 years since achieving the age of majority applies only
to parents who are non-US citizens.
Peter writes: Try reading a little further before you stop with your big “Ah-ha!” moment.
It also applied to US citizens living OUTSIDE the US for a certain number of years, which The Won’s mother did.
Under Sec. 301 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, the act in effect at the time of Barack Obama’s birth, the following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(7) “a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided that any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.”
Since The Won’s mother was 18 when he was born, she had not yet attained the 5 years past the age of 14 required for the law to apply in The Won’s case.
Either way, all I want to know;
What is Obama hiding???
The subject of Obama’s birth may be intriguing but it hardly seems problematic enough to topple his presidency.
Let’s assume he was born in Kenya. Or that he forfeited his U.S. citizenship by virtue of being adopted by an Indonesian national. Neither of these would block him from serving as POTUS.
His mother was clearly an American citizen. Many natural born Americans are born overseas — McCain was (in Panama). This is a no-brainer. As to his Indonesian citizenship, clearly as a minor he had no control over his status at the time of his adoption by Sotero. He did not “knowling” relinquish U.S. citizenship. And his blood-relative (mother) kept her U.S. citizenship all along.
If anything ever comes of the birther accusations, I believe like all other presidential scandals, it will hinge on the cover-up rather than the initial crime (i.e. being born in the wrong place or having the wrong step-father). I think Obama is far too clever to dirty his hands with any of this.
106. Middleman
Its called basic education 1… First lets start with racism.
Racism is any POSITIVE or NEGATIVE based solely on ones RACE.
INDIVIDUALISTS DO NOT JUDGE PPL BASED ON THEY’RE RACE. Thus an INDIVIDUALIST CAN NOT BE RACIST.
COLLECTIVISTS JUDGE PPL SOLELY BY A “COLLECTIVE”/GROUP. The most common and easiest grouping type throughout ALL OF HISTORY IS SKIN COLOR.
ALL COLLECTIVIST ARE BY DEFINITION RACIST.
To make it easier lets set this in a bar.
A right winger is a bartender and a black guy walks in. This is the first black guy this bartender has ever seen. He says “What do you want to drink?”. The black guy in return says “I want a miller light”. Bartender gets him a miller light.
Another black guy walks in the bar and the bartender says “What do you want to drink?”. The black guy say “I want a shot of jack.”
Now lets say a left winger is bar tending and a black guy walk in. This is the first black guy this bartender has ever seen. He says “What do you want to drink?”. The black guy in return says “I want a miller light”. So the bartender gets him a miller light.
Another black guy walks in the bar and the bartender leaves. He comes back and hands the black guy a miller light. The black guy says “I don’t want a miller light”. So the bartender quickly grabs the beer and leaves… then comes back with a straight miller. The black guy says “I don’t want a miller at all”. The bartender stares as him and says “Yes you do because blacks like miller beer”. Thats how collectivists think… now this is a simple version of it because clearly your education level is that of the avg 5th grader… but hopefully this won’t just go right over your head.
Someday if you ever bother to say read some basic history, sociology and psychology you will understand these VERY VERY BASIC definitions.
To 118. Cichawoda
Both snopes and factcheck have been proven to be completely leftist hack/smear sites… they amount to going to the Pravda when stalin was writing for facts.
RE #87/Middleman Re # 79: [...] The paper has been shown, it’s been verified, and the guy won the popular vote. Suck it up, you have at least three more years of him. [...]
To & About the Liar dba Midddleman selling red herrings around:
1) Obama’s party never allowed for a forensic analysis of the COLB purveyed by Daily KOs, so no one can say whether the generation #1 paper is authentic or not -
2) but the problem is not that paper’s authenticity – the problem is that the HAWAII HD HAS DENIED THAT IT EVER ISSUED AN OBAMA COLB, THEN OR EARLIER IN TIME, acknowledgement which puts Gibbs and the other Obamabots in the curious position of HAVING INVOKED AS EVIDENCE A SOME DOCUMENT THAT THE VERY POTENTIAL ISSUERS DENIES HAVING ISSUED! (my post #62, 79)
Answer this, Middleman -
’till then, what wears 3 feet long red shows, has glowing yellow hair, wears enormous pink pants with one green diagonal suspender, has a round, bulbuous red nose, wears a shirt made of twenty different patches, twists and squeals ballons at the corner of 235th Street @ 431 Alley is, and cannot be but the… Obamatroll dba Middleman.
Answer the questions, middleman – it’s called metamorphosis, shed you appearance of clown and become the real you…
I wouldn’t classify myself as a ” birther” since I did not have any original question about Obama’s status but events have changed my mind. Obama could have ended this Aug 2008 when Phil Berg 1st filed suit in Philadelphia. All he had to do was submit his records to the court and ask for case to be dismissed. Instead Obama has tap danced and avoided. ” He who doth protest too much”.. Makes one wonder. Now I would certainly be interested in forcing Obama to prove his status.
Diane #120: I think you have called it about right.
Prima Facie, we have a bovine excrement con artist who has developed his own “legend”.
While eligible for the office he holds, there is probably something there that would severely damage his credibility with his disciples.
So we now have a misdirection play that keeps
critics occupied with a will o the wisp while
what might be damaging goes undisclosed.
Middleman: Just as I thought, neither you nor any other Obama supporter can provide a link to Obama’s real, SIGNED birth certificate.
I’m surprised that you didn’t even give it the ole college try.
Liberals are so lame.
120. Diane wrote:
Let’s assume he was born in Kenya. Or that he forfeited his U.S. citizenship by virtue of being adopted by an Indonesian national. Neither of these would block him from serving as POTUS.
Peter writes: Um, yes it would.
Get with the program here, Diane.
But more importantly;
What is Obama hiding???
119. Peter the Bubblehead,
Oh, nice on trying to twist history to your favor, Peter. I think everyone knows that back in the days of the civil war, up to the point where Reagan wooed the rest over, a large majority of Southern Democrats were very much conservative. Even Strom Thurmond started as a Democrat, but moved to the Republicans. Byrd is merely one last hold out.
121 robotech master,
Congrats, you’ve now actually trumped your last post in terms of dumbest posts. What reality do you live in? Obviously you lack regular face to face human interaction. BTW, did you realize that you are actually talking to a black guy? I can tell you from personal experience that your little attempt at fitting people of political stripes in two little categories is a bunch of B-S. You see on top of being black, I was a non-racist skinhead for over 10 years. I’ve been face to face with the far-right, YES- FAR RIGHT. Don’t try and tell me otherwise.
122,
Go take a long walk off a short pier.
Middleman is a “black guy” who used to be a “skinhead”? Now, what’s the importance of sharing that with us Middleman? (#127)
You do know that doesn’t excuse you from the fact that you NEVER provided any link to Obama’s signed birth certificate right? Or is that why you told us all of that pertinent personal info? Does that excuse you from needed facts about your President? Does that explain your Obama bias? You tell us. You’re the one throwing out that info like it’s supposed to color our opinion of you and your comments.
C’mon Middleman. Show me the signed document. Is the fact that you won’t proffer the signed birth certificate proof that you CAN’T????????? As a fellow black man, I’d think you’d insist Obama prove us all to be wrong. I’m sure there are some in the black community that value facts over personality. Why aren’t you one of them?
To Pragmatist and the others: Sorry, but if you’re you’re a global warming denier, you are indeed in the birther/truther/moon hoax zone. While it’s true that a casual Google search using terms like “Global Warming Myths” will uncover piles and piles of rubbish right wing commentary, it shouldn’t take a genius to notice the difference between a site like this and a site like this.
please don’t feed the trolls. there is no value and no point engaging them
here is a link for the people who think they can engage a troll with a positive result.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIFcnctnHsE&feature=related
basically that means the trolls are ideological retards.
Re # 127/ Middleman RE #122/ misanthropicus: [...] Go take a long walk off a short pier. [...]
My, middy, but your analytical abilities are so overwhelming!
Yet, as far as this debate goes, you appear completely unwilling/unable to respond some simple questions about Barry’s (i)legitimacy I posed in #87/#79.
Care to try again or, as I said before…
… ’till then, what wears 3 feet long red shows, has glowing yellow hair, wears enormous pink pants with one green diagonal suspender, has a round, bulbuous red nose, wears a shirt made of twenty different patches, twists and squeals ballons at the corner of 235th Street @ 431 Alley is, and cannot be but the… Obamatroll dba Middleman.
Do it buddy, leave the pier thing aside, and beat the crappy condition of ACORN worker in which you wallow – come with an answer…
By the way, since you so nicely volunteered some biographical details – are mister Van Jones, by any chance?
… PST 6:30… just sinking in the news about Obama’s speech at the UN…
Can’t get a better proof that Barry is not American – even using a super-microscope one cannot find in his actions anything serving the (legitimate) interests of this nation.
Can he go lower than this? Probably so -
Also, it looks like he thinks about himself as a planetary emperor of sorts -
To 127. Middleman
You continue to show your massive ignorance… “conservatives” are centrist not right wing….
2nd being that you don’t even know the difference between left and right wing… or collectivist and individualist your “personal” encounters are meaningless other then to reinforce your own simple minded prejudiced view of the world.
And for your information MR BLACK MAN I happen to be AFRICAN-AMERICAN so take your race card and shove it.
Being the fact that you have not gotten any education above the 5th grade I’m trying to keep this as simple as possible for you… and your still not getting it. I can pretty much tell you for a fact you have likely never met anyone on the far right… but you’ve seemed to have met lots of ppl on the left and far left… we call them racist… or democrats… or the KKK, black panthers, la raza and a host of other left and far left wing groups.
121. robotech master:
“Both snopes and factcheck have been proven to be completely leftist hack/smear sites… they amount to going to the Pravda when stalin was writing for facts.”
Son, you made my day. It’s people like you that that put the fun back in to this site. Than you
.
How do we absolutely KNOW that George Bush didn’t have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks ?
The 9/11 attacks (mostly ) succeeded !
However, among his many, many, limitations is that Mr. Bush is the easiest person to tell when he is lying that I’ve seen in any responsible position. See him when he talks about youth programs (he’s honest on those and rather a decent human being). On the WMD, on the need for democracy in Iraq, and the many many reason-of-the-day that he gave in the run up to war in Iraq, he was lying. I do not have any opinion or knowledge on why he really wanted war in Iraq, but, the reasons he gave sounded like a 5 yr olds excuses over the broken cookie jar.
To 134. Cichawoda
Shouldn’t you be posting hitler research into why the jews are evil and claiming that their is a consensus and the debate is over so its time to warm up the ovens….
128. AThinkingPerson,
I revealed some personal information of mine to show that I’ve had plenty of exposure to people on the far-right, since they were our main rival faction back in those days.
Robotech,
I’m not playing a race card, I’m revealing that fact that through my own personal experiences, the times I’ve had dealt with racism were when it was from someone who proclaimed themselves to be right-wing/conservative. Never met someone who is far-right? Why don’t you look up what a Hammerskin is, pal. You then go find one and tell him he’s left wing and see what you get. You’ll probably want to play the race card afterward.
” On August 4, 1961, Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, of an American mother and a Kenyan father.”
Oh?? And your proof is…????????
It has already been PROVEN that the “Annointed One” LIED in his book about the breakup of his “family unit”. His mother left his FATHER (not the other way around) and enrolled at the Univ. Of Washington for the fall semester in 1961 (2 weeks after he was born!) as university records and eye-witneses have shown.
So what ELSE is he lieing about???
Fighting all attempts to reveal the TRUTH of his birth, school records, etc., etc., etc.,…only makes one wonder.
Funny…it’s the BIRTHERS who should ACTUALLY be called “TRUTHERS”!!!
To 137. Middleman
Once again you keep showing massive ignorance… Hammerskin is very clearly NOT right wing. To even imply they are right wing is near absurd.
You all but keep confirming that you have never met anyone right wing or even know what right wing is.
In fact from the brief overview that I see they are very clearly left wingers and far left wingers.
let’s see, the won during his prolonged campaign constantly reiterated how his presidency would be known by it’s transparency.
first thing he does is hide everything ABOUT himself, at great cost.
then he immediately rushed through a mega-spending bill that no one had time to read.
today the finance committee voted 12 to 11 to NOT put the entire obama inspired government run health care bill on the internet, for all to see, before this same bunch who doesn’t read the bills votes on it.
yeah, i can see where finding any kind of truth and transparency in this administration would be important to anybody with half a brain. what he is hiding might just wind up being a lot more important than where he was born.
9/11 truth is not a liberal/Democrat effort. Most 9/11 truthers I know are libertarians or traditional conservatives. And besides, over half of the 9/11 Commission members themselves now indicate that we didn’t get the whole truth; that’s hardly conspiratorial guesswork. We need a new investigation.
I’m not a “birther”. The question really doesn’t even matter to me, because the rise of the scary Left has been proceeding for some years now, and the eventual ascension of a demagogue was inevitable. Our problems run deeper than those caused by one man, and if wasn’t Obama, it soon would have been someone else. With so many Americans having abandoned the ideal of being a free citizen for the hope of having a secular savior, it was going to happen.
The real problem is that, even if it were true, our new “palace guard media” wouldn’t have reported it anyway.
That is the scary part.
139. robotech master:
“Hammerskin is very clearly NOT right wing.”
From what I have read of your posts one of the main characteristics of the right wing ideology is opposition to Communism. So the fact that the Hammerskins’ primary focus is the production and promotion of white power music (also known as Rock Against Communism) would make them ideologically affiliated with the right wing movements. Come to think of it the KKK also consider themselves part of the right wing. Oh – I’m trying to remember which side was in opposition to the civil rights movement in the 60s and 70s – you know I think it was the conservatives. Hmmm, so what do you think robotech moron, do you see a pattern?
General LeMay handled the contracting for a high altitude camera plane. Proponents and aids suggested designations with letters “Y” (prototYpe), “X” (eXperimental), “R” (Reconaisance), or “S” (Surveillance).
He knew he couldn’t keep a secret by giving it an exciting label that draws attention. He designated it as a “Utility” aircraft. The U2 remained secret ’till it was downed.
People want to see something because it’s hidden from them.
I don’t know if the President is hiding something, clumsily. Or if he is just teasing; and thinks the power of his office is a perq.
133. robotech master:
“difference between left and right wing… or collectivist and individualist ”
So lets set some common defenitions so that we can determine who the suffers from massive ignorance.
Left-wing was coined during the French Revolution – those who sat on the left in parliament supported the republic. Most commonly used to refer to support for changing traditional social orders or for creating a more egalitarian distribution of wealth and privilege.
Right-wing has the same etymology. Most commonly used to refer to support for preserving traditional or cultural values and customs or for maintaining some form of social hierarchy or private control of the means of production.
Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or social outlook, that stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, rather than the importance of separate individuals.
Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that stresses independence and self-reliance. Individualists promote the exercise of one’s goals and desires, while opposing most external interference upon one’s choices, whether by society, or any other group or institution.
Would you agree to these definitions? If so you will have to agree that conservatives are right wing because the definition of a conservative is identical to right wing.
Your statments:
Thus an INDIVIDUALIST CAN NOT BE RACIST.
ALL COLLECTIVIST ARE BY DEFINITION RACIST.
Do not flow from the defenition of either and appear to be just silly hyperbole – can you explain yourself oh wise one?
133. robotech master:
“difference between left and right wing… or collectivist and individualist ”
So lets set some common defenitions so that we can determine who the suffers from massive ignorance.
Left-wing was coined during the French Revolution – those who sat on the left in parliament supported the republic. Most commonly used to refer to support for changing traditional social orders or for creating a more egalitarian distribution of wealth and privilege.
Right-wing has the same etymology. Most commonly used to refer to support for preserving traditional or cultural values and customs or for maintaining some form of social hierarchy or private control of the means of production.
Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or social outlook, that stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, rather than the importance of separate individuals.
Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that stresses independence and self-reliance. Individualists promote the exercise of one’s goals and desires, while opposing most external interference upon one’s choices, whether by society, or any other group or institution.
Would you agree to these definitions? If so you will have to agree that conservatives are right wing because the definition of a conservative is identical to right wing.
Your statments:
Thus an INDIVIDUALIST CAN NOT BE RACIST.
ALL COLLECTIVIST ARE BY DEFINITION RACIST.
Do not flow from the defenition of either and appear to be just silly hyperbole – can you explain yourself oh wise one?
I want to see the long form birth certificate.
I know his seeking the office of President obliges him to release it.
Mostly, I want to know because he wants to hide.
I believe he was born in Hawaii and is legitimately eligible.
Still, I want to see what he wants to hide.
Pamela Gellar asserts: of people who knew his mother at the time she became pregnant with him NONE knew, or had even heard of, his alleged father. Of people who knew his alleged father at the time Barack’s mother conceived him, NONE knew, or had heard of her. (An argument that the declared father is not the actual father). In support, she further argues Ann Durham (Barack’s Mom) would see cultural advantage to declaring Barry Sotero, Who was with her at his birth, as being his father (vice an unknown John Doe, or a known person who dumped her). Also that Barry Sotero would see cultural advantage (in his Indonesian Muslim culture) in claiming sexual conquest and demonstrating fertility. He’d join in such a lie.
She points out his complete lack of resemblance to his purported father, or any of his other children.
It’s a wild theory made credible by Barack’s behavior.
To 143. Cichawoda
Not communism but socialism/government control/collectivism.
Socialism includes the following but not limited to communism, nazism, fascism, dictatorship, marxism, racism and even “democracy”.
Ppl like you and middleman often confuse right wing SOCIALISTS like hitler or hammerskin with right wingers…
All socialists span from the center to the far leftwing. They can’t be right wing because they believe in government control and racism among other issues. They are SOCIALISTS. Just because their right wing SOCIALIST doesn’t change the fact when you include into the scale things like capitalism and individualism they are left of center ALWAYS.
Ppl like you don’t even begin to understand the difference between socialists and the larger scale that includes many other aspects besides socialism.
This is commonly due to a poor or euro centric education where euros often talk about socialism as the only form of government because for them it really is the only form of government… that is why you here ppl call hitler right wing… because to euros and the ppl with poor education they don’t understand that what they are really saying is right wing SOCIALIST.
As to a pattern yeah.. its called left winger and ppl like you who are very poorly educated most of all in things like history.
127. Middleman wrote:
Oh, nice on trying to twist history to your favor, Peter.
Peter writes: History is history. I can’t twist it any more than Obama can pretend he wants the US at the forefront of world leadership.
Just because I provide proof that the KKK is, was, and always has been a DEMOCRATIC organization, and you don’t happen to like that FACT, doesn’t make it any less valid.
Go fly off to your own little fantasy world and leave the real debate to those of us with a brain and the ability to think for ourselves.
129. BC:
Peter writes: BC is a Global Warming Alarmist and Gore-worshipper who wouldn’t recognize the FACT that the world has gone through phases of climate change for millions of years before humans even existed and simply ignores all current SCIENTIFIC data showing we are currently entering a cooling period, another phase inthe normal cyclical nature of our planet’s environment, simply because the Goricle tells him it’s all his fault!
Please, show me REAL facts that tell you the Earth has been growing hotter for the last decade. I can show you dozens that PROVE otherwise.
Difference between conservatives and libtards;
Conservatives look at all the evidence and make decisions based on the facts. Libtards wait for the celebrities to come out with their latest ‘stunning proclaimation’ and regard it as fact.
139. robotech master wrote:
You all but keep confirming that you have never met anyone right wing or even know what right wing is.
Peter writes: The impression I get from some of the lib-sided posting here, anything to the right of Hillary Clinton is extreme right wing to these people.
Then the Paulians wonder why they aren’t getting more traction with the public. Memo to RonPaul: drop the kooky conspiracy theories and the neo-isolationism, and the Republican party is yours for the taking. People want to hear about markets and freedom. They don’t want to hear about black helicopters.
For those wishing to skip to the end, here’s what we’ll find if we ever get the chance to actually see the records…
He was born overseas, but recorded his birth in Hawaii in 1957, before Hawaii became a state.
His college records will show aid as a foreign student, and possibly admissions help, as well as foreign support for his expenses.
His court case records will show he did nothing but introduce his co-counsel in his most famous case, his most prolific jaunt in the courtroom. Otherwise, he was an assistant who did and contributed little.
As to the Harvard Law Review, I’m betting most of what you’d see is either controversially socialist, or empty suit, or fed to him by someone else.
I could be wrong, of course, but this is just what it smells like to me.
And Cichawoda, the Democrats founded the KKK, their two biggest enemies were blacks and Republicans. The Republicans, while not in the majority, voted with a higher percentage of Republicans than the Democrats when it came to passing Civil Rights Laws. The Republicans have always supported equality. Remember, it was the DixieCrats who supported segregation. Read your history.
154. Doc Neaves:
“Remember, it was the DixieCrats ho supported segregation”
And what do we call those Dixiecrats today? Republicans. Google “the Southern strategy”
“Once again you keep showing massive ignorance… Hammerskin is very clearly NOT right wing. To even imply they are right wing is near absurd.
You all but keep confirming that you have never met anyone right wing or even know what right wing is.
In fact from the brief overview that I see they are very clearly left wingers and far left wingers.”
Okay. Now, you go find one and tell him that. He’ll then show you his massive ignorance. Verbal and non-verbal.
RE: Middleman, Shirhan Shirhan & Obama -
*Shirhan Shirhan, the man who gunned down Robert Kennedy…
*Bill Ayres, the left-wing murderer who dedicated his “Prairie Fire” to Shirhan Shirhan….
*Bill Ayres, the left-wing murderer who dedicated his “Prairie Fire” to Shirhan Shirhan, now proved to be the true author of dba Hussein Obama’s “Dreams From My Father”…
*Hussein Obama, currently serving a shaky term as USA president…
*Developments in progress, stay tuned…
Middy, this thread is about Obama’s dubious claims of legitimacy, claims you wholesale support – I asked you respond three (3) questions about this matter (#58, 79), and you stubbornly avoid to address this, preferring to digress in some race-tinged elucubrations.
Middy, address these questions about Obama’s legitimacy:
#1- Obama’s bizzare choice of defense tactic in this matter; #2- the existing & circulated COLB invoked as genuine by the WH having not issued by the Hawaii HD; #3- the two sets of DNC nomination acts, the one submitted to the States AVOIDING TO MENTION THAT OBAM HAS FULLY SATISFIED THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRMENTS…
Let’s do it, Middy, leave the white spremacists to Rachel Maddow and rspond to the above questions about Obama – otherwise we have to take by default Shirhan Shirhan and Bill Ayres as defining elements in Obama’s intellectual formation -
Do it, buddy -
To 151. Peter the Bubblehead
pfft for some anything right of stalin is considered far to right….
To 156. Middleman
I could call them jews as well… or any of a number of things… you see much like you being poorly educated they are as well. I’m quite sure they believe they are right wing… SOCIALISTS. They like you believe that their is only socialism in the world and thus anyone who is right on the socialist scale is right wing… Some of us have some education and have this crazy idea that their is more to life then just socialism…
Here is my theory on why Barak Obama has refused to release his long form original birth certificate. When he was born on August 4, 1961, at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, his race was listed on the birth certificate as “White”. His white mother was there and his non-white father was not. The doctor probably thought that he was doing the kid a favor since in 1961 there were still significant legal disadvantages to having anything other than “White” in that part of the form.
Like Ward Churchill, Barak Obama has exploited a non-white status into success way beyond his experience and abilities. If it were revealed that Obama’s birth certificate said that he is white, it would cause him no end of problems with his base.
Now and then — And what do we call those Dixiecrats today? Republicans.
Mostly we call them dead. In a few cases we call them centenarians. In both cases they are likely to be voting straight Democrat ticket.
RE #159/Mark in Texas: [...] The doctor probably thought that he was doing the kid a favor since in 1961 there were still significant legal disadvantages to having anything other than “White” in that part of the form.
Like Ward Churchill, Barak Obama [...]
Mark, quite possible what you say – however, since the BC scandal simply cannot be stopped, wouldn’t be it wiser, PR-wise, to come clean with this explanation and so put to rest all other suspicions alimented by obfuscation?
“I was a knicklehead,” worked well for Obama at leat once, and also it is generally agreed that Bill Clinton worsened his situation by trying to stonewall the Monica affair -
Then, wouldn’t the libs have a field day coming on the screens and saying: “Look, this good man, at what level of despair and denial was brought by oppression, he feared that he couldn’t help this country unless he depicts himself as a poor black kid…”
Seen that before…
159. Mark in Texas wrote:
When he was born on August 4, 1961, at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, his race was listed on the birth certificate as “White”. His white mother was there and his non-white father was not. The doctor probably thought that he was doing the kid a favor since in 1961 there were still significant legal disadvantages to having anything other than “White” in that part of the form.
Peter writes: That theory makes as much sense, if not more, than any other I have heard floating around the internet since last summer. And would explain a great many things. But we are unlikelly to find out, at least anytime soon.
I say again, there is only one question I want answered;
What is Obama hiding????
And in an attempt (yeah, I know, probably wasted…) to educate BC and his ilk…
Not exactly a true scientific paper, but it goes a long way in explaining how the GW Alarmists who are looking for the big payoff by invoking this ‘crisis’ actually work when the FACTS don’t fit their needs…
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM=
154. Doc Neaves:
“And Cichawoda, the Democrats founded the KKK, their two biggest enemies were blacks and Republicans.”
To try to force your point into some semblance of logic you seem to be using Democrat and liberal and Republican and conservative interchangeably – they are not the same thing. Both parties through out their history have moved back and forth ideologically and are also different by region. A California, Bible Belt, New England Democrat or Republican are not the same animal.
Also I see this push to redefine all political movements of the past as left of center so I wonder if “communism, nazism, fascism, dictatorship, marxism, racism and even “democracy”.” are all left of center what does that leave to the conservatives or are they also not right wing?
I meant “conservatives or are they also not left wing?”
Crazy people believe in crazy stuff. There is no functional difference in the psychology between Birthers and Truthers. Neither of them have facts or evidence, most of them get their information from partisan (or just crazy) people on the Internet. Both of them are an embarrassment to their parties…. the only difference I’ve seen is that elected officials rarely supported Truthers (they got their support from Hollywood idiots and Bloggers etc)… but there seems to be a lot of ‘agnosticism’ for elected officials on the birther issue.
There’s not a single legitimate argument for either conspiracy. Anyone who believes otherwise is willfully ignorant.
“If so you will have to agree that conservatives are right wing because the definition of a conservative is identical to right wing.”
Nah. Conservatives want to keep things the way they are, irrespective of any political ideology. That’s what conservative means.
As several people have stated, right wingers are anti-totalitarian. Not the same thing as being conservative.
“To try to force your point into some semblance of logic you seem to be using Democrat and liberal and Republican and conservative interchangeably…”
Generally speaking, the Democrats have embraced totalitarianism, Republicans not so much. Republicans are more right wing, Democrats more left wing. And, it’s pretty much always been that way.
RE #166/Ratatosk: [...] There’s not a single legitimate argument for either conspiracy. [...]
12 bucks, Rata – 12 bucks! I leave the truthers aside, and I ask you why someone who’s ceaselessly praised for his thoughtfulness, deliberatedness and keen sense of reality doesn’t spend a 12 pack worth’s (the fee for releasing the BC), to settle this matter and show all his opponents & denigrators as the “crappy fools” they are?
Remember old Ricky? “A kingdom for a horse! A kingdom for a horse!” – well, it looks like things are cheaper now and with 12 bucks you can get America. Or lose it.
Your answer sir?
167. Dave Surls:
“Generally speaking, the Democrats have embraced totalitarianism, Republicans not so much.”
Somebody is duping someone if you think that is true. I guess if I try to argue with you by using quotes from academia you will say that the “liberal” education system has been lying to us for decades and that you now have some undisputed source of “real” history?
Lets compare left and right complaints:
On the right so far – communist takeovers, birth certificates, Oval Office dress codes, teleprompters, death panels, czars and a return to segregated buses. BTW “czar” is a nickname invented by the media for adviser – all presidents have them.
The left during the previous administration –
Iraq didn’t have WMD, true.
No connection between Saddam and 9/11, true.
George W. Bush was incompetent. The rest of the nation caught up with the left when Katrina slammed into New Orleans, shattering the levees while Bush was eating cake with John McCain.
Bush had prior knowledge of the September 11th attacks. It’s a matter of record that he knew an attack might be imminent based upon the famous PDB titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.” So that one was partially true.
Illegal wiretaps, torture and other human rights violations. All true. Did Business connections with the Bin Laden family? true. etc
The caliber of complaints seems different.
Okay, and with that incredible missive at #170, Cichawoda reveals themselves as a truly flaming Truther. Guess I can add another name on the list of the pass-overs.
“Somebody is duping someone if you think that is true.”
Someone has never heard of government enforced slavery, Jim Crow, military conscription, the IRS, two Democrat Party initiated red scares, WWII concentration camps for totally innocent U.S. citizens…and a whole lot of other stuff.
Like I said…Generally speaking, the Democrats have embraced totalitarianism, Republicans not so much.
171. Peter the Bubblehead:
“Cichawoda reveals themselves as a truly flaming Truther.”
Love your logical precise style of argument – Bubba.
“The truth, more often than not, tends to be quite prosaic. On August 4, 1961, Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, of an American mother and a Kenyan father.”
I beg to differ. Unless you can prove that you have seen the long form version bc stating he was born in this hospital, and showing the Dr.s signature this version is no more or less credible than those who believe he was born in Kenya. You are merely perpetuating their story. Dr. Taitz has in her possession his Kenyan birth certificate. No one has disputed the authenticity of this one, as they have others. It is now filed in Judge David O. Carter’s courtroom. He is a former Marine, who said he understands the importance of Constitutional eligibility. He didn’t mock, or call people birthers. The DOJ has tried, so far unsucessfully to have it dismissed, not on the merits of his eligibility, but on standing. I guess they can’t on its merits, because they know he is not eligible. The trial will take place in the Ronald Reagan Courtroom on January 26, 2010.
Hitler on the “Big Lie”
All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true in itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]
“That pretty much sums up the argument of those arguing against verification of Constitutional eligibility…”
I’m not arguing against verification of constitutional eligibility, I’m arguing that there should be no natural born citizenship requirement.
It was an idiotic idea when it was first proposed, it’s idiotic now, and it’s going to keep on being idiotic as long as it’s in the Constitution.
FED
176. Dave Surls:
I’m not arguing against verification of constitutional eligibility, I’m arguing that there should be no natural born citizenship requirement.
It was an idiotic idea when it was first proposed, it’s idiotic now, and it’s going to keep on being idiotic as long as it’s in the Constitution.
Actually, it was a highly important clause, and that is being proven right now. It was specifically meant to avoid people with the sort of sensibilities that The Precedent has. We are living the proof of the genius of the ‘natural born’ clause. We just don’t have anyone with the guts to check it. “Oooh. The cities will burn if he gets thrown out! …”
The fact is that the cities are going to burn, anyway. We’ll be extremely lucky to get away with just that. Chances are that the US will not survive The Precedent’s tenure, intact.
misanthropicus — however, since the BC scandal simply cannot be stopped, wouldn’t be it wiser, PR-wise, to come clean with this explanation and so put to rest all other suspicions alimented by obfuscation?
Not at all. It does Obama no good to allay your suspicions. You didn’t vote for him and there is very little chance that you would ever vote for him regardless of his birth status. However, many of the people who did vote for him might have second thoughts if it came out that his official status was “White”.
He also benefits by having repulsive Truthers like Tarpley jumping on the Birther bandwagon. Most normal people tend to want to dissociate themselves from nutball conspiracy whores. So not only does Obama not suffer from the controversy over his birth certificate, it is a net positive for him.
176. Dave Surls wrote:
It was an idiotic idea when it was first proposed, it’s idiotic now, and it’s going to keep on being idiotic as long as it’s in the Constitution.
Peter writes: Please explain how the Founding Father’s intentions that anyone wishing to serve as the leader of the United States have loyalty and connection to the country they wish to lead is idiotic?
Sounds to me more like you wish this speedbump would get out of your (or your preferred candidate’s) way so they can simply go about their business of tearing apart this (once great) nation and rebuild it in their own twisted image.
174. aprilnovember811:
“Dr. Taitz has in her possession his Kenyan birth certificate. No one has disputed the authenticity of this one”
So far the nut Taitz has produced 2 forgeries. The first, among other things, said he was born in Mombasa which was not part of Kenya at the time. It was also been show to be a photoshoped copy of an Australian Registration of Birth issued to one David Jeffrey Bomford born in 1959. The second, with the footprint, also names the location of Barack Obama Jr.’s birth as Mombasa which was part of Zanzibar when Obama was born.
The simplicity of the mistakes in the forgery speak to the insanity in these claims driven by hatred. The Birthers go into sophisticated document forensics mode to try to prove that the Hawaiian certificate is a forgery but are willing to accept anything with even the most evident, amateurish errors as evidence for their misguided ideas. Yes boys this is all a deep conspiracy by blacks, gays and liberals to take your white bread away and make you eat whole wheat.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kenyacert.asp a commie website where you can see photos and commentary on the fake birth certificates
For a better solution on how to handle the racist image some Rupublicans seem to be creating watch this: http://tinyurl.com/y9spcba
179. Mark in Texas:
Well said.
178. progressoverpeace:
“The fact is that the cities are going to burn, anyway.”
Na – crackers don’t live in cities.
175. aprilnovember811:
Hitler on the “Big Lie”
Good idea to post the full quote:
But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.
All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true in itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]
“Peter writes: Please explain how the Founding Father’s intentions that anyone wishing to serve as the leader of the United States have loyalty and connection to the country they wish to lead is idiotic?”
Sure. Because scumbag traitors like Jane Fonda or Ramsey Clark or Noam Chomsky can become POTUS, while loyal citizens like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Henry Kissinger can’t, simply because of where they were born.
It’s an idiotic rule, always has been, always will be.
Thanks to the natural born citizen rule this guy…
CMOH Citation for Corporal Jake Allex:
‘Rank and organization: Corporal, U.S. Army, Company H, 131st Infantry, 33d Division. Place and date: At Chipilly Ridge, France, 9 August 1918. Entered service at: Chicago, Ill. Born: 13 July 1887, Prizren, Serbia. G.O. No.: 44 W.D., 1919. Citation: At a critical point in the action, when all the officers with his platoon had become casualties, Cpl. Allex took command of the platoon and led it forward until the advance was stopped by fire from a machinegun nest. He then advanced alone for about 30 yards in the face of intense fire and attacked the nest. With bayonet he killed 5 of the enemy, and when it was broken, used the butt of the rifle, capturing 15 prisoners.’
…could never be president of the United States, SOLELY because he was born in Europe.
But, this stinking traitor is qualified to be president…
‘Hanoi Jane’
‘…Fonda visited Hanoi in July 1972. Among other statements, she repeated the North Vietnamese claim that the United States had been deliberately targeting the dike system along the Red River stating that “I believe in my heart, profoundly, that the dikes are being bombed on purpose”. Columnist Joseph Kraft, who was also touring North Vietnam, believed that the damage to the dikes was incidental and was being used as propaganda by Hanoi, and that if the U.S. Air Force were “truly going after the dikes, it would do so in a methodical, not a harum-scarum way.”‘
‘In North Vietnam, Fonda was photographed seated on an anti-aircraft battery In her 2005 autobiography, she writes that she was manipulated into sitting on the battery, and was immediately horrified at the implications of the pictures.’
‘During this visit she also visited American prisoners of war (POWs), and brought back messages from them to their families. When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs “hypocrites and liars.”‘–wiki article which touches on Jane Fonda’s treasonous behavior during the Vietnam War
…SOLELY because she was born in New York city instead of Prizren, Serbia.
There is something deeply and fundamentally wrong with a law that allows that. And, what’s wrong with it is is that being a good American has absolutely nothing to do with where you happen to have been born.
As far as I’m concerned you can take the natural born citizen rule and stick it where the sun don’t shine, because that’s where it belongs.
185. Dave Surls:
“Sure. Because scumbag traitors…”
Ok, I get it now – people who, regardless of their civil status, disagree with your particular idealogy are traitors. Sir, you are a traitor.
186. Dave Surls:
“being a good American has absolutely nothing to do with where you happen to have been born.”
Being a good American has nothing to do with what you think “good” is. That is why we have rules and laws.
The structure of the American political system is very similar to what the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569–1795) had – “our state is a republic under the presidency of the King” – Chancellor Jan Zamoyski. The Founding Fathers where aware of the Polish system:
Elected king (President), Sejm (Congress, two chambered – the upper called the Senat and the lower called the Chamber of Envoys), Prawo (Judiciary – not really worked out till towards the end of the existence of the Commonwealth). From a political perspective that the Founding Fathers could see at the time the biggest flaw was that foreigners could be elected as kings. This proved very destructive in 2 ways: because of internal rivalries and bickering Poles were seldom elected, other nations would claim sovereignty over Poland because their citizens were elected king. It is the second fault that most strongly influenced the decision to include the natural born Citizen clause.
“Ok, I get it now”
My guess is is that folks like you won’t get it until we start stringing up a few left wing traitors (after a very brief trial, of course) to serve as an example.
Jane Fonda would be a good place to start.
RE #179/Mark in Texas: [...] It does Obama no good to allay your suspicions. You didn’t vote for him and there is very little chance that you would ever vote for him regardless of his birth status. However, many of the people who did vote for him might have second thoughts if it came out that his official status was “White”. [...] So not only does Obama not suffer from the controversy over his birth certificate, it is a net positive for him.
[...]
Mark, while I don’t think that your gain/lose analysis in Obama’s case is correct, I leave it there so far, and I ask you just whether your description matches the image of enlightened statemanship and integrity that the Obamistas are tirelessly pushing around.
Basically, what you describe in Obama’s handling of this situation looks like crass opportunism & deception for me – am I wrong?
189. Dave Surls:
“start stringing up a few left wing traitors”
Old, redneck, trailer trash like you don’t stand a chance – come into my hood and try me.
190. misanthropicus:
enlightened statesmanship? – it’s called politics and anybody who wants to lead needs to be a politician first. Most on the left don’t even consider Obama a liberal. He is a centrist who is not willing to truly shake up the status quo of power. Nobody is touching the financial and military corporations.
Cichawoda:
“175. aprilnovember811:
Hitler on the “Big Lie”
Good idea to post the full quote:”
You are the perfect example of what Hitler was speaking of.
“So far the nut Taitz has produced 2 forgeries.”
I don’t think Snopes qualifies as a Court of law. The second birth certificate can be authenticated, a. By comparing it to the bc in a vault in Hawaii, or, b. By comparing the footprint. That won’t change over time, it will remain as it was the day he was born. A judge can demand the comparison.
“For a better solution on how to handle the racist image some Rupublicans seem to be creating watch this: http://tinyurl.com/y9spcba”
Racist is the new term for PATRIOT. It means we reject, communism, and someone who schmoozes with the worst ilk in the world. He’s an embarassment to this country. I and others wear the lable proudly. Speaking of race, wasn’t Obama’s mother white? How come you and others disregard his white half?
“Old, redneck, trailer trash like you don’t stand a chance…”
I bet that’s what old Julius Rosenberg was thinking right before they flipped the switch.
I just don’t get it, and have stopped trying. I’m starting to believe that ‘liberalism IS a mental illness’ because:
1)how does insisting on documented birth information qualify as a ‘conspiracy theory’?
2)why did questions regarding McCain’s eligibility vis a vis birth circumstances/constitutional requirement result in a congressional hearing yet the exact same questions regarding Obama are dismissed as ridiculous?
3)why would Obama spend more than 1 million to keep said documents of birth information hidden?
194. Dave Surls:
“old Julius Rosenberg”
Your slip is showing – better fix your dress.
193. aprilnovember811:
“Racist is the new term for PATRIOT”
Not really, Conservatives always wore it as a badge of honor. But than again Conservatives never were true Patriots. The concept is beyond anybody who can’t think further than they can spit.
193. aprilnovember811:
“How come you and others disregard his white half?”
Because his ethnic/racial background does not even come up for consideration – I don’t care.
“He’s an embarassment to this country.”
Yes it is embarrassing to have an intelligent and well spoken and liked leader. I hate it when all that Euro trash says they have a new respect for what America stands for. we should have invaded them and made them eat freedom fries.
“Yes it is embarrassing to have an intelligent and well spoken and liked leader.”
No, that would be great. Unfortunately, we’re stuck with Barack Obama.
misanthropicus — Basically, what you describe in Obama’s handling of this situation looks like crass opportunism & deception for me – am I wrong?
No. I think that you are correct in that judgment. The point is that the things that you care about are not the same things that many Obama voters cared about, especially during the primaries.
RE #200/Mark in Texas:
* misanthropicus Q: Basically, what you describe in Obama’s handling of this situation looks like crass opportunism & deception for me – am I wrong?
* Mark A: No. I think that you are correct in that judgment. The point is that the things that you care about are not the same things that many Obama voters cared about, especially during the primaries.
* misanthropicus returns: But the primaries are over, the political landscape has changed, and not to better – shouldn’t we try to correct the course, particularly now when it has became clearer that something is amiss on the command deck?
Cichawoda said:“For a better solution on how to handle the racist image some Rupublicans seem to be creating watch this: http://tinyurl.com/y9spcba”
You are the one who bought up race again. You need to realize, that race has nothing to do with it. I don’t care if he is pink with purple polka dots. I don’t like his lack of character or substance. There is nothing of any value in his mind or character to offer this country. I think the guy is totally lacking a soul. I think he is a morally corrupt opportunist, who uses vulnerable people for his own gain.
Here are two black people, who don’t like him either, and I know there are others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DlTgrMCxPg If you don’t watch this entire video, at least watch the one that follows, in its entirety.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zjXN9mvGDs
In this video Gadaffi calls Obama his son, who was a “son of Africa.” Now this is one of those moments in Hitler’s Big Lie moments, when you will continue to disregard, and say, well there is some other explanation, right?
I have a doctor who I like very much, and I will mention this, because it’s valid for this argument, is black. This is near Washington DC. My doctor does not like him. My doctor has a friend who is retired from the FBI. He used to work undercover and infiltrated the Weathermen organization before retiring. This retired FBI agent, said the Weathermen had a plan to gain access to a high position in government and destroy the country from within.
He told my doctor, he hasn’t been sleeping, because he is afraid they may have accomplished their goal, by using Obama. I don’t mean that he wasn’t a willing participant, I think he hates this country as much as the Weathermen do. But, they are using eachother.
Look at the people in his life, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, this Rev. Wright Character, who’s church he attended for 20 years, but never heard utter a anti semitic, or racist statement in all of those 20 years. Louis Farakan who loves Muammar Gadaffi(who by the way, now Obama wants to give $400,000.00 in taxpayer money to charities run by Gadaffi’s two children, this transpired in the past couple of days, since Gadaffi came here.
And who can leave out, that wonderful specimen of a human being, George Soros. At the age of 14, was stealing from the Hungarian Jews, while they were being taken to Concentration Camps, by the way he has no regrets, actually, he said that is when his character was made, here is the link:
http://www.asininity.com/archives/A2006101/
Maybe one of these situations alone doesn’t mean much, but when you add them all up, it all comes together. If you still don’t believe something isn’t right here, again you prove Hitler’s statement about the “Big Lie.” You don’t have to believe me, I’m just giving you and others information. What you do with it is up to you. You can use it to become informed, or you can keep believing someone who I think is totally out for his own gain and power, and I think has zero conscience, Obama. History and crime through the years is littered with criminals and victims, just like Obama, sociopath’s who have no conscience. They aren’t like other people, because they lack empathy for others. They speak of empathy, but their actions show different. That is why they are so dangerous. They say one thing, while their actions are showing something totally different.
Gadaffi, just gave a big heros welcome to the man who planted the bomb on the Pan Am jet that killed hundreds of Americans and others in Lockerbie. Obama of course acted totally indegnent about the whole thing. We found out later, Obama knew this was going to happen, but feigned outrage. And no one in the so called main stream press, find this unsettling? Now he is giving, your money and mine to Gadaffi’s two children for their charities. I don’t know about you, but this isn’t the act of a true American, who wants the best for this country and its citizens.
But go ahead, you and others including people in the press, including FOX news can keep their heads firmly planted in the sand, for fear of being called a racist!
I’m a racist, and the new sense and proud of it. Maybe you can just call it, good old fashion survival instinct. I’ll trust my own God given instinct, that all is not well with Obama and those who surround him, before I will Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, or Brian Williams of NBC, the National Barack Channel.
misanthropicus — But the primaries are over, the political landscape has changed, and not to better – shouldn’t we try to correct the course, particularly now when it has became clearer that something is amiss on the command deck?
Obama has much to lose and little to gain by releasing his birth certificate if it lists his race as “White”. Right now most people don’t know much about the controversy since the legacy media has no interest in reporting much about it except that some of the same people who are prominent in the Truther movement are also prominent in the Birther movement. That may see unfair to you but that does not change things.
Secondly, as you point out, there are a lot of Obama voters who are experiencing buyer’s remorse now that it is clear that something is amiss on the command deck. The thing is that people don’t like to admit that they were wrong. If they can find something to latch onto that allows them to believe that Obama fooled them into voting for him, many of the people who voted for Obama are likely to jump on that as an excuse to abandon him and his poll numbers would be way less than 50% in short order.
A significant number of people voted for Obama on the grounds that “Wouldn’t it be cool to vote for a Black man as president to prove that I am not racist and if he were elected it would put an end to racial turmoil in this country for all time.” If they have paid any attention over the last nine months, they might have noticed that it hasn’t worked out that way. Even if they voted for Obama, they are still called racist if they disagree with him.
You’re truly correct with this blog post…