Main Menu

Bad Obama

I don’t spend much time criticizing Barack Obama – there are many people who do that for a living. Nevertheless, I have to say something here, directed at Obama for America (the Obama campaign organization).

You may be familiar with the birther joke told off hand by Mitt Romney’s son Matt. You can read that story with video clip here at the CBS News web site. It was, in my view, a legitimate joke albeit only mildly funny.

My problem is the Obama campaign jumping on it in an email from campaign manager Jim Messina to supporters that said:

This is how the Romney campaign thinks it’s going to win the Republican primary: by pandering to the dead-ender fringe of extremists who still question where the president was born.

Gimme a break.

99 Responses to Bad Obama

  1. avatar
    G January 2, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    I’m with you. Unnecessary over-reaction phrasing it that way.

    All they had to do is stick with treating it as humour and and responding in kind with a simple humourous reminder that the BC mugs & shirts are still on sale. That’s a simpler and lighter way to legitimately raise campaign money without having to go a fear-mongering route.

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 12:45 am #

    I believe I am correct in saying that Obama ran more negative ads in 2008 than any previous presidential candidate. (McCain had a higher percentage of negative ads, but he didn’t have as much money.) People who know a lot more than I do seem to think that going negative is necessary to win. That doesn’t make me like it any better.

    G: I’m with you. Unnecessary over-reaction phrasing it that way.

  3. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 1:06 am #

    I’m not sure about the statistics and don’t like to leap to such assumptions without confirming the data first, so I’m not going to comment on the first part of your statement except to say that I’m skeptical that would be a fair characterization of 2008.

    I’m with you on the 2nd part. In general, I don’t like negative campaigning, but I also accept and understand the reality of it and why it happens.

    More importantly, I think there is a legitmate distinction between negative campaigning which points out truths or calls out an opponent’s hypocricy and ads that cross the line and are intentional misreprentations of someone’s words, statements or positions.

    The first type I really don’t have a problem with and is arguably important to call attention to the truth.

    The second type, which unfortunately happens to often, really offends me and I will just as quickly condemn a campaign I support for crossing that line as anyone. In summary, I don’t mind targeted criticism as long as it is true.

    Dr. Conspiracy: I believe I am correct in saying that Obama ran more negative ads in 2008 than any previous presidential candidate. (McCain had a higher percentage of negative ads, but he didn’t have as much money.) People who know a lot more than I do seem to think that going negative is necessary to win. That doesn’t make me like it any better.

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 1:29 am #

    Here’s the data.

    http://wiscadproject.wisc.edu/download.php

    See also: NY Times and Politico.com

    G: I’m not sure about the statistics and don’t like to leap to such assumptions without confirming the data first, so I’m not going to comment on the first part of your statement except to say that I’m skeptical that would be a fair characterization of 2008.

  5. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 1:32 am #

    I agree, and I should have made that distinction.

    G: More importantly, I think there is a legitimate distinction between negative campaigning which points out truths or calls out an opponent’s hypocrisy and ads that cross the line and are intentional misrepresentations of someone’s words, statements or positions.

  6. avatar
    GeorgetownJD January 3, 2012 at 1:41 am #

    I have absolutely no problem with the way that the Obama campaign handled the bad joke by Romney’s son. If the Romney campaign cannot stay on message there is nothing wrong with exploiting it with a humorous jab and a round of fundraising. You can bet Romney would have done the same had the tables been turned.

  7. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 2:15 am #

    Thanks for that! I found the NY Times article to be really good at giving me the gist of the answers in its proper context.

    As you correctly pointed out, Obama’s campaign was simply the largest in history, so the sheer volume he spent in advertising is one for the record books on its face. Therefore, that is a key factor to be kept in context on any further comparisons.

    The problem with the Politico article you referenced is that they seem to ignore that context and simply equivocate that both campaigns are “even” in their negative ads, because both campaigns had produced nearly the same total number of negative ads agaist the other in their time/place analysis.

    At least the NYT is smart enough to bring the dimension of total size comparison of the advertising campaigns into the perspective. Sadly, by failing to do so, Politico just ends up contributing to the false equivocation memes out there.

    That would be akin to someone saying that both you and Bill Gates spent $1000 on charity last year. (just making up a scenario here to make a point). In other words, without presenting BOTH dimensions of numbers as well as relative proportional representation, you simply don’t get a true and honest picture of how the comparisons line up. ( I realize I’m preaching to the choir here and you totally understand the argument and dynmics at play…but I feel that this point was a bit understated in your original post and could easily be missed by other readers.)

    So yes, as the NYT article better illustrated, when you compare the portion of each campaign’s ads that were positive (focused on the candidate themselves) or negative (criticizing their opponent), it was clear that McCain was more worried about his position and therefore relied on a much more negative campaign strategy.

    The study found that the bulk of McCain’s campaign ads were negative and that Obama had a more mixed portfolio of attacking McCain and also providing positive ads touting his campaign themes.

    Then again, I wouldn’t read too much into that either as being anything unexpected or atypical in how politics simply works. Obama pretty much was the “front runner” for most of that race. It is not unusual for the challenger (McCain) to spend a more concerted effort trying to attack his opponent.

    There is also a fair argument to make that if your platform ideas are truly superior, you have more incentive to promote them and that if you can’t compete on that front, all you can do is hope to bring the other canidate down…

    Then again, political platforms are often a combination of running *for* certain things as well as running *against* certain ideas or policies…so a certain amount of even selling your message and platform will involve negative campaigning in order to point out that contrast.

    When we look towards 2012, all prognosticators have been predicting for quite some time now that we will probably see the most brutal and negative campaign we have ever seen in our lifetimes.

    As I said before, I’m pretty resigned to that being the reality and will only take issue or be bothered by it when a campaign goes beyond legitimate criticisms or opinion/worldview differences and intentionally distorts, lies or manipulate’s other’s words in a clearly deceptive out-of-context fashion.

    …Sadly, I suspect there will be a number of these situations to take issue with…

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Here’s the data.

    http://wiscadproject.wisc.edu/download.php

    See also: NY Times and Politico.com

  8. avatar
    Lupin January 3, 2012 at 3:29 am #

    All well and good, but ultimately isn’t the point made by the Obama campaign correct?

    Hasn’t the Romney campaign acted to increase its appeal to the lunatic right?

  9. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 3:44 am #

    In a broader sense yes, most certainly. But in terms of actually pandering to birthers…no.

    Lupin:
    All well and good, but ultimately isn’t the point made by the Obama campaign correct?

    Hasn’t the Romney campaign acted to increase its appeal to the lunatic right?

  10. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 8:53 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I believe I am correct in saying that Obama ran more negative ads in 2008 than any previous presidential candidate. (McCain had a higher percentageof negative ads, but he didn’t have as much money.) People who know a lot more than I do seem to think that going negative is necessary to win. That doesn’t make me like it any better.

    on this we agree my good doctor. this is an example of the over reaction overacting i began to pick up on 4/27. i believe the birther issue is unique to american history. i believe that obama is hiding something, we all disagree on what.

    the level of reaction and ridicule always seemed unnecessary to me , as a musician maybe i have a special sensitivity (my dad called “rabbit ears”). (recognising fake it till you make it)

    the press is complicit in their attempts to want to help obama.

    but i still argue that this is going to be an issue in the campaign. that one teeny little message (i’m not sure it was a joke) evoked a real surprising reaction. i say the topic is molten lave beneath the surface. if it comes up and the issue is properly vetted (as is coming), and nothing is proven, i’m willing to let it go.for now i see the reaction/the subject as democrat defcon 1. birtherism continues to be a real threat.

    i will however continue to ask the question, why not open the vault. if he could get a special presidential waiver to get a long form, he can get the combo.
    and there is the theory he’s saving it, which may or may not be good potitics.

    either way,
    it’s going to be a hell of an election, different from the last one, i intend to enjoy the process. if romney wins the primary, i will equally mock them both (not like alan colmes mocking though). i hate the negativity and the fact that elections can more or less be bought (i wonder if the could be bought positively). people are sick of it and it renders the tv useless.

    in today’s case, i think the polls are way off in iowa (land line small sample groups as in the case of rasmussen). iowans are smart people, and will turn away from the obnoxious maniacal repitition of romney pacs (i hope). it’s all becoming so howard beal.

  11. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 9:14 am #

    I don’t think so. If the Romney campaign were really trying to pander to the birthers then they would have done something more than an unlikely rebroadcast of an off-hand remark by a family that was immediately disavowed by another family member.

    Lupin: All well and good, but ultimately isn’t the point made by the Obama campaign correct?

  12. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2012 at 9:18 am #

    bernadineayers: i believe that obama is hiding something, we all disagree on what.

    No, “we” don’t.

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 9:19 am #

    I found the CBS News article I quoted in the article to be critical of Obama. I won’t deny that many members of the press support Obama but many go out of their way to criticize him as I found in my analysis of coverage last time around.

    bernadineayers: the press is complicit in their attempts to want to help obama.

  14. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2012 at 9:22 am #

    bernadineayers: i will however continue to ask the question, why not open the vault. if he could get a special presidential waiver to get a long form, he can get the combo.

    Your nonsense assertion about the “vault” has been explained to you here recently and repeatedly.

    Your continued attitude to be obstinate defines your posts as trolling and asinine.

  15. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 9:23 am #

    Majority Will: No, “we” don’t.

    yes we can.ok more like we disagree on “whether or not”… point taken will.
    you think he is pure, i don’t.

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 9:24 am #

    Well with a number like 41% undecided, it’s hard to be sure of the outcome in advance. However, Romney won Iowa once and I lean towards believing it will happen again.

    bernadineayers: in today’s case, i think the polls are way off in iowa (land line small sample groups as in the case of rasmussen).

  17. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I found the CBS News article I quoted in the article to be critical of Obama. I won’t deny that many members of the presssupport Obama but many go out of their way to criticize him as I found in my analysis of coverage last time around.

    consider this:

    Dope Slap: Romney’s son went there. He brought up the birth certificate. Seriously, I thought we were done with this ridiculousness. Criticize President Obama all you want for his governing and policy decisions, but questions of his birth never should have and still shouldn’t be a part of public discourse. They’re a distraction from the real issues at hand. In fact, that’s exactly what Matt Romney was doing when he made his little wisecrack — deflecting from his father’s unwillingness to make his tax returns public.

    Matt, the second of Romney’s five sons, said he “heard that someone suggested” Romney might release his tax returns if Obama releases his birth certificate. The gaffe was passed off as a joke, but it wasn’t a funny one; it was just stupid. And more importantly, why doesn’t Romney release his tax returns?

    to me this reeks of fake it till you make it spin. especially where the “bad joke” turns into a call for the romney taxes. i think both documents will be held hostage. i think, in the interest of the american people, it’s a fair exchange. transparency.

    how do you feel about the media? in my mind they are competing to be the stars, that’s histrionic behavior.

  18. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 9:29 am #

    that’s from boston.com btw
    http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/blogs/thenextgreatgeneration/2012/01/high-fives_and_dope_slaps_poli.html

  19. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 9:31 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Well with a number like 41% undecided, it’s hard to be sure of the outcome in advance. However, Romney won Iowa once and I lean towards believing it will happen again.

    i’m not sure they are all even playing for first, given iowa’s history. that could be superstition.

  20. avatar
    Wile E. January 3, 2012 at 9:43 am #

    G:
    I’m with you.Unnecessary over-reaction phrasing it that way.

    All they had to do is stick with treating it as humour and and responding in kind with a simple humourous reminder that the BC mugs & shirts are still on sale.That’s a simpler and lighter way to legitimately raise campaign money without having to go a fear-mongering route.

    I agree that Mr. Messina’s characterization of this was heavy-handed, but some push-back was totally called for because this “Obama is hiding something” meme is going to continue. I think their Twitter response hit a more appropriate tone…

    http://twitter.com/#!/BarackObama/status/152820145574780928

    Perhaps they could have orchestrated a humorous “BC Mug Bomb” in which they urged their supporters order mugs and have them delivered to Matt’s law office.

    It should be noted that Matt is not some high school kid helping out his father’s campaign, but rather a Harvard educated lawyer. He should have known better than to try and deflect the original question with such a knee-jerk and toxic “joke”.

    Also, Doc… I’m curious as to why you would consider his “joke” legitimate. Do you feel that calls for Romney to disclose his tax returns are in the same category as calls for Obama to disclose his grades?

  21. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2012 at 9:50 am #

    bernadineayers: i think both documents will be held hostage.

    No, you don’t think. You troll.

    Here: http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

  22. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2012 at 9:55 am #

    bernadineayers: yes we can.okmore like we disagree on “whether or not”… point taken will.you think he is pure, i don’t.

    I didn’t say anyone was pure. You are lying about what I have stated which is the spin you hypocritically accuse of others.

  23. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 10:02 am #

    Majority Will: I didn’t say anyone was pure. You are lying about what I have stated which is the spin you hypocritically accuse of others.

    man, you are so defensive. you think he’s honest, is that fair ??

  24. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2012 at 10:11 am #

    Wile E.: I agree that Mr. Messina’s characterization of this was heavy-handed, but some push-back was totally called for because this “Obama is hiding something” meme is going to continue.I think their Twitter response hit a more appropriate tone…

    http://twitter.com/#!/BarackObama/status/152820145574780928

    Perhaps they could have orchestrated a humorous “BC Mug Bomb” in which they urged their supporters order mugs and have them delivered to Matt’s law office.

    It should be noted that Matt is not some high school kid helping out his father’s campaign, but rather a Harvard educated lawyer.He should have known better than to try and deflect the original question with such a knee-jerk and toxic “joke”.

    Also, Doc… I’m curious as to why you would consider his “joke” legitimate.Do you feel that calls for Romney to disclose his tax returns are in the same category as calls for Obama to disclose his grades?

    The BC Mug Bomb is a great idea. Send a dozen each to lying birther idiots, Cashill, Corsi and Taitz. Or better yet, send them to their favorite restaurants and hangouts.

  25. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 10:42 am #

    Majority Will: The BC Mug Bomb is a great idea. Send a dozen each to lying birther idiots, Cashill, Corsi and Taitz. Or better yet, send them to their favorite restaurants and hangouts.

    man, if this post were on my site i’d get a visit from the secret service… just saying.

    i agree with the assessment “knee jerk and toxic”. to that i would add spontaneous.

    it show’s it’s beneath the surface and people are talking about it.

    why are you all in denial even about this issue being dead ? i don’t see how you can be in the business of promotion about a controversy that doesn’t exist…

    i think that’s a fair question.

    wait till trump shows up again. chuck todd asked him point blank about his “obsession with birtherism”… he didn’t flinch.

  26. avatar
    katahdin January 3, 2012 at 11:42 am #

    If you expect Trump to be your savior, you’re going to be sitting in your pumpkin patch for a long, long time.

    bernadineayers: wait till trump shows up again

  27. avatar
    Arthur January 3, 2012 at 11:49 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Well with a number like 41% undecided, it’s hard to be sure of the outcome in advance. However, Romney won Iowa once and I lean towards believing it will happen again.

    Romney might win the caucuses tonight, but unless you count his straw poll victory back in 2007, Romney has not won an actual election in Iowa. In the August 2007 straw poll, Romney was first and Mike Huckabee second. In the 2008 Republican caucuses, Mike Huckabee won with 34% of the vote, and Romney came in second, with 25% (about where he’s been polling for the last several months).

    This year, Romney did terribly in the Iowa straw poll, coming in 7th, gathering under 4% of the vote. On the other hand, Michele Bachman was first, and Ron Paul was second. If history is a guide, Ron Paul will win the caucuses tonight, because either the first or second place winner in the poll takes the caucus vote (Michele Bachman’s campaign is in disarray and her support has dropped to 7%).

    So I’m projecting victory for Ron Paul in the Iowa caucuses.

  28. avatar
    nbc January 3, 2012 at 12:03 pm #

    bernadineayers: why are you all in denial even about this issue being dead ? i don’t see how you can be in the business of promotion about a controversy that doesn’t exist…

    The issue is not dead for a few people and we are having great fun with them. But really, for the 2012 elections, the issue is a non-issue.

  29. avatar
    nbc January 3, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    Majority Will: bernadineayers: i believe that obama is hiding something, we all disagree on what.

    No, “we” don’t.

    Berna(r)dine, you believe, without much supporting evidence, reason, fact or logic that President Obama is ‘hiding something’. So far, you have failed to provide anything beyond factfree speculation. We can all agree on that?

  30. avatar
    Lupin January 3, 2012 at 12:10 pm #

    Me, I honestly don’t think it’s such a big deal.

    Mitt has just been quoted as saying:

    “I think president Obama wants to make us a European style welfare state, where instead of being a merit society we’re an entitlement society, where government’s role is to take from some and give to others.”

    First, obviously going BOOGA BOOGA YURP “sells” to his crowd. This is rather sad, really.

    Two, obviously, it is the BANKS’ role to take from some and give to themselves.

  31. avatar
    nbc January 3, 2012 at 12:10 pm #

    bernadineayers: the press is complicit in their attempts to want to help obama.

    There you go again with unfounded, generalizations… Sigh…

    Fascinating how little you seem to be affected by the need to establish a foundation for your world beliefs…

  32. avatar
    Arthur January 3, 2012 at 12:26 pm #

    katahdin:

    Are you in some way suggesting that the Great Trumpkin is not REAL?? How DARE
    you! Children read this blog, you know!

    katahdin: If you expect Trump to be your savior, you’re going to be sitting in your pumpkin patch for a long, long time.

  33. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 12:29 pm #

    nbc: The issue is not dead for a few people and we are having great fun with them. But really, for the 2012 elections, the issue is a non-issue.

    please define “a few people”. you seem to work in cliche’ n.

    “trump as a savior”, interesting choice of words. kat.

    my foundation is still doubt, certain questions can’t be answered. i think that’s why the issue won’t die, not just because birthers amuse you. there has to be more to it than that.

  34. avatar
    J. Potter January 3, 2012 at 12:33 pm #

    bernadineayers: there has to be more to it than that.

    There does? LOL! How simple of you.

  35. avatar
    richCares January 3, 2012 at 12:38 pm #

    please define “a few people”.
    well the last birther rally had 29 people show up, that;’s few

  36. avatar
    JD Reed January 3, 2012 at 12:45 pm #

    bernadineayers ,,, hiding something? where? how? “Please tell us that you have something beyond the totally debunked claim that Mr. Obama signed an executive order his first day in office sealing his personal records. A TOTAL LIE. Please tell us that you have real compelling evidence that would stand up in a court of law that would cast doubr on Mr. Obama’s official birth records. Without such, the Hawaiian officials’ authentication of Mr. Obama’s birth there stands
    legally unassailable. Birthers have absolutley no legal or moral right to demand a peek at the vault copy.
    Godot will arrive before that happens.

  37. avatar
    richCares January 3, 2012 at 12:45 pm #

    “wait till trump shows up again.”
    why, the last time he showed up he was made a laughing stock, is he a mutton for punishment

  38. avatar
    nbc January 3, 2012 at 12:49 pm #

    bernadineayers: please define “a few people”. you seem to work in cliche’ n.

    Now that is ironic… The issue is dead outside the tea party ‘minded’ groups who thoroughly hate President Obama and what they believe he stands for. They are irrelevant to the elections. Amongst undecided, the issue is of little relevance. If you believe that this is going to be an election issue, then you will be quite disappointed (again).

    my foundation is still doubt, certain questions can’t be answered.

    Doubt in your mind and irrelevant questions that you believe cannot be answered… Who really cares?

  39. avatar
    sfjeff January 3, 2012 at 12:59 pm #

    bernadineayers:. i believe that obama is hiding something, we all disagree on what.

    but i still argue that this is going to be an issue in the campaign. that one teeny little message (i’m not sure it was a joke) evoked a real surprising reaction. i say the topic is molten lave beneath the surface. if it comes up and the issue is properly vetted (as is coming), and nothing is proven, i’m willing to let it go.for now i see the reaction/the subject as democrat defcon 1. birtherism continues to be a real threat.

    i will however continue to ask the question, why not open the vault. if he could get a special presidential waiver to get a long form, he can get the combo.
    and there is the theory he’s saving it, which may or may not be good potitics.
    either way,

    it’s going to be a hell of an election, different from the last one, i intend to enjoy the process. if romney wins the primary, i will equally mock them both (not like alan colmes mocking though). i hate the negativity and the fact that elections can more or less be bought (i wonder if the could be bought positively). people are sick of it and it renders the tv useless.
    .

    Wash- you start of with three completely unsupportive negative speculations- and then end with saying how you ‘hate the negativity’.

    Seriously? I sometimes have difficulty in figuring out when you are mocking yourself, but when you start off with going completely negative- passing on once again unsupported negative speculation and then decry negativity….was this a failed attempt at humor or just an example of how you get confused?

  40. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 1:45 pm #

    Just be clear, I find the joke legitimate as a joke, not as a condition for his father to release tax returns. It’s funny because the condition is ridiculous. In context, Matt was repeating a joke someone told him anyhow.

    Wile E.: Also, Doc… I’m curious as to why you would consider his “joke” legitimate. Do you feel that calls for Romney to disclose his tax returns are in the same category as calls for Obama to disclose his grades?

  41. avatar
    J. Potter January 3, 2012 at 1:54 pm #

    nbc: bernadineayers: the press is complicit in their attempts to want to help obama.

    That Fox News is one heck of a reverse psychology op!

  42. avatar
    Judge Mental January 3, 2012 at 1:56 pm #

    bernadineayers: please define “a few people”. you seem to work in cliche’ n.“trump as a savior”, interesting choice of words. kat.my foundation is still doubt, certain questions can’t be answered. i think that’s why the issue won’t die, not just because birthers amuse you. there has to be more to it than that.

    Which questions relevant to eligibility do you think “can’t be answered”?

  43. avatar
    Wile E. January 3, 2012 at 2:32 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Just be clear, I find the joke legitimate as a joke, not as a condition for his father to release tax returns. It’s funny because the condition is ridiculous. In context, Matt was repeating a joke someone told him anyhow.

    When I first saw a video of this (which was before Matt’s maiden Tweet that it was a joke), it didn’t come across as a joke to me at all…mainly because it lacked the essential elements of a joke–most notably, it wasn’t funny. I think if it was intended as a joke, the other brother who stepped in to cover for Matt would have said something like, “That was just a joke.”, and not simply stress that it wasn’t his father who said it.

    I’m more inclined to think that Matt’s ham-fisted attempted at a rejoinder was something he had heard one of his friend’s or family say during a conversation about whether or not his dad would disclose his tax returns…and he thought it sounded like a swell retort.

    Once backstage, his brothers –much to their credit– probably laid into him about publicly advancing something so stupid, and he was pressured into opening a Twitter account so that he could try to distance himself from his foolish remark as fast a possible….by simply claiming it was a joke.

    As always, I could be wrong…just my take on it.

  44. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 2:41 pm #

    The secret service is only tasked with protecting birthers if they are the President, Vice President, visiting heads of state and stuff like that. Plus they only go after credible threats. That was obviously a joke.

    bernadineayers: man, if this post were on my site i’d get a visit from the secret service… just saying.

  45. avatar
    Wile E. January 3, 2012 at 2:55 pm #

    J. Potter: That Fox News is one heck of a reverse psychology op!

    Murdoch is one wascally manipulator.

    Reminds me of one of the belly-button lint hoarders on my local internet board with whom I occasionally exchange pleasantries. He had been hoarding ammo in the months leading up to Obama’s inauguration. When I ask him where all the anti-gun legislation laws are that were supposed to be inevitable with Obama in office…he claims that the reason Obama hasn’t done it yet is because he is tricking us into electing him again and the second term is when all the bad stuff is gonna happen.

  46. avatar
    misha January 3, 2012 at 2:59 pm #

    bernadineayers: molten lave

    ‘Lave’ is to wash one’s hands. Molten lave woud be to wash one’s hands with a bar of Lava soap.

    bernadineayers: it’s all becoming so howard beal.

    So you’re not going to take it anymore? Also, on a scale of 1 – 10, how mad are you?

    bernadineayers: i will however continue to ask the question, why not open the vault.

    Why won’t Glenn Beck release his criminal record abstract, showing it is stamped “subject has clear record to date”?

  47. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 3:17 pm #

    I’m going to assume you are referring to the 2007 Iowa Ames Straw Poll.

    In that summer straw poll, Romney did indeed win that conteest with 32%.

    (The rest of the high placements were: in second, Mike Huckabee (18%); third, Sam Brownback (15%); fourth, Tom Tancredo (14%), and fifth, Ron Paul (10%). )

    Mitt Romney ran a very dedicated campaign in Iowa in 2008 and poured a ton of money into that state.

    However, the actual Caucus results were different and awarded Mike Huckabee 1st place with 34% that year.

    Romney was still able to come in 2nd, with 25% of the vote. It should be noted that the eventual nominee, McCain, came in 4th with 13%. (Fred Thompson placed 3rd with 13.4%). Ron Paul came in 5th that year with 9.93%.

    This year, Michele Bachmann won the 2011 Ames Straw Poll with 28.6%.

    Ron Paul came in close 2nd with 27.7%.
    Tim Pawlenty was a distant third with 13.6% and dropped out of the race as a result.
    Rick Santorum came in 4th, with 9.8%.
    Herman Cain had 8.6% for 5th.
    Rick Perry didn’t enter the race until the next day, but he still came in 6th in the poll as a write-in with 4.3%
    The previous Ames Straw Poll winner, Mitt Romney, only came in 7th place, with 3.4%.
    Newt Gingrich was 8th place with 2.3% and Jon Huntsman was 9th, with 0.4%.
    Thaddeus McCotter rounded out 10th place with only 0.2% (35 votes) and dropped out of the race on Sept 22nd after being unable to get any traction.

    Dr. Conspiracy: However, Romney won Iowa once and I lean towards believing it will happen again.

  48. avatar
    J. Potter January 3, 2012 at 3:56 pm #

    Wile E.: … the reason Obama hasn’t done it yet is because he is tricking us into electing him again and the second term is when all the bad stuff is gonna happen.

    Here’s hoping that’s exactly what does happen! I hope he does all sorts of evil things. Things like rolling back financial deregulation, instituting real credit and banking reforms, continuing to use military resources smarter not harder, prosecute terrorists as criminal fugitives (rather than “enemies”), starts calling the wingers on their indulgent reliance on scarespeak, overhauling tax rates, continues to press on green tech, environmental regs, addresses public works (americans rebuilding america (duh.)), and somehow manages to purge “family values” from governmental discourse.

    I hope he makes your friends heads explode, and leaves them gnash the remains of their teeth between their gums.

  49. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 3:59 pm #

    nbc: Now that is ironic… The issue is dead outside the tea party minded’ groups who thoroughly hate President Obama and what they believe he stands for. They are irrelevant to the elections. Amongst undecided, the issue is of little relevance. If you believe that this is going to be an election issue, then you will be quite disappointed (again).

    Doubt in your mind and irrelevant questions that you believe cannot be answered… Who really cares?

    i do, and i’m just as american as you are.

  50. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:06 pm #

    misha: ‘Lave’ is to wash one’s hands. Molten lave woud be to wash one’s hands with a bar of Lava soap.

    So you’re not going to take it anymore? Also, on a scale of 1 – 10, how mad are you?

    Why won’t Glenn Beck release his criminal record abstract, showing it is stamped “subject has clear record to date”?

    i don’t type that well.

  51. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:10 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The secret service is only tasked with protecting birthers if they are the President, Vice President, visiting heads of state and stuff like that. Plus they only go after credible threats. That was obviously a joke.

    disclaimer noted…

  52. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 4:11 pm #

    The media has been this way for quite some time. Nothing unusual there. Our media stopped being solid journalism and moved to sensationalized info-tainment a few decades ago.

    bernadineayers: how do you feel about the media? in my mind they are competing to be the stars, that’s histrionic behavior.

  53. avatar
    misha January 3, 2012 at 4:21 pm #

    bernadineayers: i don’t type that well.

    That’s for sure.

  54. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 4:21 pm #

    While the article was entertaining, you do understand that it is merely an opinion piece don’t you? Nothing unusual there, as most of the cable news time is spent more on talking head punditry than actual straight reporting. Print journalism has always had a lot of clear editorial and opinion pieces as well. It really is not different from people touting their own opinions all over the internet all the time. Most blogs are opinion blogs.

    So I’m not sure what point you are making whatsoever at all, other than simply noting the story was reported and some people, like that writer, consider even joking about the topic of Birtherism to be below the belt. If anything, that reflects just how poorly Birtherism is viewed in the public.

    I found the story of Scott Brown to be more interesting. Now that he’s faced with a re-election and a strong opponent, he is predictably shifting his stances and behaviors back towards the middle and towards compromise. Nothing unexpected there either. He is after all running for re-election in MA, so he was expected to make that political calculation to help his re-election regardless. But I find it noteworthy, because the very dynamics of his desire to be re-elected might be enough to stop some of this unnecessary gridlock and let the Senate accomplish more this year. That is good for the country.

    bernadineayers:
    that’s from boston.com btw
    http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/blogs/thenextgreatgeneration/2012/01/high-fives_and_dope_slaps_poli.html

  55. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    Judge Mental: Which questions relevant to eligibility do you think “can’t be answered”?

    i’m going to give one example for now (ockham’s razoe): frank arduni is hands down the smartest guy i’ve encountered on the interneton this subject, he is wildly smart. but a challenge was made to him

    http://www.wnd.com/2011/08/329221/

    Neither Arduini nor Davidson have demonstrated an ability to replicate what is observed in the Obama birth certificate PDF by scanning a document and utilizing optimization techniques.

    i emailed jerry corsi this morning to ask again first hand if frank had accomplished this simple test.

    now, when i was at political forum, i had extensive q and a’s with wong. i asked him six times to respond to this specific challenge, even way before he put me on ignore.

    now when it comes to birtherism, this guy buries all of us, i spotted him my first day as a pro (red flag). there are other things that frank has said thati think contradict general birther anti birther theory.

    it’s all in the archives at pf. so why can a guy with wong’s ego not prove such a simple point, when i think it’s the first thing he would d,o so he could gloat and rub in our faces, he’s very condescending.

    why has frank arduini rejected this basic challenge??

    this is one of the things i can’t get explained, there are many others, (like the way the birth certificate is framed in it’s own paper, and why is the ap copy blue.

  56. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:31 pm #

    misha: That’s for sure.

    i mean, i’m disabled

  57. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:34 pm #

    G:
    The media has been this way for quite some time.Nothing unusual there.Our media stopped being solid journalism and moved to sensationalized info-tainment a few decades ago.

    i agree. at some point the press in the white house preceeded every question with two minutes of editorialising. from there it degenerated to alan colmes. the fifth piller

  58. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 4:38 pm #

    J. Potter: That Fox News is one heck of a reverse psychology op!

    this may be the understatement of the election season

  59. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2012 at 4:41 pm #

    Corsi is not being honest when he says that. What I demonstrated is scanning a document and using optimization techniques created layers in the PDF document including many of the things observed in the President’s birth certificate, and things that various WND “experts” claim where certain indications of fraud.

    However, I don’t have a copy of Obama’s original certified copy, the White House scanner, nor the Mac software he used and cannot expect to reproduce the White House PDF exactly. The point that I made is the the WND expert analysis is a fraud.

    bernadineayers: Neither Arduini nor Davidson have demonstrated an ability to replicate what is observed in the Obama birth certificate PDF by scanning a document and utilizing optimization techniques.

  60. avatar
    nbc January 3, 2012 at 4:45 pm #

    bernadineayers: Neither Arduini nor Davidson have demonstrated an ability to replicate what is observed in the Obama birth certificate PDF by scanning a document and utilizing optimization techniques.

    People have shown how scanning in the document into a PDF, depending on the settings, actually does result in layers being formed.

    See also here

    The end.

  61. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    I’m not sure whether I agree or not, as you’ve said nothing to explain what you mean by “unique”. It definitely seems to have some elements that only pertain to protesting the election of this particular president…but other elements seem to be pretty similar to other paranoid conspiracy nonsense of the past (such as McCarthyism & John Birch Society) with a healthy dose of Jim Crow “show us your papers, boy” mixed in along with unfounded rumor-mongering and yellow-journalism that has been mud-slung by opponents of Presidential candidates as long as there have been political parties in this country.

    So please, define and explain how you view it as “unique”…

    bernadineayers:
    i believe the birther issue is unique to american history.

  62. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    Yeah, we know you “belief” that. However, your “belief” so far is just an “irrational” one that you that you seem predisposed to, based on very loose correlations you draw to various scars and prejudices of your own past. The problem is, your “belief” is the very definition of a prejudice – you’ve simply started by drawing a negative conclusion and are desperate to find anything to grasp onto to justify it.

    A rational and logical worldview doesn’t work that way. The LAST step in honest assessment is arriving at a conclusion. You start with an event and evidence and then apply analysis to move forward from there. You don’t place judgment until the end of the process.

    So, what we can all agree on is that you are simply an irrational person. Whether this is just a bad habit of yours that is hard to break or you suffer from some mental defect rendering you incapable of grasping and performing rational thought remains to be seen. Just as some people are born blind, the ability for rational thought may simply be beyond your abilities.

    To your final point – NO, we do NOT all agree that he is hiding something. Nor does that mean we think he “walks on water” either. We are all human and imperfect. People will make mistakes all the time. Obama is no different. Sorry, but one’s personal rights to privacy do not qualify as “hiding” something.
    The way you say it implies being guilty of some “serious crime”. While we are all human and imperfect, most of the population doesn’t commit real crimes (let’s not deal with petty issues of speeding or other irrelevant misdemeanors).

    Your very implication is that he’s done something that would rise to the level of disqualifying someone from holding higher office or get someone put in jail. That is quite a high charge to make. So NO, many of us do NOT think he’s “hiding” anything in terms of such insinuations, whatsoever at all – and that doesn’t make him “special” or different the standard person in those regards.

    To have such a faulty mindset that “everyone must be guilty of something”…well, that usually is a sign of projection and tells more about the failings and lack of a solid moral center of behavior in the person projecting that claim. Only someone incapable of doing the right thing on their own is incapable of grasping a world full of other people that are not naturally motivated to act so irresponsibly.

    bernadineayers:
    i believe that obama is hiding something, we all disagree on what.

    the level of reaction and ridicule always seemed unnecessary to me , as a musician maybe i have a special sensitivity (my dad called “rabbit ears”). (recognising fake it till you make it)

  63. avatar
    misha January 3, 2012 at 5:02 pm #

    bernadineayers: i don’t type that well.

    bernadineayers: i mean, i’m disabled

    I apologize. I had an aneurysm which caused the worst stroke survivable. I had to relearn to walk. Penndot revoked my license, and I have to be retested. I am wholly dependent on the public sector. I have had conservatives call me a parasite. I have had people actually say that I deserve to suffer because I am not a Christian.

    When I was in Anchorage for the Iditarod, a minister in the Anchorage AoG literally said to me “Auschwitz was divine retribution because you people have refused to accept God’s only son.” A woman with him said to me Jewish people “deserve to suffer.” Palin belongs to the Wasilla AoG. I will remember that every time I go into the voting booth.

    Simply put, conservatism is ‘you’re on your own.’ There is not any private charity that can take the place of what I am dependent on, despite Ron Paul’s blathering.

    Judaism believes that to save one life, is the save the world. Christianity believes people are born with original sin, and the only way to expunge that original sin is by baptism. Christianity believes people are born inherently bad. Judaism believes people are born inherently good.

    These are the reasons I am a liberal.

    Think about that.

  64. avatar
    misha January 3, 2012 at 5:06 pm #

    misha: “Auschwitz was divine retribution because you people have refused to accept God’s only son.” A woman with him said to me Jewish people “deserve to suffer.”

    I was raised by Survivors. My mother told me her mother was saved by being hidden in a trunk in the attic. Palin and her crowd are vile.

  65. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 5:14 pm #

    Ah yes, a typical charge of media being in the tank. The standard lazy trope excuse of whiners. People just sling such accusations around all the time and then cherry-pick a few examples to back it up, while always discounting the BREADTH of similar media criticisms that cut the other way…

    Sorry, but false meme here. The only truisms that can be stated in terms of overall media behavior are along these lines:

    1. Charismatic people are better at generating good media coverage.
    2. Candidates with “momentum” get more coverage.
    3. CAUSE & EFFECT: Candidates that are better at handling and reacting to “pushback” and “challenging” questions will of course “fare better”. Simply, they are better at nipping issues in the bud or providing an answer sufficient to cause the media to move on. Those that handle things poorly, bring upon themselves further scrutiny and skepticism as a result. Typical cause/effect of how human behavior works, that is all.
    4. In general, in order to lure eyeballs and advertisers, the media tends to try to play up “controversies” and also make any election into a “horse race” and spin the dynamics or criticism to make it seem always competitive and close. There is also a lot of false equivocation that goes on in terms of going overboard to try to project “balance”.

    Obama always received criticism from certain circles in the media. You seem to forget that the #1 media in the US is Fox News Channel. They started off treating him positively, until it became clear that he was a serious challenge to HRC and therefore likely to become a Presidential nominee. From that point onwards, they have been overwhelmingly and relentlessly negative on him. This from the same channel in which it was pretty much “unpatriotic” to criticize Bush at all during his first term.

    In terms of Obama and any other president, there is always a difference between campaigning and the real hard work of governing. Rarely is there a case where an administration’s actions aren’t challenged or criticized in the media and this has always been the case in the modern era. With the exception of a pretty strong “limited criticism pass” that GWB got for a few years, post 9/11, media has always been full of criticism for Presidents, from Reagan through Obama.

    So sorry, but your charge that “the press” is helping Obama just doesn’t hold water and utterly falls apart under any serious scrutiny.

    bernadineayers:

    the press is complicit in their attempts to want to help obama.

  66. avatar
    Judge Mental January 3, 2012 at 5:20 pm #

    bernadineayers: i’m going to give one example for now (ockham’s razoe): frank arduni is hands down the smartest guy i’ve encountered on the interneton this subject, he is wildly smart. but a challenge was made to himhttp://www.wnd.com/2011/08/329221/Neither Arduini nor Davidson have demonstrated an ability to replicate what is observed in the Obama birth certificate PDF by scanning a document and utilizing optimization techniques.i emailed jerry corsi this morning to ask again first hand if frank had accomplished this simple test.now, when i was at political forum, i had extensive q and a’s with wong. i asked him six times to respond to this specific challenge, even way before he put me on ignore.now when it comes to birtherism, this guy buries all of us, i spotted him my first day as a pro (red flag). there are other things that frank has said thati think contradict general birther anti birther theory.it’s all in the archives at pf. so why can a guy with wong’s ego not prove such a simple point, when i think it’s the first thing he would d,o so he could gloat and rub in our faces, he’s very condescending.why has frank arduini rejected this basic challenge??this is one of the things i can’t get explained, there are many others, (like the way the birth certificate is framed in it’s own paper, and why is the ap copy blue.

    I asked you about which questions “relevant to eligibility” can’t be answered. Whilst I believe the ‘challenge’ question can be answered and has been answered already the simple reality is that there is absolutely nothing about analysis of the pdf image or the colour of a photocopy which is relevant to eligibility.

    Maybe you could you ask that paragon of truth and virtue Corsi if he thinks that Les Kinsolving, WND’d own birther staff reporter who sat in on the White house briefing, personally handled the actual certified, signed and sealed, copy birth certificate (not a pdf image) and who expressed the opinion that he saw no problem with it, if he thinks Kinsolving was hallucinating or just failed to notice that the certificate didn’t actually say that Obama was born at Kapiolani on 4th August 1961? Every time anyone else asks the question Corsi runs a mile and you’ll notice that Kinsolving has been conspicuous by his absence ever since.You might have more luck.

  67. avatar
    Daniel January 3, 2012 at 5:23 pm #

    Ever notice that all the media that doesn’t agree with the birther fringe are “liberal media”?

    Ever notice that Judges are only “activist” or “legislating from the bench” when THEY lose?

  68. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

    Puh-lease! Just like everything step along the campaign, all the small “gaffes” garner some bit of attention. The amount of coverage on the lame Birther joke has been pretty light in comparison with all the other twists and turns in the campaign. It is barely a blip. Michelle Bachmann’s minor gaffe about confusing the birthplace of John Wayne Gacy got way more coverage and heat than that!

    Yes, just about everyone in the nation is aware of Birthers. Trump particularly made quite a media splash with it last year. What you seem to fail to grasp is the overwhelming reaction – it is a “poison” topic and a bad joke. It gets coverage because it is a point of embarrassment and engenders overwhelming disdain, not support. Birther talking points get the same type of reaction as a loud fart in church or someone using the N word. It gets some attention because society recoils from the idea of it.

    Again, all this shows is the limitations of your confirmation bias mindset and how desperately you have to grasp at cherry-picking irrelevant crumbs out of context in order to sustain your delusions.

    The topic will continue to come up this year, because the same small set of die-hard Birthers is desperate to do anything they can to prevent Obama’s re-election and it happens to be an election year.

    Just because your fringe movement has activity doesn’t have any correlation to a gain in size nor increase their chances of success. Sorry.

    bernadineayers:
    but i still argue that this is going to be an issue in the campaign. that one teeny little message (i’m not sure it was a joke) evoked a real surprising reaction. i say the topic is molten lave beneath the surface.

    All that might be coming is that this election opens a legitimate window for a court case that contests ballot access, based on an opposing candidate that finally meets the minimum standing threshold. Many of us are expecting that at some point in this cycle, that will happen.

    However, this is likely to simply result in the defense submitting a certified COLB as evidence and that is all that would be needed to end the case right there. Simple application of Full Faith and Credit on prima facie evidence and that is end of story.

    Sorry, but there is no “Defcon” here at all. Birtherism is a failed zombie movement and will remain that way for a simple reason – it simply has no underlying basis in law, fact, evidence nor reality. Without that, it was doomed from the start. Fantasizing and wishing isn’t going to change that Scott.

    The only threat is if any of these nuts crosses the line and tries to commit an act of violence.

    bernadineayers:
    if it comes up and the issue is properly vetted (as is coming), and nothing is proven, i’m willing to let it go.for now i see the reaction/the subject as democrat defcon 1. birtherism continues to be a real threat.

  69. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 5:47 pm #

    You’ve already been given the answer of why the vault can’t be opened several times. You simply don’t like the answer, so you refuse to listen and you just try to ignore the answers.

    Therefore, you are not worth answering on this anymore except to call you out for intentional Concern Trolling again.

    You’re whole line of questioning on this has been completely answered and debunked several times, so you are just intentionally a liar when you keep bringing up this same issue, without addressing the answers you’ve been repeatedly given.

    If you persist in dishonest behavior like this, Dr. C. will stop letting you post here.

    bernadineayers:

    i will however continue to ask the question, why not open the vault. if he could get a special presidential waiver to get a long form, he can get the combo.
    and there is the theory he’s saving it, which may or may not be good potitics.

  70. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 5:48 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Corsi is not being honest when he says that. What I demonstrated is scanning a document and using optimization techniques created layers in the PDF document including many of the things observed in the President’s birth certificate, and things that various WND “experts” claim where certain indications of fraud.

    However, I don’t have a copy of Obama’s original certified copy, the White House scanner, nor the Mac software he used and cannot expect to reproduce the White House PDF exactly. The point that I made is the the WND expert analysis is a fraud.

    ok how come you can prove it’s genuine and i can’t question it’s authenticity ? i talked to ivan zatkovitch on may 2nd. what about fox’s jean-claude tremblay and that fiasco.
    kevin riddle me this riddle me that. why is one green and the other blue ? are you and frank going to be at the gillar debate standing behind john woodman ?? ?

  71. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 5:56 pm #

    misha:
    I apologize. I had an aneurysm which caused the worst stroke survivable. I had to relearn to walk. Penndot revoked my license, and I have to be retested. I am wholly dependent on the public sector. I have had conservatives call me a parasite. I have had people actually say that I deserve to suffer because I am not a Christian.

    When I was in Anchorage for the Iditarod, a minister in the Anchorage AoG literally said to me “Auschwitz was divine retribution because you people have refused to accept God’s only son.” A woman with him said to me Jewish people “deserve to suffer.” Palin belongs to the Wasilla AoG. I will remember that every time I go into the voting booth.

    Simply put, conservatism is ‘you’re on your own.’ There is not any private charity that can take the place of what I am dependent on, despite Ron Paul’s blathering.

    Judaism believes that to save one life, is the save the world. Christianity believes people are born with original sin, and the only way to expunge that original sin is by baptism. Christianity believes people are born inherently bad. Judaism believes people are born inherently good.

    These are the reasons I am a liberal.

    Think about that.

    thanks misha, i’m not a monster. i have had digital paralysis and my eyesight is lousy, usually i go back and edit when it’s more clear. but there is no doing that here. everybody’s got something, some liability, some anchor, but they tend to blossom in other areas.
    i am not that far apart with anyone on this board (possible exception sfjeff)
    i can communicate well and we all need to talk, that’s why i’m here.
    can we all agree to check the anger at the door ? i’m not afraid here because i sense intelligence, and i like your leader’s style.

  72. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 6:01 pm #

    It definitely is the most “anything can happen” scenario in this scale of an election that I’ve seen in my lifetime! Regardless of where you fit on the poltiical spectrum, it is a fascinating race to follow!

    An important bit of info I learned today was that only 3 campaigns were providing transportation to help get their voters to the Caucus – Romney, Paul and Perry. I assume that it really comes down to those being the only campaigns that could afford to do so, but when turnout of your own supporters is such a key factor and senior citizens are such an important voting block… providing transportation can really make a difference!

    As you’ve said, so many are still undecided (possibly another record high at this stage in the game) and the margins between the top and bottom have been so narrow in most of the polling (when nobody gets more than mid 20’s and even the bottom tier of the main 6 still average above 10%)… that is at most a 15% gap between #1 and #6 going into the vote!

    So yes, ANYONE could win this. Some have a lot more factors and momentum in their favor or against them than others…but the door is truly open to last minute swings in who turns out and who is persuaded to change their mind…!

    I’m still going to stick with my original prediction that I made almost 4 days ago:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/12/new-poll-results-most-iowa-republicans-are-idiots/#comment-142474


    1. Ron Paul
    2. Rick Santorum
    3. Mitt Romney
    4. Rick Perry
    5. Newt Gingrich
    6. Michele Bachmann

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Well with a number like 41% undecided, it’s hard to be sure of the outcome in advance. However, Romney won Iowa once and I lean towards believing it will happen again.

  73. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 6:16 pm #

    In 2008, McCain came in 4th in IA and he ended up being the eventual party nominee.

    I do feel that Iowa is important and the story of each state is really about impacting momentum for the next contest (up or down) and therefore either opening opportunity for more funding or causing campaign contributions to dry up (and thus lead to winnowing the field by having a candidate drop out).

    I agree that 1st place is “over-hyped”. It certainly matters and allows for the most delegates to be allocated and certainly helps momentum for whoever wins a state.

    However, other placements are important too – but they are more complex calculations based on relative comparisons against expectations and the margin of difference between the positions above and below them…as well as the dynamic of who beat who.

    The old trope of only 1st matters or that only the top 3 move on is nonsense and a meme the media uses that doesn’t really hold up and definitely doesn’t apply to the dynamic in play today.

    I can almost guarantee that the top 4 coming out of this contest will continue on through not just NH but also SC.

    Depending on who comes in 4th, that could be a boost to their momentum and ability to fundraise going forward (and therefore a “victory” for them) and not a bad thing at all…

    The whole question is really on what 5th & 6th place will mean…and how it can be perceived or spun. It will be hard to justify continuing on in a 6th place finish or for any candidate that drops to receiving only single-digit support in the final numbers… unless the margins are fairly competitive (within 2%) of the position above.

    The whole question is will any of the 6 drop out after tonight at all? Other than Romney & Paul, the rest of the campaigns are likely fairly tapped out financially from this last minute push in IA. They will need to have some sort of positive “spin” to convince donors to continue to give them a shot…

    Egos might prevent even the bottom performers from throwing in the towel after tonight and to perhaps stay in at least through the next debate or two, hoping those performances can give them the financing to mount a campaign effort in NH & SC (and perhaps FL)… so those judgement calls will also be fascinating parts of the story too!

    bernadineayers: i’m not sure they are all even playing for first, given iowa’s history. that could be superstition.

  74. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 6:33 pm #

    Oh what utter hyperbolic nonsense you spew! Come off it Scott and stop being such a whiny prick!

    You would NOT get a visit from the Secret Service for sending someone a mug with the President’s birth certificate on it. That is NOT in any way a “threatening” act nor a threat of violence!

    Your over-reactionary hyperbole here is so over the top on this claim that its not even in the realm of an apples to oranges mischaracterization analogy. More like apples to a shoe. Miles apart.

    You deserve utter ridicule and contempt when you make such ridiculous statements! *sheesh*

    bernadineayers:
    man, if this post were on my site i’d get a visit from the secret service… just saying.

    Majority Will: The BC Mug Bomb is a great idea. Send a dozen each to lying birther idiots, Cashill, Corsi and Taitz. Or better yet, send them to their favorite restaurants and hangouts.

  75. avatar
    bernadineayers January 3, 2012 at 6:50 pm #

    i am at a super heightened state of awarenes at this point. anything i say can and will be used against me (as i am being constantly monitored)

    .i’m the guy that will strike up an army and overthrow the government that ben franklin wrote about… i am the real deal and i’ve just brought it to your door.

    i was lucky enough to get washingtonamerica.com as a domain name…

    that’s the new american voice….. and i/we will question authority.

    while i’ll guard my threats i will never relinquish the right to use them.

    i’m telling you…. as a dope smoking conservative musician vermonter that owns washamericom, america’s website… libertarians and liberals aren’t that far apart….
    look at ron paul and jesse ventura, they are the full circles of life, government and political philosophy…

    there,…….. top that dr. conspiracy

    and people thought the rick santorum winning iowa caucus story was the big story of the day….

  76. avatar
    sfjeff January 3, 2012 at 6:53 pm #

    bernadineayers: i’m going to give one example for now (ockham’s razoe): frank arduni is hands down the smartest guy i’ve encountered on the interneton this subject, he is wildly smart. but a challenge was made to himhttp://www.wnd.com/2011/08/329221/Neither Arduini nor Davidson have demonstrated an ability to replicate what is observed in the Obama birth certificate PDF by scanning a document and utilizing optimization techniques.i emailed jerry corsi this morning to ask again first hand if frank had accomplished this simple test.now, when i was at political forum, i had extensive q and a’s with wong. i asked him six times to respond to this specific challenge, even way before he put me on ignore.now when it comes to birtherism, this guy buries all of us, i spotted him my first day as a pro (red flag). there are other things that frank has said thati think contradict general birther anti birther theory.it’s all in the archives at pf. so why can a guy with wong’s ego not prove such a simple point, when i think it’s the first thing he would d,o so he could gloat and rub in our faces, he’s very condescending.why has frank arduini rejected this basic challenge??this is one of the things i can’t get explained, there are many others, (like the way the birth certificate is framed in it’s own paper, and why is the ap copy blue.

    You are sure obsessed with Frank aka Wong.

    And for the record- he put you on ignore after you continued to address him in a way that he considered derogatory after he warned you he would do just that.

    Your challenge came after he put you on ignore. He never answered you because he never saw your posts.

    And all the time there were dozens of issues we tried to get you to take a position on-

    here is one of them:

    You claim to have become a Birther in April when Obama released the copy of his long form birth certificate- yet at the same time you have embraced the ‘two citizen parent” Birther claims.

    Exactly when did you decide that Barack Obama is not eligible because his father was not a U.S. citizen, and why?

    here is another:

    You claim to have the utmost respect for John McCain. Yet John McCain has never once supported Birthers, never once suggested in any way that Obama is not eligible. Do you believe either a) that John McCain is more ignorant than Birthers b) John McCain is too cowardly to raise the issue or c) provide your explanation of why John McCain never raised the issue- other than ‘ignorance’ or ‘cowardness”.

    Wash- you claim one of the reasons you still are suspicious is because anti-Birthers haven’t bothered to refute you. Well step up to the plate.

  77. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 6:57 pm #

    Ok, you’ve been given the same detailed answers and responses to this same line of questioning numerous times now…to which you utterly fail to respond. Therefore, you are not dialoging in good faith on this line of questioning and just Concern Trolling again. Stop being dishonest and playing juvenile games. Read the responses you’ve already been given.

    It stops being a “fair question” when you’ve asked it before (repeatedly) and been given very detailed responses and then choose to never respond to them (i.e. completely ignoring them) and go back to repeating the same broken record question over and over again. That is just Concern Trolling behavior.

    For the last time, there is NO fear of the Birthers succeeding in removing the president from the ballots. There is simply no underlying basis to any of your myths. Therefore, there is ZERO chance that your court efforts will succeed. The best hope you have in this cycle is a challenge that merely requires presenting the COLB as proof and the courts would have to accept it and that would end it right there. FFAC and prima facia in effect. End of Story.

    So really, your best hope is a result that is just another hard nail in the coffin for your arguments. What is hilarious is that actually getting a court case heard is the worst possible outcome for your silly movement! Same as how Obama’s presenting the LFBC was devastation for you. Most of the steam came out of your movement at that time and only the same hard core dead-enders remain. There is NO substantial growth from there. All you have is the same bitter voices carrying on the same antics. That is all.

    Face it, your made up movement is all a sham and really only about trying to insinuate false doubts into the process. Any time there is any real result or finding, it just shreds more of your myths…
    You don’t actually want definitive answers or to have a court case with standing because then the truth comes out and you are exposed on a factual playing field. Whenever that happens, you lose.

    Yes, there is broad awareness of Birtherism in the public after all this time. That awareness works against you, as Birtherism is broadly condemned and mocked. Your movement is quite simply political poison.

    So no, nobody fears you pariahs at all. Yes, ugly acts will always get attention but negative attention is not a “win” by any means. Vile or clownish behavior will always get attention… its called condemnation.

    Nor does Birtherism hurt Obama’s vote chances either. Those who are Birthers or susceptible to the nonsense of Birtherism were never going to vote for Obama anyways. Your votes against him are already factored in.

    For the final time, the *only* fear or concern is of some unhinged person being inspired to commit a violent crime and cause harm to themselves or others as a result. Beyond that, there is NO real threat from Birtherism whatsoever at all.

    So, you’ve been given final notice that you’ve been given fair and detailed responses to this. If you chose to continue to ignore these responses and just pose the same Concern Trolling questions over and over again, as if you’ve never been given an answer in the first place… then you continue to demonstrate an unwillingness to engage in serious and mature dialogue and good faith.

    You have been warned several times now that continued Concern Trolling can get you banned.

    bernadineayers:

    i agree with the assessment “knee jerk and toxic”. to that i would add spontaneous.
    it show’s it’s beneath the surface and people are talking about it.

    why are you all in denial even about this issue being dead ?i don’t see how you can be in the business of promotion about a controversy that doesn’t exist…

    i think that’s a fair question.

  78. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 7:02 pm #

    Trump can play Birther all he wants. He’s only succeeded in damaging his brand and legacy with this so far. If he jumps into the race, it is a gift for Obama. He becomes an easy cartoon foil to endlessly mock and pulls away some votes from the GOP. Win-win for Obama. None of us here fear Trump getting into the race. We just seriously doubt he’ll ever actually run, as his past history is full of pretending he will jump in, but never doing so. Other than being an embarrassment to the US Presidential process, we would find it endlessly entertaining. So go for it Trump. Get in the race and we’ll stock up on popcorn!

    bernadineayers:

    wait till trump shows up again. chuck todd asked him point blank about his “obsession with birtherism”… he didn’t flinch.

  79. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 7:06 pm #

    Just another example of the delusional “any day now…” mentality at work…

    Wile E.: When I ask him where all the anti-gun legislation laws are that were supposed to be inevitable with Obama in office…he claims that the reason Obama hasn’t done it yet is because he is tricking us into electing him again and the second term is when all the bad stuff is gonna happen.

  80. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 7:24 pm #

    Why should he bother with a meaningless chase down the rabbit hole on an irrelevant issue?

    The whole PDF nonsense is just a smoke-and-mirrors sideshow argument in the first place. Same as all the complaints about the online COLB.

    Simply put, complaints about an online scan or image don’t mean squat. What matters is that the ONLY official body to issue such certificates, the HI DOH, has confirmed and attested that they’ve issued a certified COLB and the LFBC and attested to not only its entire chain of custody but also that the information that has been presented via the scans is the information they have and released.

    In a court, no one is going to be dealing with a PDF. They will be handed an actual certified paper copy. FFAC & prima facie evidence. End of Story right there.

    Birthers are just being stupid to even whine about PDFs or “original vault” documents. That is completely meaningless to the only legal entity that matters – a certified document by an official issuing authority IS the validation on its face – END OF STORY. That issuing agency could decide to write the data in crayon and certify it and it would be legit.

    The paper isn’t “magic” nor is the image or the original. What matters is the data and the official testament to it.

    Same theory goes to how our country prints paper money and it works as legal tender. It is legit and sound because it comes from the official authority in charge of issuing it. You can take a photo or scan your phsyical dollar and argue about how the image looks on your computer until the cows come home. It is irrelevant. The “image” of the legal tender is NOT the legal tender itself. The actual paper dollar doesn’t lose its legitmacy by someone taking or arguing over a scan of it. And most importantly, the actual piece of paper ONLY is legitimate because of WHO issued it and certified it in the first place. If that agency decided to print legal tender on toilet paper or the backs of tree leaves, then those would be legal tender too.

    Why you can’t grasp this simple concept is beyond me. Either you know this is true (and are just making these claims because your real goal is only a propaganda con game to cast aspersions and sow doubt) or you are truly mentally handicapped in some real form and unable to grasp certain basic concepts. So which is it Scott, are you just playing some dishonest game and think its funny or are you really that stupid?

    bernadineayers: why has frank arduini rejected this basic challenge??
    this is one of the things i can’t get explained, there are many others, (like the way the birth certificate is framed in it’s own paper, and why is the ap copy blue.

  81. avatar
    Daniel January 3, 2012 at 7:30 pm #

    bernadineayers: i am at a super heightened state of awarenes at this point. anything i say can and will be used against me (as i am being constantly monitored)

    .i’m the guy that will strike up an army and overthrow the government that ben franklin wrote about… i am the real deal and i’ve just brought it to your door.

    Oh Puh-leeze

  82. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 7:33 pm #

    Who pays attention to Alan Colmes or cares what he says? I mean, I’m sure every pundit out there has some sort of a following, but very few people pay much attention to Alan Colmes or care what he has to say.

    I don’t mean to offend you if you are an Alan Colmes fan. A matter of personal taste applies to all pundits and each to their own.

    However, you seem to make a big deal out of whether some pundit X or Y or Z says so and so… how does that matter at all?

    So, that person has an opinion about something…. *newsflash* – That’s what pundits do for a living. Guess what, everyonee has opinions. So what? What does it matter or have to do with anything anyways?

    I think you take too much stock in just going off of what someone says (like your support for Orly, simply because she tells you something) and not paying atttention to real things that matter – like facts, evidence, logic and reality. Opinions are just opinions and don’t mean squat.

    Folks that just hear someone say things and take whatever they say without question are just gullible marks and easy prey to any two-bit grifter or con artist out there. That is pretty much the baseline of what makes a fool a fool.

    bernadineayers: from there it degenerated to alan colmes. the fifth piller

  83. avatar
    G January 3, 2012 at 7:52 pm #

    Then please work harder to develop better communication style habits and work harder to check your own pre-conceived emotional prejudices at the door.

    I for one, love an intelligent and adult conversation and have little tolerance for silly games during serious conversation.

    So far, you seem to have difficulty acting in an appropriate manner and understanding that your behavior and rush to spout unjustified talking points and cast dubious aspersions is what engenders a negative response. You seem to lack the proper social skills, at least via online communications in being able to sustain a real and fair dialogue with others. Cause & Effect as I’ve been saying. Please reflect on that and realize that you are your own source of difficulty in getting along with others and work to improve on that.

    If you notice, there are a fair number of regulars here who are conservatives and who did NOT vote for Obama and have no intention to do so next time who have a lot of respect from the others on this board and don’t encounter the pushback and difficulties you engender. Maybe you can study their posts and learn how they are able to interact as responsible adults. See: John Reilly, Daniel, just to name a few.

    bernadineayers: i can communicate well and we all need to talk, that’s why i’m here.
    can we all agree to check the anger at the door ? i’m not afraid here because i sense intelligence, and i like your leader’s style.

  84. avatar
    bernadineayers January 4, 2012 at 9:32 am #

    sfjeff: You are sure obsessed with Frank aka Wong.

    And for the record- he put you on ignore after you continued to address him in a way that he considered derogatory after he warned you he would do just that.

    Your challenge came after he put you on ignore. He never answered you because he never saw your posts.

    And all the time there were dozens of issues we tried to get you to take a position on-

    here is one of them:

    You claim to have become a Birther in April when Obama released the copy of his long form birth certificate- yet at the same time you have embraced the two citizen parent” Birther claims.

    Exactly when did you decide that Barack Obama is not eligible because his father was not a U.S. citizen, and why?

    here is another:

    You claim to have the utmost respect for John McCain. Yet John McCain has never once supported Birthers, never once suggested in any way that Obama is not eligible. Do you believe either a) that John McCain is more ignorant than Birthers b) John McCain is too cowardly to raise the issue or c) provide your explanation of why John McCain never raised the issue- other than ignorance’ or cowardness”.

    Wash- you claim one of the reasons you still are suspicious is because anti-Birthers haven’t bothered to refute you. Well step up to the plate.

    i called him frankie… he excoriates and humiliates people for pleasure, that’s not right. you’re his barney fife jeff, of course you adore him.

  85. avatar
    Majority Will January 4, 2012 at 11:26 am #

    bernadineayers: i called him frankie… he excoriates and humiliates people for pleasure, that’s not right. you’re his barney fife jeff, of course you adore him.

    If you don’t want to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.

  86. avatar
    Arthur January 4, 2012 at 12:11 pm #

    Bernadine:

    You had me at “dope smoking . . .musician vermonter (sic).” I like the cut of your jib, Bernie ol’ boy, and I will never repond to your comments in a mean or snarky way again. We have way too much in common.

    bernadineayers: i am . . . a dope smoking conservative musician vermonter

  87. avatar
    sfjeff January 4, 2012 at 1:23 pm #

    bernadineayers: i called him frankie… he excoriates and humiliates people for pleasure, that’s not right. you’re his barney fife jeff, of course you adore him.

    First of all he excoriates and humiliates a specific class of people- Birthers- and does so for their promotion of lies, speculation and innuendo. I approve of that.

    Secondly that would make him Sheriff Taylor, one of the most beloved figures of classic American TV, and a paragon of American values. Now, I don’t view him as that, but I find it odd that you do, and still are obsessed with him- is it some wierd love hate thing?

  88. avatar
    sfjeff January 4, 2012 at 1:28 pm #

    Arthur: Bernadine:You had me at “dope smoking . . .musician vermonter (sic).” I like the cut of your jib, Bernie ol’ boy, and I will never repond to your comments in a mean or snarky way again. We have way too much in common.

    Wash is an interesting guy- there are times when he responds in a rational folksy way, that I relate to- he and I swap info about the Bay Area and New England and commonly wish each other well.

    But he also goes off into these wierd tangents that are just unrelated to reality. He believes everything that Taitz and Corsi say without any reservations, but is convinced, apparently just because he was a Chicago politician, that Obama is corrupt.

    He is certainly not the run of the mill Birther like Apuzzo, he is more of the tangentally obsessed like Sven, but not the completely consumed obsessed like Michaeln

  89. avatar
    G January 4, 2012 at 3:52 pm #

    There seems to be some behavioral pattern here that seems to crop up with a certain subset of Birthers and other conspiracy folks.

    There seem to be uneven periods of both posting activity and how they come across in their communications and behavior. When they post, it can almost be a form of manic expression.

    I’m not sure if the unstable periods mean that that is when they are taking drugs…or that is when they need to take more of their drugs to restabalize…

    The pattern here seems to be some sort of connection between their susceptibility to paranoia and their manic activities and their poor behaviors and their emotional state.

    So yeah, seems like some underlying emotional or mental instability is at play.

    sfjeff: Wash is an interesting guy- there are times when he responds in a rational folksy way, that I relate to- he and I swap info about the Bay Area and New England and commonly wish each other well.

    But he also goes off into these wierd tangents that are just unrelated to reality. He believes everything that Taitz and Corsi say without any reservations, but is convinced, apparently just because he was a Chicago politician, that Obama is corrupt.

    He is certainly not the run of the mill Birther like Apuzzo, he is more of the tangentally obsessed like Sven, but not the completely consumed obsessed like Michaeln

  90. avatar
    bernadineayers January 4, 2012 at 4:54 pm #

    Majority Will: If you don’t want to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.

    i’m serious.. the west point graduate shut down when i called him frankie. in all fairness he still kept being nasty to the others.

  91. avatar
    bernadineayers January 4, 2012 at 5:03 pm #

    Judge Mental: I asked you about which questions “relevant to eligibility” can’t be answered. Whilst I believe the challenge’ question can be answered and has been answered already the simple reality is that there is absolutely nothing about analysis of the pdf image or the colour of a photocopy which is relevant to eligibility.

    Maybe you could you ask that paragon of truth and virtue Corsi if he thinks that Les Kinsolving, WND’d own birther staff reporter who sat in on the White house briefing, personally handled the actual certified, signed and sealed, copy birth certificate (not a pdf image) and who expressed the opinion that he saw no problem with it, if he thinks Kinsolving was hallucinating or just failed to notice that the certificate didn’t actually say that Obama was born at Kapiolani on 4th August 1961?Every time anyone else asks the question Corsi runs a mile and you’ll notice that Kinsolving has been conspicuous by his absence ever since.You might have more luck.

    les is a friend, he told me that the press room is opressive, i made a video of everyone in the room working against him. tapper the dramatic, chuck todd running the room, it’s a joke. he said he’s afraid to ask the questions, he’s only there one day/week now (last time i talked to him) he said gibbs was bad carney is worse. they are pushing around a guy who’s been in the room since nixon, i believe he’s the second senior correspondent.

    tell me again why some copies are on safety paper (green) and the ap version is blue and high resolution. what happened to the frame ?

  92. avatar
    bernadineayers January 4, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    Arthur:
    Bernadine:

    You had me at “dope smoking . . .musician vermonter (sic).”I like the cut of your jib, Bernie ol’ boy, and I will never repond to your comments in a mean or snarky way again.We have way too much in common.

    that’s what i mean. i’m a strict fiscal conservative and bill of rights kind of guy, at heart i am a liberal, no doubt. that’s why it stings so bad when i get called racist or get baited.
    which you guys have all been very classy about, same at pf. if i we’re sf and wong would have called me on it.

  93. avatar
    whodunit January 4, 2012 at 8:39 pm #

    Obama has been hounded with more false accusations and lies and death threats and ugly vicious attacks than any president in U.S. history.

    Wouldn’t you be a little testy if you were the receiving end of all that racist motivated bullshit for years? … “Gimme a break?” Give him a break .!

  94. avatar
    Sally HIll January 4, 2012 at 10:48 pm #

    They forgot to mention that the birthers were racists.

  95. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 4, 2012 at 10:56 pm #

    Perhaps you might gain some credibility if you first laid out why YOU think some copies are on safety paper (green) and the AP version is blue and high resolution. I’m not sure what you mean by “the frame” though. I mean, MY copy of the long form is framed, but that’s just me.

    bernadineayers: tell me again why some copies are on safety paper (green) and the ap version is blue and high resolution. what happened to the frame ?

  96. avatar
    nbc January 4, 2012 at 11:31 pm #

    bernadineayers: tell me again why some copies are on safety paper (green) and the ap version is blue and high resolution. what happened to the frame ?

    The AP version is a black and white copy, the others are photographs or scans of the original in color.

    Not that hard…
    The COLB has a border which is computer generated.

    Any further questions? Do you even know how the COLB is generated versus the long form? Have you taken the time and effort to educate yourself? Anything?

  97. avatar
    Sef January 5, 2012 at 10:06 am #

    bernadineayers: tell me again why some copies are on safety paper (green) and the ap version is blue and high resolution. what happened to the frame ?

    Birthers (and yes, you are included in this august group) continue to be hung up on a particular document, be it on paper or electronic. The fact of the matter is that the only thing of relevance is the data on the document: name, DOB, place of birth. Nothing else matters as regards NBC status.

  98. avatar
    Majority Will January 5, 2012 at 10:59 am #

    bernadineayers: tell me again why some copies are on safety paper (green) and the ap version is blue and high resolution. what happened to the frame ?

    Irrelevant, scott.

    You’re chasing meaningless shadows which i realize is what you and many other birthers do but it’s really fatuous.

    Do you have panic attacks when you get a new driver’s license and it looks different from the last?

    Don’t answer that.

  99. avatar
    J. Potter January 5, 2012 at 11:11 am #

    Majority Will: Irrelevant, scott.You’re chasing meaningless shadows which i realize is what you and many other birthers do but it’s really fatuous.Do you have panic attacks when you get a new driver’s license and it looks different from the last?Don’t answer that.

    I am truly grateful for everyone’s efforts at heading off this attempt to spark another outbreak of PDF Madness. Neglect away, good sirs!