Not a shouting match, but a debate. For the Affirmative (Obama’s not eligible) we have Scott Erlandson (aka Washington America) and for the Negative, Frank Arduini.
Orly Taitz once said of Mr. Arduini:
obot Frank Arduini. Does anyone know, where is he from? Was he born here? Where is his family from?
To tune into Reality Check Radio tonight at 9 PM Eastern time for the show.
Frank showed up. Scott didn’t.
As opposed to Ms Taitz, allegedly an ex-KGB snitch and Moldovian prostitute. I’m told.
I even verified with Mario Apuzzo that this is the real Frank Arduini. 😉
“Debate” is the wrong word, it is not possible to debate a birther, they refuse to accept facts and/or reality. The moderator will have his hands full. The birther hate for Obama locks them into a position that can’t be dented by facts. At every loss they search for a new OMG moment. The latest OMG moment is on March1, sheriff joe’s big investigation. After that fails what is the next OMG moment? I will listen tonight but there will be no debate. A debate supposes each side has valuable points, that supposition is wrong with birthers.
So what happens if the birther side “wins” the debate? Does that mean the President resigns and/or doesn’t run for re-election? He’s at 60% on InTrade-should I take a short position?
That’s funny! (I remember that thread.)
analogy test
birher: debate
a. 2 year old: temper tantrums
b. adolescent: apoplectic fit
c. Hippie: bad acid trip
d. knife: gun fight
Well, I have Stolen A March on EVERYBODY!!! I have EXCLUSIVE video of tonight’s upcoming Debate!!!
EXCLUSIVE!!! TARDIS Video Of Tonight’s Great Birther-Obot Debate!!!
http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/exclusive-tardis-video-of-tonights-great-birther-obot-debate/
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I wonder if Dean is going to make refunds to the six people who registered?
Additionally, we have observed other calls for mass gatherings and demonstrations, and have had to accept the fact that, barring some major event occurring, levels of apathy about issues such as ours seem nearly impossible to overcome. It is far easier to air one’s complaints via computer keyboard than it is to leave the comfort of one’s home and actually make a physical effort.
At least he got to spend some time “investigating” in Hawaii.
“At least he got to spend some time “investigating” in Hawaii.”
.
that was a neat way to get a Vacation, scamming to get a vacation is called “ScamVac”, birthers love to be suckered in. Still Dean still hasn’t recovered from his Hawaii failure yet, he was crushed on the ID theft claim when he found that Obama was not named Virginia Sunahara, the different BC number was the last straw the camel ate. Now the Big Birther Summit failure may lead him to get mental help or not.
” I’m told.” – http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2010/02/blog-post.html
LOL! Well done.
Oh, they’ve been heard all right! Heard and found laughable, then tiresome. Haskins is one delusional dude. That goofy friend with a missing sense of embarrassment, who inevitably embarrasses anyone with a shred of respectability, and who winds up whining about being alone all the time. Self-reinforcing cycle of delusion! Just imagine what he’ll latch onto next.
G:
I did a Internet Article on it, but I didn’t take it to “5”. I just left it kind of free standing, Plus, I really wanted to use the “Twin Peaks” theme on it, and not Osawld Rabbit.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Irish Setter to Cocker Spaniel: “Don’t get in the car with them. They’ll tell you you’re going for a ride. You’ll end up on the roof. Pass it on.”
Did Scott/Bernardine Rae chicken out?
So far, it seems he has. We are now over 20 minutes into the show and Scott still hasn’t shown up.
Did Jablonski chicken out?
It’s not at all surprising.
It must get exhausting for some of these frightened and pathetic birther bigots to keep up their ridiculous charade.
Hi Squeeky. Here is why not and why it would NOT make money for the state either – in fact, it would likely lose a lot of money, due to inefficiency.
Standards and rules exist for a reason. When any entity – whether private company or government agency switches over to new standards and clearly states this *new* form is the format that everyone will get from now on, then that needs to be adhered to. If you start making exceptions to those standards, then you DO NOT have a standard. Does that make sense?
Second, as you are not a business technology person, you may simply not be grasping the sheer amount of waste and cost involved with maintenance, upgrades and inefficiency that goes along with maintaining multiple formats and procedures. These types of costs accrue daily, regardless of whether someone is showing up to pay a “fee” for the alternate form or not. It would be a huge money losing proposition and make every further system and process revision more burdensome. The costs would greatly outweigh and bog down the system over any potential perceived benefit. It would be the very definition of government waste and inefficiency to do that.
Again, all this confusion comes in here by the misleading use of terms such as “short form” and “long form”. In HI there are no such things, there is just ONE STANDARD FORM.
When Dean goaded Sunahara’s brother into requesting her BC, the HI DOH gave him her information as requested. He received a Certified Standard Form BC. That is all they provide and there is no legitimate argument of why that is insufficient to his needs. After all, this is for a sister that was born and died on the same day, over 50 years ago.
Any requested exceptions to standard procedures need clearly defined extraordinary justifying reasons to explain why such an exception is necessary. Mr Sunahara (i.e. Dean’s patsy) never gave any reason for why the Standard BC he received is insufficient for his needs.
I hope that explains things better.
Agreed. What keeps getting lost in Dean’s dishonest spin of this case is that the State of HI *did* comply with all legitimate requests for information and documentation, under the law, that was requested by the Sunahara family.
Dean is simply pulling the typical and intentional Birther trick of demanding types of info that don’t exist or can’t be given, in order to create a fake controversy, where there really never was one in the first place. It is just the shyster legal form of the no-win accusation of saying “When did you stop beating your wife?”
That is the part that bothers me the most… how they have manipulated and taken advantage of an innocent family and their long dead baby. None of this was done for the family’s benefit. They and their emotions are just being manipulated and abused here. They were always nothing more than cannon fodder pawns by Dean in order to excuse a wild goose chase effort to try to dig up dirt on Obama.
I find such intentional dishonest and manipulative abuse of a innocent family and their long dead child to be about as reprehensible as anything I’ve seen happen in Birtherdom so far.
It is for that reason that I do not feel Dean can truly receive redemption or achieve a true Paradigm Shift until he can acknowledge his wrongheadedness on what he’s done to the Sunahara family and appropriately atones for it.
He chickened out like a frightened Chicken Hawk. As is being proved more and more, birthers adore making promises, but they’re incapable of fulfilling them.
There is a big difference here.
Jablonski NEVER called for the GA suit. He was the defense. The Birthers called for it.
Jablonski, in a nutshell, gave ADVANCE NOTICE that the whole thing was a frivolous nutty circus and he wasn’t going to waste his time.
So, Jablonski KEPT his word.
Conversely, Birther SCOTT (aka Bernadine Ayers on here) CALLED for this “Debate” and REQUESTED Frank as his counter. and even confirmed to the host yesterday that he would be there… Now SCOTT has CHICKENED OUT. Frank showed up on time.
It is now 1 hour & 6 minutes into the debate that Birther SCOTT requested and he is still a NO SHOW.
So, in summary, Jablonski was true to his word, whereas Scott is just a typical lying chicken-sh*t Birther coward.
All of you craven Birthers don’t seem to fare too well anytime you have to come out from hiding behind your keyboards…
Doc C. just came on the Show at 10:11 pm. He’s currently plugging Arthur Goldwag’s new book, “The New Hate”.
What’s the matter, princess? Did you forfeit your Motel 6 deposit for Dean’s super friendly Circle of Birther Bigots in Washington?
Please don’t let reason stop you. Birther rage and stupidity is gold for the incumbent. Independents and moderates despise the blatantly racist agenda of raving lunatics.
Irish Setter: Roof! Roof!
Mitt Romney: What’s that boy? Ya wanna’ ride on the roof again?
Irish Setter: No, you dumb ass, I was barking.
Well, at least we got to also hear about some of the latest events in Birtherdom and Doc C got to offer a lot of his take on the show.
It is now 10:30pm on the show and it seems like things are wrapping up, because Scott never showed.
RC just gave a shout out to Squeeky! NOTE: On the discussion feed, Squeeky offered that she would call into the show sometime in March!!!
Squeeks says she is a bit shy, but is willing to go on. I hope she does.
Squeeky, my advice: Since you feel shy, why don’t you first call in on the next show and just be a “contributing commenter” on the line?
I’ve done that twice. It is a very low pressure situation. RC has many line feeds, and when you simply are a caller to chime in, you are on the line, but can easily hang back and remain quiet in the background until you find something you want to speak up on.
Once you’ve done that a few times, I think you might feel more comfortable and be willing to be an actual FEATURE GUEST on RC’s show – I’d love to see that, as I think you and your blog would be a great topic for the show – period.
There is a lot you could talk about to show how you research, reference and tie together all the legal stuff you’ve learned with all the literary, historical and pop culture references and blend it into such a well-written combination of easily accessible information that is also loaded with cheeky double entendres throughout!
I think that would make a fascinating, entertaining and very LOL quality show right there!
Hey, if you felt uncomfortable being a solo guest, you could even ask to partner with Doc C, and maybe both of you could be guests discussing the topic of what efforts it takes to research and maintain blogs on this topic period. That would be a fun show right there!!!
Also, you have quite an interesting path from where you’ve started out to where your reasoning and research has led you today. So yeah, there are lots of great reason why you would make an excellent guest for the show.
🙂
that he was gonna chicken out and he did. that’s a true chicken.
Now it has never being doubted that chickens remain quiet in the background until they find something the want to speak up on. These were anonymous lawyers or Natural Born Obots…
It is in my prayers that
TorquemadaSantorum is on the GOP ticket.Hey Rick: ‘states should have the right to ban the sale of contraceptives.’ Really?! This guy is running for prez, and he either does not know, or forgot Griswold v. Connecticut, in 1965.
Pop quiz: Germany 1933 or USA 2012
Complete story: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political animal/2011_12/quote_of_the_day_28034177.php
“Gingrich went on to describe “the rule of two of three” — a made-up rule with no foundation in American law — in which two branches of government could out-vote the other one. He wasn’t kidding, by the way.
SCHIEFFER: One of the things you say is that if you don’t like what a court has done, that Congress should subpoena the judge and bring him before Congress and hold a congressional hearing … how would you enforce that? Would you send the Capitol Police down to arrest him?
GINGRICH: Sure. If you had to. Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send a U.S. Marshal.
Just so we’re clear, this week, a leading presidential candidate articulated his belief that, if elected, he might (1) eliminate courts he doesn’t like; (2) ignore court rulings he doesn’t like; and (3) take judges into custody if he disapproves of their legal analyses.
I hope it’s unnecessary to note that Gingrich’s vision is stark raving mad.”
“a made-up rule with no foundation in American law” Welcome to Birfistan. These guys are running for president?!
The complete link did not copy:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_12/quote_of_the_day_28034177.php
Actually, it takes a hell of a lot of balls to tell a Judge and the SoS that you aren’t going to show up.
He stuck to his word. I personally and openly disagreed with that tactic as quite risky, but he both announced it in advance and then stuck to his word and did it.
That’s ballsy.
Scott, however, called for a debate and was given a debate with his chosen opponent under his own terms. The whole thing was scheduled for over a MONTH in advance. The moderator double checked with Scott, who CONFIRMED he would show, just yesterday.
…Yet Scott still CHICKENED OUT. That is pathetically wimpy…
No. Word of advice, if you don’t have anything relevant to add to a conversation, you simply keep your mouth shut, until you do.
Otherwise, you are just wasting air and words.
But then again, only a fool opens his mouth to confirm it. As you seem to do everytime you show up here.
Speaking of made-up rules, here’s another gem from
the Pillsbury DoughboyNewtonMacPhersonGingrich:“You can’t put a gun rack in a Volt,” Gingrich said in a line that drew cheers at a speech in Georgia this weekend, and is now appearing in his stump speech.”
Read on:
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120221/AUTO0103/202210426/GM-Gingrich-You-can-t-put-gun-rack-Volt?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE
If you argue with a fool, make sure you’re not doing the same thing.
Gingrich and Santorum: making Republicans look like tyrannical theocrats for over twenty years.
Since the 13th century: “One dismissive reviewer of Santorum’s 2005 book, “It Takes a Family,” wrote in The Philadelphia Inquirer that Santorum is “one of the finest minds of the thirteenth century.”
Read on:
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/the-first-principles-of-rick-santorum/
Yes, great time to be a Republican.
I’m sorry, but the Republican party died with Nelson Rockefeller. As a New Yorker, I’m sorry too.
What’s worse, this crop of crackpots constantly sound a dog whistle to anti-Semites, and Jewish Republicans ignore it. Craziest alliance I’ve ever seen.
I’ve said it before: this crowd loves Israel, but hates Judaism and Jewish culture. I’m impressed with the mental gymnastics they go through, without ending up needing massive amounts of Thorazine.
Oh yutube, your false equivalency is adorable 🙂 Jablonski never needed to show up to your little GA charade, but Scott agreed to debate. Apple, meet orange.
From the Far Side: http://chrisoncars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/far_side_01-1.gif
If Erlandson suddenly shows up with a couple of nuclear power plants, I for one am going to be very suspicious.
On the subject of no shows, Orly’s request to speak at a candidate forum sponsored by the Republican party of California has been denied. She was told that because of the “overwhelming response” the schedule full and there just wasn’t enough room for her. If you were thinking that Orly took this polite dismissal gracefully, you don’t know Orly. Read her response at Oh, For Goodness Sake: http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/
That’s a good one!
Speaking of Scott… I came up with a list of the Top Ten Reasons that Scott Erlandson Skipped the Debate on Tuesday Night.
Loved the Top Ten list & Squeeky’s additions! LMAO!
Ahh, if only it was reason #6, I too might give him a pass…
#’s 7, 9, 10 and Squeeky’s #13 made me laugh the hardest! KUDOS.
Also: I still enjoyed listening to the show and kudos to you, Frank, Bob Ross, Dr. C & the rest for still finding a way to fill 2 hours…
Imagine the MOOD she will be in when she shows up there! Reports are that she was pretty much flying from IN straight to that CA Candidate Forum… despite the fact that they have told her that her invite was recinded…
After the utter smackdown she just received in IN, she could be all sorts of explosively combative crazy at the CA Candidate Forum… I can just see her causing an incident for not being allowed to speak and end up being forcibly barred or removed from the event…
So, keep an eye out for the reports on this story tomorrow!
I received an email from Scott. he says he “punked the Fogbow” and “they” were laughing their asses off listening to the show. Funny thing, I am not “Fogbow” and I don’t feel punked. 😆
I posted what he wrote on my blog: http://rcradioblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/23/wheres-scott-top-ten-reasons-that-scott-erlandson-skipped-the-debate-on-tuesday-night/
How is running away “punking”?
No, he is not welcome back. If he had simply forgotten or was confused about the night then I would have. If you have read any of his posts here as Bernadine or on other forums as “washingtonamerica.com” you know he is a lightweight even among Birthers. His web site is a joke and looks as bad as Ed Hale’s site.
Well, because the alternative would have been to argue his case, and given his historical inability to present much of an argument, he ‘punked’ the Fogbow by not presenting his argument.
In the mind of a birther, it makes perfect sense. Especially the part that is at odds with reality…
ROTFL