Main Menu

Not happy

I’m not happy about the way this Obama Conspiracy business is going and I’m not happy about my air conditioning not working (it’s 80 decrees here in the study). I wasn’t happy about some emails today from a friend who keeps saying that Obama should release his records so people won’t be suspicious of him. And I am not happy about the comment I read over at AZ Central that is the topic of the previous article.

I’m not happy about Joe Arpaio and his band of birthers becoming the 2012 version of Donald Trump, getting news cycles they don’t warrant, and I’m not happy with the mainstream media doing a sloppy job of debunking the Arpaio investigation. I’m not happy about some folks who dump really long junk here that I don’t have time to answer and who wouldn’t listen if I did. I don’t like WorldNetDaily pumping out smear day, after day, after day.

I don’t like it that the middle class is shrinking, that evil prospers, and that I had a kidney stone last night.

I’m not happy about an article I saw at CNN by Fareed Zakaria that suggests a downward spiral of the Republican Party. He wrote:

So if you lose blacks, women, Latinos (and Republicans have probably already lost Arab and Muslim Americas), what are you left with? You can’t win a general election with the angry, white, male vote.  That’s clearly a core vote for the Republican Party but it’s not going to be enough.

I really think a healthy two-party or multi-party system is necessary for long-term prosperity (emphasis on “healthy”).

I guess I should get my AC fixed.

138 Responses to Not happy

  1. avatar
    richCares March 20, 2012 at 8:18 pm #

    I ditto everything except the Air Conditioning, mine works.
    I certainly wish Arpaio & Corsi & Zullo get a day in court, I also wish Orly is completely banned from any court room

  2. avatar
    Joey March 20, 2012 at 8:29 pm #

    “There’s a little song I wrote.
    You might want to sing it note for note.
    Don’t worry, be happy.”

  3. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 20, 2012 at 8:38 pm #

    Dr C:

    What you need are some Birfer jokes. I am putting together a “How Many Birfers Does It Take???” Internet Article, but you sound like you need relief now. Sooo

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. None. They prefer to remain in the dark.

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. Where is the light bulb from???

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. 37. One to change the bulb, and thirty six to write indignant letters to the editor complaining about burnt out bulbs.

    A Mario Apuzzo Knock Knock joke:

    Knock, knock.
    Who’s there???
    Mario.
    Mario who???
    Mario England is not where we get our laws. It is France!!!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  4. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 20, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    When I have a mood like the one you describe, it gives me solace to consider that so far we have been able to depend on the judicial system. Even Judges who may in private detest Obama politically are steadfast in rejecting Birferism, and should continue to do so. The expression “sober as a Judge” didn’t come from nowhere.

    The media don’t want to pull the plug on a good story. The swift-boaters will do what they do. The weak-minded will ignore reason. The goal-posts can be moved forever, even when they’re planted in muck. Friends who should know better will ask why BHO hasn’t cleared up all the ‘doubts.’

    But the courts are no so easily fooled. Thank goodness. BHO will be on every ballot in the land, the Secret Service will keep him safe, and the crazier the wingnuts get, the more likely it becomes that he will serve two terms.

    Corragio!

  5. avatar
    Scientist March 20, 2012 at 9:24 pm #

    Your frustration is not unwarranted, but don’t lose the forest for the trees. The birthers have lost and lost badly. Not just in court, but in the court of public opinion. Obama won a decisive victory and is favored to do so again. Even if a big upset occurs and he loses, the demographic trends are clear. He won’t be the last multi-racial President. There will be a woman and/or openly gay President in my lifetime (and I’m in my 50s). Opinions on mixed-race marriage, same-sex marriage and a whole host of issues have shifted dramatically just in the last 10 years.

    While there are still plenty of racists and fools, the US has elected a person of a racial minority to the top position and will do it again. No other major country has done that. Not the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, Germany and not even France (sorry Lupin). The Republican party will change or die. If it dies, something will replace it as the Federalists and the Whigs were replaced. There is room for both a real Socialist party and a sensible Conservative Party like the UK or Canadian Tories. If you build it, they will come

    So get your AC fixed and cheer up, Doc,

  6. avatar
    Thrifty March 20, 2012 at 9:41 pm #

    I like this sentence the best. I would add my own personal rule. People will be jerks, liars, bigots, etc., I just shrug it off and say “big deal; I just won’t associate with those people”. I also think they are in the minority and most people are basically good. It’s just that the jerks, liars, and bigots are the loudest because they have little shame and lots of rage.

    To put it another way, nobody ever marched on Washington with signs saying “Everything is relatively okay.”

    Scientist: While there are still plenty of racists and fools, the US has elected a person of a racial minority to the top position and will do it again

  7. avatar
    Kenneth Olaf Olsen March 20, 2012 at 9:50 pm #

    If your hero would just act in a responsible, adult manner, he could make the whole problem go away quickly.

    Better an honest carnival barker than a dishonest president.

  8. avatar
    Thrifty March 20, 2012 at 9:50 pm #

    *groan*

  9. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:55 pm #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter:
    Dr C:

    What you need are some Birfer jokes. I am putting together a “How Many Birfers Does It Take???” Internet Article, but you sound like you need relief now. Sooo

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. None. They prefer to remain in the dark.

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. Where is the light bulb from???

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. 37. One to change the bulb, and thirty six to write indignant letters to the editor complaining about burnt out bulbs.

    A Mario Apuzzo Knock Knock joke:

    Knock, knock.
    Who’s there???
    Mario.
    Mario who???
    Mario England is not where we get our laws. It is France!!!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    Nice! :-D

  10. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:56 pm #

    Scientist:
    Your frustration is not unwarranted, but don’t lose the forest for the trees.The birthers have lost and lost badly.Not just in court, but in the court of public opinion.Obama won a decisive victory and is favored to do so again.Even if a big upset occurs and he loses, the demographic trends are clear.He won’t be the last multi-racial President.There will be a woman and/or openly gay President in my lifetime (and I’m in my 50s).Opinions on mixed-race marriage, same-sex marriage and a whole host of issues have shifted dramatically just in the last 10 years.

    While there are still plenty of racists and fools, the US has elected a person of a racial minority to the top position and will do it again.No other major country has done that.Not the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, Germany and not even France (sorry Lupin).The Republican party will change or die.If it dies, something will replace it as the Federalists and the Whigs were replaced.There is room for both a real Socialist party and a sensible Conservative Party like the UK or Canadian Tories.If you build it, they will come

    So get your AC fixed and cheer up, Doc,

    Well said.

  11. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:58 pm #

    Kenneth Olaf Olsen:
    If your hero would just act in a responsible, adult manner, he could make the whole problem go away quickly.

    Better an honest carnival barker than a dishonest president.

    You are no friend to the irony meter.

  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 10:02 pm #

    Best birther joke of the lot. Thanks!

    Kenneth Olaf Olsen: If your hero would just act in a responsible, adult manner, he could make the whole problem go away quickly.

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 10:05 pm #

    Also an old friend died today. He was elderly and had Alzheimer’s. But that’s OK.

  14. avatar
    Linda March 20, 2012 at 10:09 pm #

    Hope you and your AC are better. You do a great job here. Even catching the occasional birther here, helps. Even what I know, I still look up to have links, etc. I continue to learn both from that and from what others post. Thanks. Big group hug!

  15. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 20, 2012 at 10:10 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Also an old friend died today. He was elderly and had Alzheimer’s. But that’s OK.

    Cause tomorrow he won’t remember it???

    OH, that was morbid, but I have been reading somebody called Charles Addams.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  16. avatar
    Kenneth Olaf Olsen March 20, 2012 at 10:18 pm #

    You’re welcome. Gotta admire your hero’s casual disdain for honest professionals:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/28/carnival-barkers-slam-obama_n_854702.html

  17. avatar
    Bob March 20, 2012 at 10:28 pm #

    WND is for Birthers what a porn studio is for people with a specific fetish. They both have to come up with slightly new variations on the same story . . . over and over and over.

  18. avatar
    Joey March 20, 2012 at 10:46 pm #

    Kenneth Olaf Olsen:
    You’re welcome. Gotta admire your hero’s casual disdain for honest professionals:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/28/carnival-barkers-slam-obama_n_854702.html

    Now THAT was funny! Thanks for the giggle!

  19. avatar
    J. Potter March 20, 2012 at 11:09 pm #

    Kenneth Olaf Olsen: Kenneth Olaf Olsen

    Heh …. his initials spell Koo! Koo-koo, koo-koo.

    Thanks for the flog of the year-old koo-koo carnival fluff piece!

  20. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 11:10 pm #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: Cause tomorrow he won’t remember it???

    OH, that was morbid, but I have been reading somebody called Charles Addams.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    Addams was a genius.

    http://www.cadavercafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/charles-addams1.jpg

  21. avatar
    G March 20, 2012 at 11:23 pm #

    Agreed on both accounts. The world will always have its share of crazies, racists, fools, extremists and gullible idiots.

    The world will go on and progress will continue its long, slow march regardless of the antics and wailing of the regressive elements out there. There will always be some speed bumps along the way, sure. But in the end, as long as most people remain vigilent and don’t kowtow to the corrosive elements, they will continue to be remembered as foolish footnotes on the wrong side of history.

    Scientist: Your frustration is not unwarranted, but don’t lose the forest for the trees. The birthers have lost and lost badly. Not just in court, but in the court of public opinion. Obama won a decisive victory and is favored to do so again. Even if a big upset occurs and he loses, the demographic trends are clear. He won’t be the last multi-racial President.

    Thrifty: I like this sentence the best. I would add my own personal rule. People will be jerks, liars, bigots, etc., I just shrug it off and say “big deal; I just won’t associate with those people”. I also think they are in the minority and most people are basically good. It’s just that the jerks, liars, and bigots are the loudest because they have little shame and lots of rage.
    To put it another way, nobody ever marched on Washington with signs saying “Everything is relatively okay.”

  22. avatar
    J. Potter March 20, 2012 at 11:28 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Also an old friend died today. He was elderly and had Alzheimer’s. But that’s OK.

    Sorry to hear that, Doc. Reminds me to continue to treasure my eldest friend. She is the ultimate anti-birther. She should be cloned and the clones sent to every Tea Party coven in the country. Have to call her as soon as I pay my phone bill!

  23. avatar
    Dave March 20, 2012 at 11:36 pm #

    Zakaria’s points about the GOP have been raised many times before, and while they are something the RNC should be fretting about this problem is ultimately self-limiting. When the GOP starts falling behind you’ll see new GOP candidates with an adjusted platform that plays to a larger coalition.

  24. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:37 pm #

    Superior.

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: Knock, knock.
    Who’s there???
    Mario.
    Mario who???
    Mario England is not where we get our laws. It is France!!!

  25. avatar
    Thrifty March 20, 2012 at 11:40 pm #

    I hear so much talk about the decline of the Republican party. It sounds like hogwash. They won a majority in the House and picked up a few Senate seats in 2010. How does a political party in decline gain seats?

  26. avatar
    veritas March 20, 2012 at 11:43 pm #

    I’m not happy about Joe Arpaio and his band of birthers becoming the 2012 version of Donald Trump, getting news cycles they don’t warrant, and I’m not happy with the mainstream media doing a sloppy job of debunking the Arpaio investigation.

    Debunking the investigation??? you mean debunking the results of the investigation right? well Obama could debunk them by allowing 1 or 2 attorneys that are suing him see his birth records. the issue would be over, and he would make those crazy birfers look stupid. my point is he could settle this BC issue in a matter of hours but he wont. my son just applied for a passport to go to Mexico, I would love to see the faces of the people at the office if he brought his lap top with an image of his BC. why doesn’t he sue these people for defamation of character? I know I would. Truth be told I do enjoy your web site.

  27. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:43 pm #

    None. Only the original bulb is acceptable.

    Majority Will: Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???

  28. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:48 pm #

    You don’t know very much about birthers (who by the way already look stupid). Of course no attorney could tell a real one from a fake one but did you hear the Arizona posse demanding to date samples of the microfilm copies? And even if they proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama’s birth certificate came from 1961, there is the whole fraud avenue. We have the Daily Pen writing articles that say Hawaii registered foreign children, and the Cold Case Posse is saying that, and then we’ll have corrupt Hawaiian officials in 1961 (this is already being said about them today).

    Don’t be silly. Birthers will never be satisfied. If they could be satisfied they would have been satisfied by the short form in 2008 or certainly by the Hawaii Department of Health press release saying the original was in the files, the newspaper announcements and the published state birth index.

    Over the past three years, the birthers have built alternate universe from which there is no return.

    veritas: 1 or 2 attorneys that are suing him see his birth records. the issue would be over, and he would make those crazy birfers look stupid.

  29. avatar
    J. Potter March 20, 2012 at 11:53 pm #

    Thrifty:
    I hear so much talk about the decline of the Republican party.It sounds like hogwash.They won a majority in the House and picked up a few Senate seats in 2010.How does a political party in decline gain seats?

    It’s the last gasp. No, really. This one is the last one.

    More seriously, Our unfortunate reliance on 2 permanent parties guarantees the continued survival of both of them. Many of us have opined for a split in the Reds. If they ditched the Deep Red anchor, reinstating the difference between “conservative” and “stupid”*, the remainder would take off like a rocket. Imagine conservatives once again free to challenge their constituents!
    ________________

    * Self-destructive, prudish, regressive, whatever, ad nauseum, take your pick.

  30. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    Another thing that makes me unhappy is the 364 spam comments received since this morning.

  31. avatar
    Dave March 20, 2012 at 11:58 pm #

    Yes, the GOP is clearly not currently declining — unless you count the fact that ten years ago we were hearing about the “permanent Republican majority” that has since evaporated. Pieces on this subject often imply the GOP is in decline, but clearly the effect they’re talking about is the potential for decline in the future.

    Thrifty:
    I hear so much talk about the decline of the Republican party.It sounds like hogwash.They won a majority in the House and picked up a few Senate seats in 2010.How does a political party in decline gain seats?

  32. avatar
    J. Potter March 21, 2012 at 12:02 am #

    veritas: I’m not happy about Joe Arpaio and his band of birthers becoming the 2012 version of Donald Trump, getting news cycles they don’t warrant,

    Outside of the birtherverse, I haven’t heard peep one about Arpaio. Trump in his pretty pink dreams.

    Obama briefly occupied The Chair on April 27th, 2011, and, excepting a few brief, comic dalliances and exploitative marketing schemes, wisely left it Empty ever since.

    Again I refer you to the Tao of Obama*, as recorded by Laura Joffe Numeroff, and excellently illustrated by Felicia Bond. The man is a genius; this calculated wisdom applies equally well to terrorists and birthers. From personal experience, I can assure you it applies equally well to deadbeat tenants.
    _________________

    * Link is to crummy PowerPoint version, sorry about that. Want to make sure you get a chance to read it right now.

  33. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 12:04 am #

    veritas: my point is he could settle this BC issue in a matter of hours but he wont

    Utter idiotic and disingenuous nonsense.

    Political enemies are only interested in total destruction. Nothing else will suffice.

  34. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 12:08 am #

    veritas: why doesn’t he sue these people for defamation of character?

    Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan

    and

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

  35. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 12:11 am #

    veritas: I would love to see the faces of the people at the office if he brought his lap top with an image of his BC.

    Do you think Hawaii and other states issue laptops to its residents with images of their certified birth certificates?

  36. avatar
    John Reilly March 21, 2012 at 12:20 am #

    Doc: My condolences on your friend’s passing.

    As to politics and your web site. Cheer up. You are doing God’s work here on earth spreading the truth in a logical and moral context.

  37. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 12:24 am #

    My sincere condolences.

    Dr. Conspiracy: Also an old friend died today. He was elderly and had Alzheimer’s. But that’s OK.

  38. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 12:29 am #

    I’m no longer so sure about that. I truly think that the party has crossed a threshold from which it can’t recover and can only spiral further down towards even more extremism and madness…

    The only recovery I see is the cast-out RINOs and sane conservatives eventually abandon the crazed red-meat cancerous elements and build a new and more rational party as the old one self-collapses from the irrational demands of its terminally angry and rigid base.

    Dave: When the GOP starts falling behind you’ll see new GOP candidates with an adjusted platform that plays to a larger coalition.

  39. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 12:41 am #

    A long-term decline is rarely linear. In fact, short periods of reclaimed victory should be expected from a declining movement, as the very nature of decline will lead to intense periods of lashing-out in order to reclaim former glory.

    If these occur without a corresponding course correction – like the 2010 Tea Party victory, in which the results solve nothing and the trend to extremism only increases – then the overall trend remains in place.

    So yes, when a party has become more insular and extreme over time and less inclusive, that is an overall sign of decline. 2010 was merely a backlash effort of increased intensity. It succeeded in a non-Presidential cycle because lower turnout simply favors intensity. But the GOP has done nothing to change the larger trend of becoming even more insular and less inclusive in the process. Sadly, they have only doubled-down and accelerated it.

    Thrifty: I hear so much talk about the decline of the Republican party. It sounds like hogwash. They won a majority in the House and picked up a few Senate seats in 2010. How does a political party in decline gain seats?

  40. avatar
    Obsolete March 21, 2012 at 12:49 am #

    veritas:
    I’m not happy about Joe Arpaio and his band of birthers becoming the 2012 version of Donald Trump, getting news cycles they don’t warrant, and I’m not happy with the mainstream media doing a sloppy job of debunking the Arpaio investigation.

    Debunking the investigation??? you mean debunking the results of the investigation right? well Obama could debunk them by allowing 1 or 2 attorneys that are suing him see his birth records. the issue would be over, and he would make those crazy birfers look stupid. my point is he could settle this BC issue in a matter of hours but he wont. my son just applied for a passport to go to Mexico, I would love to see the faces of the people at the office if he brought his lap top with an image of his BC. why doesn’t he sue these people for defamation of character? I know I would. Truth be told I do enjoy your web site.

    So how do you suggest Obama change his skin color, thereby placating the birthers?

  41. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 21, 2012 at 12:51 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Another thing that makes me unhappy is the 364 spam comments received since this morning.

    Thank you for the “superior” !!! Plus, on the spam stuff, I am saving up some of the funnier ones on mine to print in the sidebar, but I have to do widget stuff to show them. Have you noticed how the spammers are getting sneakier, and repeating part of what you have in the post back at you???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  42. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 12:57 am #

    But it doesn’t mean that it is the SAME two parties. Even though our system favors a 2-party system (although it is NOT required); our nation’s history has seen one of the major parties collapse and be replaced before. That usually seems to offer a small timeframe where there is a broader set of viable party alternatives competing, with eventually one of them emerging to replace the one the failed. I actually think this is the long term realignment trend we are headed back towards.

    The standard cycle is just for parties to shift in their priorities and platforms over time…usually every so many decades…and yet still retain the same overall party title banner. The Democratic Party seems to have survived by doing this type of internal shifting quite well. The Republican Party has managed this for the past century and a half too.

    However, as the Federalists and the Whigs demonstrate, there are times where a major party can eventually die out and be replaced. The time cycle of decline and replacement tends to take place over the course of several decades.

    I love this graphic representation of the history of the Political Parties which shows this dynamic, including some of the underlying minority party movements that become a factor in times of both shifting and in showing the splintering effect that takes place when the slow demise of one major party leads to the eventual emergence of its successor:

    http://www.historyshots.com/Parties/index.cfm

    J. Potter: More seriously, Our unfortunate reliance on 2 permanent parties guarantees the continued survival of both of them.

  43. avatar
    Benji Franklin March 21, 2012 at 1:09 am #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: What you need are some Birfer jokes.

    Here’s another Birfer joke to cheer you up, Doc!

    Question: “How many of the thousands of Birfer theories of Presidential ineligibility does it take to have Obama removed from office, and frog-marched to a waiting birfer Guillotine?”

    Answer:”Only one; but none can get past the bounds of prospectivity.”

  44. avatar
    Greenfinches March 21, 2012 at 1:34 am #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. None. They prefer to remain in the dark.

    Q. How many Birfers does it take to change a light bulb???
    A. Where is the light bulb from???

    Super!!!

    and good luck, Doc C, with the aircon. Wish I needed it here……….

  45. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 1:35 am #

    The current GOP started with Nixon’s implementation of the Southern Strategy and then Reagan’s courting of the Evangelical base in the late 70’s. Reagan however was very “big tent” and inclusive in his presentation and was able to broaden appeal with optimism and charisma. GWB had a chance to improve the GOP’s inroads into the growing hispanic population, but the other destructive trends put in place by the GOP were already starting to backfire by then.

    When you look at the increasingly cynical attack-party politics of both Gingrich’s 1994 GOP campaign strategy and the culmination of Rove’s even more cynical “50 plus one” approach, all this did was to reinforce a trend towards hardline and extreme positions and a demonizing of one’s opponents. All of these strategies have only served to “cast out” moderate voices and increase the list of dogmatic positions and categories of people and viewpoints looked down upon as “not one of us”.

    With Obama’s election, the GOP viscerally overreacted and doubled down on these exclusionary and demonizing trends. Not only does this result in casting out more and more segments of their party as “insufficiently pure”, but it also becomes increasingly a turn-off to other segments of the population.

    The GOP has become increasingly unfriendly to minorities, women, science, education, young people, non-fundamentalist evangelicals, etc.

    Here in the 21st century where statements can now live forever and easily be found on the internet, it is increasingly hard to see how they come back from the ever expanding number of bridges they are burning. The long term demographics are certainly not in their favor in any of those categories.

    That is why I believe they are working so hard on various voter suppression efforts and to keep the economy in poor condition. Sadly Irrational anger has become their defacto political weapon of appeal. But what do they have beyond that to offer?

    Unless they succeed in turning the US into a quasi-corporate plutocracy / theocractic fiefdom molded in their image, I don’t see how they can maintain control over all of the numerous factions they scorn in the long term.

    I see this being an era of increasing uncertainty as US politics moves into another major shift in adapting to 21st century realities and trends. While the GOP can still achieve short term bursts of intensity that helps it to maintain a level of control in the short-term, I simply don’t see how it can credibly reverse some of its increasingly exclusionary positions and adapt to the long term demographic realities it will face.

    In the long term, I believe the GOP remains on a trend towards becoming an increasingly regional (southern / rural western) party and eventually being replaced in prominence by some new major alternative to the Democratic Party. Note: I do think that eventual dynamic will also change the makeup of the Democratic Party in the process as well.

    Dave: Yes, the GOP is clearly not currently declining — unless you count the fact that ten years ago we were hearing about the “permanent Republican majority” that has since evaporated. Pieces on this subject often imply the GOP is in decline, but clearly the effect they’re talking about is the potential for decline in the future.

  46. avatar
    Greenfinches March 21, 2012 at 1:39 am #

    Majority Will: here will be a woman and/or openly gay President in my lifetime (and I’m in my 50s).

    I can agree with that – but I wish I could be more optimistic about there being an openly atheist winning.

  47. avatar
    J. Potter March 21, 2012 at 1:53 am #

    G: But it doesn’t mean that it is the SAME two parties.

    Those cycles require viable 3rd parties. The two main parties are literally enshrined in law at the state level. Being a political nut, you know this; there are rules for Reds & Blues and everyone else. Can also be termed the inside and the outside, and the us and the them. The only realistic hope for a change in the parties is from within. We need a visionary conservative to rise, and call the bullshit bullshit. Not bull feces, bull poo, or bull dung, but bee-yull … shee-yitt.

  48. avatar
    dunstvangeet March 21, 2012 at 3:31 am #

    veritas: well Obama could debunk them by allowing 1 or 2 attorneys that are suing him see his birth records. the issue would be over, and he would make those crazy birfers look stupid.

    So, let me get this correct…

    He should call these idiotic birthers up, invite them to the White House, and show them personally the documents that have been up on the internet for the public to view for the last 4 years?

    Let me run you down the history… 4 years ago, people said, “If he’d just release his birth certificate, this thing would all be over.” So, Obama took his valid Hawaii State Birth Certificate which is prima facie evidence in any court of law, scanned it in, posted it on the web where anybody could see it, sent the image to news organizations, and invited news organizations to visit his campaign headquarters in Chicago and physically handle it. Birthers said, “It’s a forgery, it proves nothing, and it doesn’t matter since his father was Kenyan.”

    So, after a couple of years, he releases his “long-form” birth certificate by writing the Hawaii Department of Health to grant him a special exception, then he scans it into a PDF, photocopies it so each reporter would have a photocopy, and then hands his birth certificate to reporters so that they can feel it. Even WND’s own White House Coorispondent is satisfied with it. He posts the scan he made on the White House website. Birthers said, “It’s a forgery! It doesn’t prove anything, and he’s ineligible anyways since his father was Kenyan.”

    Now, you’re suggesting that he invite a couple of birthers who have no legal right to see his birth certificate to the white house, personally hand them the birth certificate, and expect them to do something else than scream “It’s a forgery! It doesn’t prove anything, and he’s ineligible anyways, since his father is Kenyan.” Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over, and expecting a different result. That is exactly what you’re suggesting that he do.

    my point is he could settle this BC issue in a matter of hours but he wont. my son just applied for a passport to go to Mexico, I would love to see the faces of the people at the office if he brought his lap top with an image of his BC.

    Just wondering. What do you expect? None of the “Birther Lawyers” have any more right to see the birth certificate than your average voter. So, should Barack Obama release it to the Media? He did that. Should he put it in his Campaign Headquarters and invite the media to come feel it, take pictures of it? He did that. Should he go into the White House Press Room, hand out photocopies of his birth certificate to reporters, and then hand it around, so that the reporters can feel it? He did that. The only thing that might be left is him buying every voter a personalized copy of his birth certificate. That should only cost somewhere around $1 billion. the reality is that he did much more than just put an image on his website. He allowed multiple news agencies to take pictures of it, and distribute those pictures. the image was mainly so that the public at large could look at it themselves.

    why doesn’t he sue these people for defamation of character? I know I would.

    And you’d look petty on it. It’s a loser politically to sue the carnival barkers, as you seem petty, and you also would lose as you are a public figure and you have a significant higher burden of proof on slander. Not only do you have to prove that it’s wrong, but you have to prove that they knew it was wrong, they did it with malicious intent, and there was a monetary damage to it. It is very hard for a public figure to sue anybody for libel and slander. Ask Jerry Falwell.

    Truth be told I do enjoy your web site.

  49. avatar
    Keith March 21, 2012 at 3:53 am #

    Scientist: The birthers have lost and lost badly. Not just in court, but in the court of public opinion. Obama won a decisive victory and is favored to do so again.

    Is it too early to start to worry about the scorched earth cat fight being set up for 2016?

  50. avatar
    Keith March 21, 2012 at 5:39 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Also an old friend died today. He was elderly and had Alzheimer’s. But that’s OK.

    So it goes. My sympathy to family and friends.

    I’m off tomorrow to drink much too much fine wine with a great friend and human being who has only a few months left to enjoy this kind of thing due to motor neurone disease. Maury is a great friend, a connoisseur of fine wine and great trad jazz.

    Not everyone can attend their own wake and we are going to make sure it is a memorable one.

  51. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 6:04 am #

    ….Please, tell us more… not sure what you mean here….

    Keith: Is it too early to start to worry about the scorched earth cat fight being set up for 2016?

  52. avatar
    Keith March 21, 2012 at 6:38 am #

    G:
    ….Please, tell us more… not sure what you mean here….

    The Repugs are eating each other for lunch this year when the only possible hope they might have to win would be to present a united front. No way on earth are they going to win this year.

    On the other hand, they have poisoned public opinion with their crap and positioned themselves so far right that they won’t be able to back down before 2016 especially with having to fight Obama every spec of the way for four years. True, Gingrich and Paul and Romney are probably too old to go around again, but Santorum, the biggest nest crapper of them isn’t.

    And who is on deck for the Dems? In a race without an incumbent, are they going to be able to energize the electorate enough to avoid getting down into the gutter with the GOP?

  53. avatar
    Scientist March 21, 2012 at 7:14 am #

    veritas: the issue would be over

    In war, when one side is routed, the war ends with their unconditional surrender. And make no mistake, for the birthers this war has been a rout, start to finish. The Japanese and the Germans were in better shape in 1945. The way to end it is to get all the birther bigwigs together-Taitz, Apuzzo, Farah, Corsi, Arpaio, Haskins, Trump, whomever else-and have them issue a statement that Obama has won. They can still claim they are “right”, that every document back to the Magna Carta is a forgery, that you need 8 citizen great grandparents, that there is an enormous conspiracy involving the entire known universe. Then, they can say the conspiracy is too big and powerful for mere mortals to do anything about, so they surrender. Drop all lawsuits, Shut down all websites. Close paypal accounts. Pull “books” from Amazon. Announce that henceforth WND will focus on actual policy disagreements.

    That, my friend, is how you end it.

  54. avatar
    misha March 21, 2012 at 8:08 am #

    Thomas Brown: Even Judges who may in private detest Obama politically are steadfast in rejecting Birferism

    Except Judge Cebull. If he does not resign, I hope he is impeached. Alcee Hastings was impeached and convicted.

  55. avatar
    misha March 21, 2012 at 8:24 am #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: OH, that was morbid, but I have been reading somebody called Charles Addams.

    My favorite Charles Addams cartoon: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2632/3765120149_c563060f6e.jpg

  56. avatar
    misha March 21, 2012 at 8:47 am #

    veritas: well Obama could debunk them by allowing 1 or 2 attorneys that are suing him see his birth records. the issue would be over

    No, it will not be over. Birthers are fascists and authoritarians. Farah is a Phalangist. Orly Taitz does not believe in democracy.

    This is where Orly comes from:
    “Settler leader calls democracy an obstacle to Israel’s higher calling

    Veteran settler leader Benny Katzover: ‘We didn’t come here to establish a democratic state.’ ”
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/settler-leader-calls-democracy-an-obstacle-to-israel-s-higher-calling-1.407490

  57. avatar
    misha March 21, 2012 at 8:53 am #

    “I had a kidney stone last night.”

    Max, my Siamese sealpoint, had kidney stones. It cost $800, and that was with health insurance.

  58. avatar
    JPotter March 21, 2012 at 9:41 am #

    Keith: scorched earth cat fight

    Scorched Earth is still one of the most awesome games of all time. My son and I play it sometimes on the big screen. Nothing more satisfying than carefully calculating, and then anticipating the instant, pixelated satisfaction as your prepare to push the button on someone. So sweet.

    That kind of ROI is so elusive in the birtherverse. A round of Scroched Earth is great therapy for whatever frustrates ya.

    Stay away from the 3D mess that came later, tho.

  59. avatar
    veritas March 21, 2012 at 10:01 am #

    Obsolete: So how do you suggest Obama change his skin color, thereby placating the birthers?

    well, there you go again, suggesting this is about race. he is more Arab than black not to mention his white momma.

  60. avatar
    JoZeppy March 21, 2012 at 10:26 am #

    veritas: why doesn’t he sue these people for defamation of character?

    Because unlike you, the President knows the law. For a public figure to win a defamation suit is near impossible. It requires proving the person lied, and knew it was a lie. But then again,

    veritas: I know I would.

    And then you could chalk up one more loss to the total birther law suit lost. You see, there is the difference between birthers and reasonable people. Reasonable people actually look at what the law is before deciding to file a suit, rather than clogging up the courts with frivolous law suits that have no basis in law.

  61. avatar
    Lupin March 21, 2012 at 10:42 am #

    Scientist: While there are still plenty of racists and fools, the US has elected a person of a racial minority to the top position and will do it again. No other major country has done that. Not the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, Germany and not even France (sorry Lupin).

    Oh I totally agree. A recent poll here showed that something like 44% of the French rated Obama’s election as the #2 most important event of the decade, Fukishima being #1.

  62. avatar
    Lupin March 21, 2012 at 10:43 am #

    veritas: he is more Arab than black

    What???

  63. avatar
    Lupin March 21, 2012 at 10:48 am #

    Weirdly it’s been pretty from here too. In the last month we’ve lost a cousin’s wife (who was also suffering from alzheimer), a good friend (to cancer), the father of a close friend (to some kind of rapid pneumonia), two of our friends including another close one have been diagnosed with cancer… It’s really been a harrowing time. But life goes on, I suppose.

  64. avatar
    JD Reed March 21, 2012 at 10:58 am #

    Veritas, what an ironic screen name you have. You’ve been answered adequately on your suggestion that the President put the matter to rest by just showing his vault copy — it wouldn’t, based on the overwhelmingly documented propensity of birthers to move goalposts. And the President should sue for libel if he thinks he’s being lied about? That would be a loser politically, and almost certainly in court, as a president is virtually libel-proof, as others have shown by pointing to NY Times v. Sullivan.
    But your assertion that Obama is more Arab than black shows either the quality of your search skills, or your level of intellectual honesty. That Obama is mostly Arab on his father’s side is a thoroughly-debunked urban legend, and has been, for over two years. If you have good Internet search skills, you can dial up a picture of Barack Obama Sr., who’s black as midnight. So I challenge you: look up a picture of Obama Senior and then come tell us why you think he is predominately Arab rather than black African.

  65. avatar
    Michael Heuss March 21, 2012 at 11:05 am #

    Doc – my condolences on the loss of your friend. As I’ve gotten older, I find this happens more often and at a greater rate then one can keep up with. My mormon upbringing encourages me to offer the suggestion that the rewards of heaven are the price the living pay for our friend’s comfort in heaven – but as I have gotten older, I find that solace less comforting then it did so long ago.

    To veritas – the only people who care about the presidents race are birthers, Samuel Jackson and racists. It isn’t a factor to those of us who can dispassionately look at the evidence and draw rational conclusions. The only mystery in birtherism is why those who practice it feel so passionately about something that provides a total absence of anything to hang one’s hat on.

    To Squeaky – thanks for posting comments here- that is how I found your blog, which I really, really enjoy. You offer a style and perspective that is unique, entertaining, and completely worth reading. So thank you.

    To those saying the republican party is on the decline – I don’t think that is the case, yet. They are going through a transition period, though – and if they continue on the course they are currently trodding, they may pull still go full Whig on us. The democrats survived the civil war, the republican party survived FDR. Whether or not the republicans survive their wholesale endorsement of ignorance, religion, paranoia and obstructionism is too early to call yet.

    Lastly – to Mr. Olson and Veritas – it is without a doubt you aren’t here to discuss anything substantive, or have anything to offer the conversation. Why are you here, other than to entertain us by playing the buffoon? Isn’t there something else you should be doing?

  66. avatar
    Rickey March 21, 2012 at 11:11 am #

    Lupin: What???

    The story that Obama is only 6.25% black goes back to 2008. This appears to be where it originated:

    http://kennethelamb.blogspot.com/2008/02/barak-obama-questions-about-ethnic.html

    Lamb’s idiotic claims were picked up and repeated by Monica Crowley on a Fox News show.

    http://newscorpwatch.org/research/200806260002

  67. avatar
    Bob March 21, 2012 at 11:14 am #

    Lupin: veritas: he is more Arab than black

    Thanks for keeping track of such things. You’re a real gem.

  68. avatar
    misha March 21, 2012 at 11:36 am #

    veritas: he is more Arab than black

    Genetically, Palestinian Arabs are closer to Israeli Jews, than to other other Arabs. If my ancestors did not inter-marry with Lithuanians and Russians, I would look like an Ethiopian Jew. Plus, I have an Afro-Judeo cousin.

    The world is changing, and unlike you, I am not afraid.

  69. avatar
    JoZeppy March 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

    veritas: well, there you go again, suggesting this is about race. he is more Arab than black not to mention his white momma.

    I love this line of argument. “Oh, no, I can’t possibly be a racist, because afterall, Obama is half white, or an arab.”

    Of course, these are the same people who would argue one drop of african blood makes you a n***er…but hey, who needs consistency, when you’re looking for any reason to hate?

  70. avatar
    Northland10 March 21, 2012 at 1:24 pm #

    They are likely even more offended by the fact the Obama is the poster child for multi-cultural. He is a constant reminder of something they dislike. Being a product of a black male and white woman gets the hard core haters even more steamed.

    I suspect they would take it easier if he was the child of 2 black parents from Chicago.

    JoZeppy: I love this line of argument.“Oh, no, I can’t possibly be a racist, because afterall, Obama is half white, or an arab.”

    Of course, these are the same people who would argue one drop of african blood makes you a n***er…but hey, who needs consistency, when you’re looking for any reason to hate?

  71. avatar
    JPotter March 21, 2012 at 1:26 pm #

    And we all know that all Arabs are Muslims. ALL of them. Nothing racist about it, it’s a known fact. Arabs are unamerican by birth.

    And all Muslims are evil. Nothing racist about it, it’s a known fact. Nothing racist about it, it’s a known fact. Muslims are unamerican.

    Arabs are muslims at birth. just like Christians are born Christian, and American.

    God, so stupid. It’s a second order prejudice!

    What is this, an ongoing centennial of American eugenics?

    I suggest the use of the phrase “Take our country back”—or any variation thereof—should be punishable as a hate crime, unless terminated with a prepositional phrase, as in “Take our country back from the ________“. Corporate interests, pinko communists, inferior races, whatever is on the speaker’s mind. Both sides use this and numerous other heavily coded, supposedly empty phrases. Let’s start asking for clarification.

  72. avatar
    Fazil Iskander March 21, 2012 at 1:42 pm #

    Thank you, Dunstvangeet. That was as lucid a post as I’ve read anywhere in a long time. You’ve made my day.

    dunstvangeet: So, let me get this correct…

    He should call these idiotic birthers up, invite them to the White House, and show them personally the documents that have been up on the internet for the public to view for the last 4 years?

    Let me run you down the history…4 years ago, people said, “If he’d just release his birth certificate, this thing would all be over.”So, Obama took his valid Hawaii State Birth Certificate which is prima facie evidence in any court of law, scanned it in, posted it on the web where anybody could see it, sent the image to news organizations, and invited news organizations to visit his campaign headquarters in Chicago and physically handle it.Birthers said, “It’s a forgery, it proves nothing, and it doesn’t matter since his father was Kenyan.”

  73. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 21, 2012 at 2:25 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:54 pm Dr. Conspiracy(Quote) # “Another thing that makes me unhappy is the 364 spam comments received since this morning.”

    Not all were “spam comments”. Some were from me addressing the absurd & leftist agitprop postings from G & Scientist on Terrorist Groups & Iraq War, and questioning you on your para-military facts.

  74. avatar
    Kenneth Olsen March 21, 2012 at 2:43 pm #

    Someday scientists and philosophers will laugh among themselves as they examine why Dr. Con and his congregation spend so much time and emotional energy avoiding the simple and obvious conclusion: The LFBC PDF is a forgery.

  75. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 21, 2012 at 2:46 pm #

    dunstvangeet: Let me run you down the history…4 years ago, people said, “If he’d just release his birth certificate, this thing would all be over.”So, Obama took his valid Hawaii State Birth Certificate which is *prima facie evidence in any court of law*, *scanned it in*, posted it on the web where anybody could see it, sent the image to news organizations, and invited news organizations to visit his campaign headquarters in Chicago and physically handle it.Birthers said, “It’s a forgery, it proves nothing, and it doesn’t matter since his father was Kenyan.”

    *prima facie evidence in any court of law*

    From the dictionary:

    prima facie evidence
    n. Law
    Evidence that would, if uncontested, establish a fact or raise a presumption of a fact.

    *scanned it in*

    Have the scanned it in {copies] been contested?

  76. avatar
    Stanislaw March 21, 2012 at 2:55 pm #

    Kenneth Olsen:
    Someday scientists and philosophers will laugh among themselves as they examine why birthers spend so much time and emotional energy avoiding the simple and obvious conclusion: The LFBC PDF is legitimate.

    Fixed that for you.

  77. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 21, 2012 at 2:57 pm #

    Kenneth Olsen:
    Someday scientists and philosophers will laugh among themselves as they examine why Dr. Con and his congregation spend so much time and emotional energy avoiding the simple and obvious conclusion: The LFBC PDF is a forgery.

    Because nobody with a working brain-stem would believe the .pdf is a forgery, and nobody with an IQ greater than a stalk of broccoli would think that examining a .pdf of a document says anything about the original document.

    And the .pdf CANNOT BE the original, as you claim.

    There are higher-resolution copies of the LFBC. You cannot make a higher-resolution document from a lower-res image. So the .pdf cannot have been used to create the paper documents on file. QED.

    It’s so simple slime mold could understand it. But I can see why you’re having trouble.

  78. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 3:00 pm #

    Kenneth Olsen: LFBC PDF

    Only mentally challenged, bigoted political enemies with ulterior motives can’t comprehend that the state of Hawaii has vouched for the date and place of birth of the President which satisfies two of the three Constitutional requirements for eligibility.

  79. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 21, 2012 at 3:06 pm #

    I didn’t see any by you on the spam list unless you were using the name “Cheap Viagra.”

    Rambo Ike: Not all were “spam comments”. Some were from me addressing the absurd & leftist agitprop postings from G & Scientist on Terrorist Groups & Iraq War, and questioning you on your para-military facts.

  80. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 3:17 pm #

    Rambo Ike:
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 11:54 pmDr. Conspiracy(Quote) # “Another thing that makes me unhappy is the 364 spam comments received since this morning.”

    Not all were “spam comments”.Some were from me addressing the absurd & leftist agitprop postings from G & Scientist on Terrorist Groups & Iraq War, and questioning you on your para-military facts.

    Are you sure you weren’t posting on the Stormfront site by mistake?

  81. avatar
    JPotter March 21, 2012 at 3:42 pm #

    Rambo Ike: para-military facts.

    Yet another new breed of facts! how many are birthers up to?

  82. avatar
    Daniel March 21, 2012 at 3:43 pm #

    Joey:
    “There’s a little song I wrote.
    You might want to sing it note for note.
    Don’t worry, be happy.”

    I’m worried about the baggage retrieval system they’ve got at Heathrow.

    See how many old geeks we have reading this thread.

  83. avatar
    Suranis March 21, 2012 at 3:54 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Have the scanned it in {copies] been contested?

    Not by anyone who examined it who actually is a document examiner. And not by the courts (See Ankenny Vs Daniels, Farrar et al V Obama, Tisdale V Obama) And hawai’i said that was “a valid hawai’in Birth certificate.” And Remember birthers spent 3 years trying and failing to get the long form they were adamant anyone could get. And remember Terry Lakin couldnt even get the long form for his own daughter.

    Why dont you wander down to his chicago office and examine them for yourself? Scared?

  84. avatar
    jayHG March 21, 2012 at 4:02 pm #

    Kenneth Olaf Olsen: If your hero would just act in a responsible, adult manner, he could make the whole problem go away quickly.Better an honest carnival barker than a dishonest president.

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz snort snort…………oh, sorry, did somebody say something stupid….???

  85. avatar
    Sef March 21, 2012 at 4:03 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Have the scanned it in {copies] been contested?

    Not only have they not been contested in a real court, but one of the parties in GA (or maybe it was AL) acknowledged its authenticity. And the “Empty Chair” did not contest it.

  86. avatar
    jayHG March 21, 2012 at 4:07 pm #

    veritas: … he would make those crazy birfers look stupid. “

    Oh please……birthers already look stupid. You saw that coming, right? Anyhow, birthers don’t need any help from President Obama………

  87. avatar
    Thrifty March 21, 2012 at 4:13 pm #

    Ike and Olsen, feel free to froth and live in your angry delusions. Convince yourself that your victory is coming “any day now”, and that we anti-Birthers are the fringe minority and not you. No skin off my back. Reality is squarely on our side. Have you guys won any lawsuits lately?

  88. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 21, 2012 at 4:33 pm #

    ANY
    DAY
    NOW.

    Kenneth Olsen: Someday scientists and philosophers will laugh among themselves as they examine why Dr. Con and his congregation spend so much time and emotional energy avoiding the simple and obvious conclusion: The LFBC PDF is a forgery.

  89. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 21, 2012 at 4:46 pm #

    Only once has the birth certificate gone into evidence in a judicial proceeding and that was in Judge Malihi’s administrative hearing in Georgia. In that case a printed copy of the scanned version was submitted by two plaintiffs, one as evidence that Barack Obama’s father was a non-citizen, and in the other (by Taitz) as evidence that Obama was a fraud. The document was not contested in the first instance, and in the second instance the Judge ruled on his own that the experts contesting the document were “not qualified.”

    I can’t think of any situation where a court would actually rule on the authenticity of the birth certificate scan (unless Hawaii were prosecuting someone for faking it — which they won’t since they already vouched for it). I could see maybe somehow a certified copy of the birth certificate in evidence at a ballot challenge and I frankly see no argument that could be raised against it, particularly with the State of Hawaii’s full backing.

    Just speculating here, but it would seem to me that the birther’s best chance to get a swipe at the birth certificate would be through a state law requiring one to be submitted with candidate certification.

    Rambo Ike: Have the scanned it in {copies] been contested?

  90. avatar
    Obsolete March 21, 2012 at 4:53 pm #

    veritas: well, there you goagain, suggesting this is about race. he is more Arab than black not to mention his white momma.

    I rest my case.

  91. avatar
    Whatever4 March 21, 2012 at 5:06 pm #

    misha: My favorite Charles Addams cartoon: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2632/3765120149_c563060f6e.jpg

    I love Charles Addams! When I was a kid, this was my favorite: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PB-O1yT5EYg/ShnxAY7xfFI/AAAAAAAAke8/qgu4SExMl1U/s400/09_monsterrally_addams_streetsigns.jpg
    I used this one as my “perspective project” in Art class. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PB-O1yT5EYg/Sl6AgTTld0I/AAAAAAAAns0/IkpvHN8fh3w/s400/29_homebodies_addams.jpg

  92. avatar
    Rickey March 21, 2012 at 5:22 pm #

    Rambo Ike:

    *prima facie evidence in any court of law*

    From the dictionary:

    prima facie evidence
    n. Law
    Evidence that would, if uncontested, establish a fact or raise a presumption of a fact.

    If you are going to define legal terms, you really should used a legal dictionary. Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition:

    Prima facie evidence. Evidence good and sufficient on its face; such evidence as, in the judgment of the law, is sufficient to establish a given fact, and which if not rebutted or contradicted, will remain sufficient. Prima facie evidence is evidence which, if unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of the issue which it supports, but which may be contradicted by other evidence. [emphasis added]

    Get it? To overcome prima facie evidence, you need other evidence which contradicts it. In other words, to overcome a prima facie document you need to prove that the information contained therein is false. Merely questioning it doesn’t cut it. Come up with some prima facie evidence of your own that Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii and you will be on to something. Failing that, you are just spitting into the wind.

  93. avatar
    Sef March 21, 2012 at 5:52 pm #

    misha: My favorite Charles Addams cartoon: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2632/3765120149_c563060f6e.jpg

    Does anyone else remember on an old “What’s My Line” program wherein they actually had a guy (chemist??) who made a silk purse from a sow’s ear?

  94. avatar
    Scientist March 21, 2012 at 7:01 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Some were from me addressing the absurd & leftist agitprop postings from G & Scientist on Terrorist Groups & Iraq War,

    Would you have the courtesy, if you are going to mention my handle, to point out the posts and your specific disagreement? I don’t recall saying anything about “Terrorist Groups” and my comment regarding Iraq was that taking a country to war on fradulent evidence was a far more serious matter than altering a personal document, in terms of lives lost and treasure expended. I stand by the latter whole-heartedly. Are you going to say that it’s OK to lie or even cherry-pick information regarding war and peace?

  95. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 7:09 pm #

    I think the main difference between our views here has to do partially with timescales and partially with a difference of where you and I put importance on different portions of this equation being entrenched.

    From the timescale aspect, I see the natural change dynamic of party platforms as something that usually unfolds over many decades. In that vein, there has ALWAYS been a number of registered minor parties and new ones can always form or collapse.

    I agree with you that the entrenched two major parties are too dominant and work to keep any minor party from rising to contend and threaten them. My argument is that this dynamic CAN and has changed in history when ONE of those major parties becomes weakened enough to cause splintering of its voting base. Such situations now give opportunity to one of those lesser parties to absorb those voters and content with that weakened major party to seriously attempt to replace it.

    I would argue that the state party structure actually makes this easier to do over time and it is the same dynamic that did in the Federalists and the Whigs over time. Their declines were not sudden and there were several cycles in which both they and their eventual replacements were all in contention. The thing about such splintering is that it usually changes BOTH major parties. While the Democratic Party (formerly Democratic-Republicans) survived as a “brand” throughout these periods of instability, its makeup and priority platforms also faced changes, challenges and even a degree of temporary splintering during such periods of broader change.

    Which gets to the second point about what is really entrenched and what is really damaged beyond repair. From your perspective, you seem to be simply arguing that the GOP is too entrenched as a Brand for any other lesser option to challenge and supercede it.

    My argument is that Brand and Base are the whole key to when change can happen from within the existing 2 Party platform Brands or whether it requires a replacement brand to step in, in order to MAINTAIN that 2 Party dynamic.

    My argument is that the GOP Core Base has become too entrenched along a “purity path” and therefore the GOP Brand is now too entreched in being associated with that direction as well.

    I simply don’t see a viable and credible path for the GOP to shift to a more inclusive and moderate platform from within their existing Brand. The Core Base would reject it and the Brand is now so tainted by association to that Core Base, that it would be hard for many outside the Party to forget and simply accept such a broadening shift as credible.

    No, I think 2010 was simply an understandable aberration of temporary resurgance – a mere lashout of intensity by an increasingly dogmatic and zealous “purity” party. I think it is less likely that the longer demographic shifts and contradictions with the party orthodoxy can hold.

    Therefore, I think the GOP will continue its shift towards appealing only to the regional South and rural midwest/west. As long as there is economic recovery, the fear-based political strategy will have less appeal on the coasts (especially the Northeast) and increasingly the Great Lakes region as well.

    Because the 2-Party dynamic is so entrenched in how most state elections are structured, some party alternative will need to arise in these “liberal” areas to appeal to those voters that don’t want to vote Democrats, but can’t win with candidates who are locked into entrenched continuously hard-right shifting of the GOP orthodoxy.

    So, I simply think that those GOP voters will simply have to re-coalesce under a different Brand name in order to MAINTAIN a strong 2 Party structure in those areas.

    J. Potter: Those cycles require viable 3rd parties. The two main parties are literally enshrined in law at the state level. Being a political nut, you know this; there are rules for Reds & Blues and everyone else. Can also be termed the inside and the outside, and the us and the them. The only realistic hope for a change in the parties is from within. We need a visionary conservative to rise, and call the bullshit bullshit. Not bull feces, bull poo, or bull dung, but bee-yull … shee-yitt.

  96. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 7:27 pm #

    That is my point too. I simply don’t see how nominating Romney does anything more than cause them to double-down on this direction for the next 4 years and poison their own well further.

    Romney is such a bland and untrustworthy “Etch-A-Sketch” (that really is the apt deadly analogy that his own campaign dealt him today), that he’s not going to have GOP voters casting their ballots for him, but merely in opposition to Obama. Their visceral hatred for Obama is simply not enough on its own for them to beat an incumbent President. While anything can happen and the overall economic & world event stage can dramatically shift things; right now there is very little appeal or policy offerings to convince people to put their trust in Romney.

    So say that Obama beats Romney in the fall. The GOP base will simply double down even further than they did in 2008 with the same excuse they had for McCain. They will simply be even more angry that the “Establishment GOP” forced a weak “RINO” candidate “down their throats”. They will likely push for even greater party purity and well-poisoning policy of opposition for opposition’s sake.

    I simply don’t see a realistic scenario where they magically reinvent themselves in 2016 as being more open and inclusive and can get away with pretending that the last 16 years didn’t happen… So yeah, as much as the punditry tries to talk about Jeb Bush as their 2016 hope, I simply think the GOP base will be even more hungry for candidates in the Santorum & “Tea Party” mold, than they will have an appetite to accept “establishment” candidates again…

    Keith: On the other hand, they have poisoned public opinion with their crap and positioned themselves so far right that they won’t be able to back down before 2016 especially with having to fight Obama every spec of the way for four years. True, Gingrich and Paul and Romney are probably too old to go around again, but Santorum, the biggest nest crapper of them isn’t.

  97. avatar
    jayHG March 21, 2012 at 7:29 pm #

    Kenneth Olsen: Someday scientists and philosophers will laugh among themselves as they examine why Dr. Con and his congregation spend so much time and emotional energy avoiding the simple and obvious conclusion: The LFBC PDF is a forgery.

    Nah…..not gonna happen…….

  98. avatar
    Paper March 21, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    I’m told that…any…day…now…a video will be released showing the fake birth records being planted in Hawaii. Of course, I am told, “any day now” means during the general election at just the right moment. And when that doesn’t happen, well, then that will just mean someone got to the video and those who know the truth, just like with Breitbart.

    To quote Kant:

    $^$%^%#^$*&**&%%&*)(*)( IYOIY(*(*T I(Y(( !!!!!!!!!

    To which I have nothing to add.

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Only once has the birth certificate gone into evidence in a judicial proceeding and that was in Judge Malihi’s administrative hearing in Georgia. In that case a printed copy of the scanned version was submitted by two plaintiffs, one as evidence that Barack Obama’s father was a non-citizen, and in the other (by Taitz) as evidence that Obama was a fraud. The document was not contested in the first instance, and in the second instance the Judge ruled on his own that the experts contesting the document were “not qualified.”

    I can’t think of any situation where a court would actually rule on the authenticity of the birth certificate scan (unless Hawaii were prosecuting someone for faking it — which they won’t since they already vouched for it). I could see maybe somehow a certified copy of the birth certificate in evidence at a ballot challenge and I frankly see no argument that could be raised against it, particularly with the State of Hawaii’s full backing.

    Just speculating here, but it would seem to me that the birther’s best chance to get a swipe at the birth certificate would be through a state law requiring one to be submitted with candidate certification.

  99. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 21, 2012 at 11:02 pm #

    @ Ricky & whomever

    Why is it I get the distinct feeling I’m on planet earth and rest of yas are floating around somewhere in the upper limits of the stratophere? I’m from the Old School of “Trust GOD and the rest of us verify the credentials were claiming.” I use logic, a method of reasoning.

    That short form COLB was the original problem. From the beginning the Clinton campaign claimed it didn’t provide the proof necessary and it was a fake. From there it snow-balled to almost everything surrounding those COLBs being contested. That’s what the lawsuits were based on. The burden of proof is on the candidates that were applying for the position. McCain was vetted and passed on having 2 citizen parents, both under the complete jurisdiction of the US, his dad under oath to the Constitution, and under military orders that came down through the chain of command from a legal president to be stationed outside the country. On the other side, your Hero was given a free pass [unvetted] to be on the DemoRAT Ticket.

    My problem is seeing the gullible believe a copy becomes prima facie evidence based on the word of an official or some officials in Hawaii, when we have others connected to Hawaii claiming something that contradicts those official(s). Hasn’t recent history taught a lesson when it comes to just swallowing what people say is the truth. Examples: Bubba Clinton: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”, and Rathergate with Mary Mapes & Bill Burkett.

    To me that leaves needing the original, if it exist, to be released for examination.

  100. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 21, 2012 at 11:41 pm #

    After a few lies like this, I ban folks. You’ve about reached the limit. You might try REALLY HARD to clean up your act if you want to stay on.

    Rambo Ike: From the beginning the Clinton campaign claimed [Obama’s short-form birth certificate] didn’t provide the proof necessary and it was a fake.

  101. avatar
    J. Potter March 21, 2012 at 11:50 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Why is it I get the distinct feeling I’m on planet earth

    The Twilight Zone always leaves that impression, right up to the point the The Reveal, usually right before the second commercial break. Got to have a good cliffhanger, to keep’em hanging through the commercials for Colgate and L&M.

    Rambo Ike: yas are floating around somewhere in the upper limits of the stratophere?

    Still not high enough for astronaut status. Blast!

    Rambo Ike: I’m from the Old School of “Trust GOD and the rest of us verify the credentials were claiming.” I use logic, a method of reasoning.

    If the irony meter could speak kook, it would explode.

    Rambo Ike: DemoRAT

    Whoopsie, just when I thought no one bothered with that perjorative, you come along a flash a bit of bias. God bless you, sir. :)

  102. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 21, 2012 at 11:55 pm #

    Ahh! Word missing: should be “Clinton campaign supporters”

  103. avatar
    Arthur March 22, 2012 at 12:01 am #

    Rambo Ike: I’m from the Old School of “Trust GOD and the rest of us verify the credentials were claiming.” I use logic, a method of reasoning.

    God says Obama’s credentials are authentic. Do you see the thundering illogic in your threadbare little folk wisdom?

  104. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 22, 2012 at 12:13 am #

    That’s a pretty big difference between saying the Clinton campaign called the short form a fake and some fringe Clinton supporters calling it fake.

    You might also note that Clinton supporters were just some of the Obama opponents who disbelieved the original birth certificate. However, it was also a Clinton supporter who first disclosed the Hawaii newspaper announcements of Obama’s birth and after that the Clinton supporters mostly dropped their objections (with some notable exceptions).

    Rambo Ike: Ahh! Word missing: should be “Clinton campaign supporters”

  105. avatar
    G March 22, 2012 at 12:18 am #

    You mean the PUMAs. An EPIC FAIL movement if there ever was one. Simply nothing more than the ODS predecessors to the Birthers.

    So, where are the PUMAs today? These supposed “democrats” are mostly Birthers, Fox News fans, open racists, Tea Party types and SarahPAC members…

    Yeah… not what I would call a credible bastion of “democratic party” voters… Who was the PUMA who filed the first Birther lawsuit? Oh, that’s right – crazy Phil Berg. The same guy famous for filing a lot of frivolous 9/11 Truther lawsuits. So yeah, just another conspiracy nut.

    Rambo Ike: Ahh! Word missing: should be “Clinton campaign supporters”

  106. avatar
    JoZeppy March 22, 2012 at 1:08 am #

    Rambo Ike: My problem is seeing the gullible believe a copy becomes prima facie evidence based on the word of an official or some officials in Hawaii

    Actually, it becomes prima facie evidence based on the state seal on the document. The word of the state officials is entirely unneccesary, but considering they come from the custodian of records for that document, is just icing on the case. I think your problem lies with your distaste of US laws.

    Rambo Ike: when we have others connected to Hawaii claiming something that contradicts those official(s).

    Except that we don’t have anyone connected to Hawaii claiming something that contradicts those officials. At best, you have one low level temp, that worked in an office that had no access, and nothing to to do with vital records, making double hearsay claims about what he heard around the water cooler, which is genuinely worthless when compared to the statements of the official custodian of the records.

    Rambo Ike: Hasn’t recent history taught a lesson when it comes to just swallowing what people say is the truth. Examples: Bubba Clinton: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”, and Rathergate with Mary Mapes & Bill Burkett.

    Except neither of those situations invovled state documents, supported by the custodian of records. One was an individual denying he had an affiar, and the other invovled uncertified documents of unknown origin. So they aren’t remotely analogous, are they?

    Rambo Ike: To me that leaves needing the original, if it exist, to be released for examination.

    And under the law of the United States, that amounts to a heaping pile of “who gives a cr@p what the leaves to you.” Unless you have actual, concrete, admissible evidence of fraud, there is no reason to ever examine the original documents. If you really have a problem with our laws, I suggest you start a move to amend the constitution to delete the full faith and credit clause, and change the rules of evidence. However, I think you’re facing an uphill battle there.

  107. avatar
    Rickey March 22, 2012 at 2:18 am #

    Rambo Ike:
    McCain was vetted and passed on having 2 citizen parents, both under the complete jurisdiction of the US, his dad under oath to the Constitution, and under military orders that came down through the chain of command from a legal president to be stationed outside the country.

    You are confused. McCain was never vetted. He never produced his birth certificate, other than to show it to one Washington Post reporter who wasn’t allowed to make a copy. McCain never produced any documentation about who his parents are or where he was born (BTW, I believe that he was born on the Navy base in Panama and that he is a natural-born citizen).

    But your real confusion is found in your understanding of the jurisdiction clause in the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment says nothing about the parents being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. It is only necessary for the newborn baby to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

    Obama’s father would not have been subject to the jurisdiction of the United States if he had not been in the United States when Barack was born. But that would not have changed the fact that Barack was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the moment of his birth, hence he was a natural-born citizen.

  108. avatar
    Majority Will March 22, 2012 at 6:47 am #

    Rambo Ike: My problem is . . .

    You have a problem with U.S. laws and the Constitution.

    It’s a common problem for terminally confused, anger consumed birthers.

  109. avatar
    Paper March 22, 2012 at 7:45 am #

    FIFY

    :-)

    Majority Will: You have a problem with U.S. laws and the Constitution.

    It’s a terminal problem for commonly confused, anger consumed birthers.

  110. avatar
    Majority Will March 22, 2012 at 7:51 am #

    Paper:
    FIFY

    That works.

  111. avatar
    misha March 22, 2012 at 1:28 pm #

    This nonsense is getting dangerous:

    “Marine faces ‘administrative action’ over Obama Facebook post

    Nine-year Marine put comments on the Armed Forces Tea Party page saying he would not follow unlawful orders from Obama”:
    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0322-obama-marine-20120322,0,644910.story

  112. avatar
    gorefan March 22, 2012 at 2:23 pm #

    misha: This nonsense is getting dangerous:

    And we’ve seen this stuff before.

    http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2009/09/case-not-closed-or-posners-jfk-follies.html

    These were produced in October, 1963

  113. avatar
    Thrifty March 22, 2012 at 5:38 pm #

    I’m confused. What stuff is dangerous to whom? Birther dogma is dangerous to the careers and livelihood of certain people? That’s really the only danger I can see here; that falling for Birther dogma leads individuals to ruin their own lives. I can’t see how it would be dangerous to anyone else, except maybe a few close family members who rely on the duped Birther for financial or emotional support.

    misha:
    This nonsense is getting dangerous:

    “Marine faces administrative action’ over Obama Facebook post

    Nine-year Marine put comments on the Armed Forces Tea Party page saying he would not follow unlawful orders from Obama”:
    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0322-obama-marine-20120322,0,644910.story

  114. avatar
    JPotter March 22, 2012 at 6:15 pm #

    gorefan: And we’ve seen this stuff before.

    An infamous image! To counter (sort of), here are some images from Obama’s speech in Cushing, OK today. Very positive, but I also note the speech was not a public event. And not much advance notice was given. I wish I could have made the trip and checked out the scene for myself.

    http://www.kjrh.com/gallery/news/news_photo_gallery/president-barack-obama-visits-cushing-oklahoma

    Sorry about the mud, the area just received a deluge, first significant rain in months.Our weather pattern swtched to that of a desert a few years ago.

  115. avatar
    misha March 22, 2012 at 6:40 pm #

    Thrifty: What stuff is dangerous to whom? Birther dogma is dangerous to the careers and livelihood of certain people? That’s really the only danger I can see here…I can’t see how it would be dangerous to anyone else

    Simply what I have said before – Orly’s, Corsi’s and the rest of their coterie’s goal is to incite a lone wolf. They say it is free speech; I say it is analogous to crying ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre.

    This is exactly the same vitriol that preceded Yitzhak Rabin. I’ve seen this before.

    Shrub was arguably the worst president since Franklin Pierce and made the worst military blunder in US history, and was not the subject of hatred like Obama.

  116. avatar
    G March 22, 2012 at 8:33 pm #

    I agree with Misha. The biggest threat of allowing such ugly smears to stoke irrational paranoia and fear is that it can incite some to act out violently.

    Such utter disrespect for law and our government is also shameful and harmful to the nation in general. Plus, as ludicrous as these frivolous court challenges are – they ARE a waste of taxpayer’s time and overbogged-down court resources that could be better spent dealing with real problems. So, there is a number of “harms” in tolerating this shameful and hate-based nonsense. All of the issues I stated go beyond just the hateful fool causing damage within their own life.

    Thrifty: I’m confused. What stuff is dangerous to whom? Birther dogma is dangerous to the careers and livelihood of certain people? That’s really the only danger I can see here; that falling for Birther dogma leads individuals to ruin their own lives. I can’t see how it would be dangerous to anyone else, except maybe a few close family members who rely on the duped Birther for financial or emotional support.

    misha: Simply what I have said before – Orly’s, Corsi’s and the rest of their coterie’s goal is to incite a lone wolf. They say it is free speech; I say it is analogous to crying fire’ in a crowded theatre.This is exactly the same vitriol that preceded Yitzhak Rabin. I’ve seen this before.Shrub was arguably the worst president since Franklin Pierce and made the worst military blunder in US history, and was not the subject of hatred like Obama.

  117. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 23, 2012 at 10:00 am #

    We really have to give it up to the 0b0ts, they are original.

    JoZeppy says “..it becomes prima facie evidence based on the state seal on the document. The word of the state officials is entirely unneccesary…”

    Lmao, so now the seal is doing the talking for Dear Leader.

    JoZeppy says, one low level temp’s [Tim Adams] notorized affidavit “is genuinely worthless when compared to the statements of the official custodian of the records.”

    Lmao, now it’s switcharoo and the official’s statements are the gospel. Overlooked is Gov. Abercommie’s statement via Mike Evans. Sure, you’re gonna say Evans changed his statement, so it no longer counts. Isn’t it reasonable to think, after possibly some calls from you know who and 6 days to think about it, Evans felt it healthier to retract his statement.

    JoZeppy says about applying the lessons we learned from Rathergate & Bubba Clinton to statements from some Hawaiian officials “aren’t remotely analogous”.

    I have to differ on that. I see the many similarities.

    Ol’ Bubba was the highest official in the country at the time, not a low level temp or a health dept. official. After 8 days of strongly denying the charge he does a press conference stating, “But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky………………These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.” Lmao. Does it look somewhat familiar to what somebody said in regards to their birth certificate? And then to top it off we had Hillary on the Tube the next day calling the allegations a “vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.” Sound familiar? That’s right, we have many just on this site calling it a “vast Birther conspiracy against their Dear Leader”. 7 months later history recorded that Bubba admitted to the allegations. So the moral of this example is officials do lie.

    Rathergate follows the same path. Here we had Dan Rather, the most trusted newscaster in the country at the time, telling the nation an outright lie. 4 documents [copies] were presented as authentic when in truth CBS had failed to authenticate the documents. Typography experts concluded the documents were forgeries. Sound familiar? Rather’s producer, Mary Mapes, knew 5 years before that what was being presented by Rather in the Killian documents was a lie. So the moral of this example is even the most trusted will try to put one over on ya. Prior to 2008 wasn’t Dear Leader associated with people in a law firm that was trying to get the Article II eligibility clause changed? Hmmm!

    And BTW, one of the people in on helping to expose the Killian copies as forgeries is someone today we’d call an 0b0t or maybe even an anti-Birther.

    JoZeppy says “Unless you have actual, concrete, admissible evidence of fraud, there is no reason to ever examine the original documents”

    Has Sheriff Joe stated that he has “probable cause” to believe the document(s) are a forgery and fraud has been committed? How can we determine who is telling the truth without examining the original document(s) alleged to be on file at the HDOH?

    You make a mistake calling me a Birther. I’ve been almost as critical of the Birthers, and even more so of others on the political Right who I’ve labeled “the opportunists & spineless” – to this group I have total disdain, and have let them know it anytime I get the opportunity to do so. These issues with the records/documents should of all been cleared up prior to the 2008 General Election. Those that have allowed this to continue on I see as “Dirty Americans” {think Congress 1st].

  118. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2012 at 10:21 am #

    As with Tim Adams’ claims, one asks the first question: how does he know?

    With Adams the answer is that he couldn’t know because he didn’t have access to the records he talked about, nor did his anonymous supervisor.

    The same question is rightly leveled at Sheriff Joe’s claims of “probable cause.” How does he know? We just need to look at the the Posse report to see that it’s junk science, so the Sheriff doesn’t know.

    It is my view that junk science and science don’t deserve equal time, and I don’t think speculation and facts deserve equal time. I’ve been at this for over 3 years, and I have yet to see a smoking gun from the birthers, not one. They have not earned the level of credibility to make demands and to be taken seriously.

    You say that you’re not a birther, but you certainly have same “guilty until proven innocent” attitude that is central to birther thinking, and you seem to share the same inability to make distinctions between well-supported claims and crank claims.

    Rathergate and the Lewinsky affair are good examples of how the system works and how the truth comes out even when trusted people lie. With Obama Conspiracy Theories, the rumors never pan out, the media has found nothing amiss, and even Sheriff Joe’s Posse uncovered nothing but old birther rumors. Eventually a rational person would conclude that there is nothing to it.

    Rambo Ike: Has Sheriff Joe stated that he has “probable cause” to believe the document(s) are a forgery and fraud has been committed? How can we determine who is telling the truth without examining the original document(s) alleged to be on file at the HDOH?

  119. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2012 at 10:41 am #

    First let me say that Barack Obama’s birth in Hawaii is well-attested and that a reasonably-informed person may dismiss Sheriff Joe’s claims out of hand.

    However, if we were dealing with a claim related to a document with less provenance and presented with that as a hypothetical question, I would respond this way:

    While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original, one can certainly determine if a claim of “probably cause” is true without looking at the original. One need only look at the evidence and reasoning behind the claim to see if “probable cause” has been shown. We have a mass of information from the Cold Case Posse about what they considered evidence and how then went about interpreting it. It is clear to me and to the Press that no probable cause was shown.

    Rambo Ike: Has Sheriff Joe stated that he has “probable cause” to believe the document(s) are a forgery and fraud has been committed? How can we determine who is telling the truth without examining the original document(s) alleged to be on file at the HDOH?

  120. avatar
    Arthur March 23, 2012 at 11:22 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Rathergate and the Lewinsky affair are good examples of how the system works and how the truth comes out even when trusted people lie. With Obama Conspiracy Theories, the rumors never pan out, the media has found nothing amiss, and even Sheriff Joe’s Posse uncovered nothing but old birther rumors. Eventually a rational person would conclude that there is nothing to it.

    Those who are intertested in how a real conspiracy is uncovered and reported should direct their ears to “Fresh Air” and Terry Gross’ interview with Lowell Bergman, whose upcoming “Frontline” documentary examines the phone hacking and bribery scandal involving Rupert Murdoch.

    http://www.npr.org/2012/03/22/148610399/as-murdochs-scandal-unravels-many-implicated

  121. avatar
    Scientist March 23, 2012 at 12:52 pm #

    Rambo Ike: These issues with the records/documents should of all been cleared up prior to the 2008 General Election. Those that have allowed this to continue on I see as “Dirty Americans” {think Congress 1st].

    They were cleared up-100%, as Barack Obama was found to be qualified by Congress without objection. Unless the Constitution has been amended in the interim (it hasn’t) he is STILL eligible in 2012 and will serve until 2017 at the pleasure of the vvoters.

  122. avatar
    JoZeppy March 23, 2012 at 1:53 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Lmao, so now the seal is doing the talking for Dear Leader.

    The law is the same for everyone in the United States. A sealed document is a self authenticating document under the FRE. A sealed document is considered valid by every state under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution. Why do you hate our laws and Constitution so much?

    Rambo Ike: Lmao, now it’s switcharoo and the official’s statements are the gospel.

    They are not gospel, but the normal way a document would be authenticated (if it were not a self authenticating document, like we are dealing with here), would be for the custodian of those documents to idenitfy them, and vouch for them. The custodians of those records spoke in their official capacity to vouch for those documents. While entirely unnecessary, it is just one more strike against birther claims.

    Rambo Ike: Overlooked is Gov. Abercommie’s statement via Mike Evans. Sure, you’re gonna say Evans changed his statement, so it no longer counts. Isn’t it reasonable to think, after possibly some calls from you know who and 6 days to think about it, Evans felt it healthier to retract his statement.

    “Gov. Abercrombie’s statement via Mike Evans”? Actually, I’m going to say “it doesn’t cout” because it is double hearsay. The Governor denies he ever made such a statement, there is nothing back up Evans’ claim that such a statement was made, and he even recanted that such a statement was made. It is genuinely meaningless, and completely inadmissable in a court of law. Is it so hard for you to provide any real evidence?

    Rambo Ike: So the moral of this example is officials do lie.

    Yes they do. And guess what? Within a few months, as you pointed out, the evidence was discovered. And there was evidence all along that pointed in that direction. So you are suggesting a 50 year cover up of “officials lying” that has not produced a single shred of evidence? And to top it off, for some reason, both republican and democrats have continued to lie to cover this up, and still not a single shred of evidence has come out to counter this lie? I’m sorry, but that is just beyond silly. Besides the point is the burden is on you to prove it. Just waving your hands saying it is remotely possible, because “officials lie” doesn’t shift that burden. We have laws in place in this country. We don’t toss the way legal documents are treated just because you don’t like the man occupying the White House. Just dreaming a completely implausible explanation of how something “possibly could have happened” is not a substitute for evidence that it did happen.

    Rambo Ike: Rathergate follows the same path.

    Actually it doesn’t. He was relying on documents that he had no idea where they came from, and certainly were not certified in any way. They were shown to be fake, because they were typed in a font that didn’t exist at the time they were purported to be created. In the present case, you don’t have any evidence of forgery, just claims by people found by a judge to be wholly unqualified on the subject, and several statements by experts that found no evidence of forgery. And again, the Rather document scandal progressed over a matter of weeks. Four years later, Birthers have come up with exactly nothing.

    Rambo Ike: JoZeppy says “Unless you have actual, concrete, admissible evidence of fraud, there is no reason to ever examine the original documents”
    Has Sheriff Joe stated that he has “probable cause” to believe the document(s) are a forgery and fraud has been committed? How can we determine who is telling the truth without examining the original document(s) alleged to be on file at the HDOH?

    Quite simple….they way you usually do. If he has probable cause, present it to a DA to file charges. Then let the legal system do its thing. Funny…why hasn’t Sheriff Joe done that? I’ve said it from the second I heard him utter those words. If there is real probable cause give it to a DA, and he’ll tell you if you have probable cause or not. If he thinks it’s probable cause, then have a judge empanel a grand jury, and they will tell you if you have probable cause or not. If you have probable cause, then do what you’re supposed to. My question is how did he come to the conclusion he has probable cause without so much as even calling the state of Hawaii? Seems to be skipping a pretty important step of an investigation there.

    Rambo Ike: You make a mistake calling me a Birther.

    If it walks and quacks like a duck….

    Rambo Ike: These issues with the records/documents should of all been cleared up prior to the 2008 General Election.

    It was…at least for all reasonable people.

    Rambo Ike: Those that have allowed this to continue on I see as “Dirty Americans” {think Congress 1st].

    And I call those who think there is still an issue “delusional”

  123. avatar
    JoZeppy March 23, 2012 at 3:21 pm #

    Rambo Ike: Rather’s producer, Mary Mapes, knew 5 years before that what was being presented by Rather in the Killian documents was a lie

    And btw…how exactly did she know it “5 years before” that it was a lie. She first saw the documents between September 2 and 5, 2004, the 60 Minutes story ran on Sept 8, and the debunking began the next day. In less than a week, ABC News ran a story interviewing the expert document examiners, who admitted that they stated had issues with the document that went unanswered. By Sept 20, Dan Rather appologized.

    So besides noting how quickly genuinely bogus documents get called out, when the claims about them are legitimate (two weeks from running the show, to apolgy), how exactly could Mapes know that what was in the documents was a lie? Did she have some super secret access to the real documents no one else ever saw? Or perhaps she jumped into her TARDIS 5 years earlier to see how her career with CBS ended?

  124. avatar
    G March 23, 2012 at 5:52 pm #

    Well said JoZeppy. Well said! As your two posts pretty much cover it all, I’ll just say “ditto”.

  125. avatar
    Majority Will March 23, 2012 at 7:12 pm #

    Speaking of Oklahoma: Oklahoma Christian Radio Station General Manager Calls Obama ‘Dumb Ni**er’

    link to article: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/23/oklahoma-christian-radio-station-general-manager-calls-obama-dumb-nier-image/

    JPotter: An infamous image! To counter (sort of), here are some images from Obama’s speech in Cushing, OK today. Very positive, but I also note the speech was not a public event. And not much advance notice was given. I wish I could have made the trip and checked out the scene for myself.

    http://www.kjrh.com/gallery/news/news_photo_gallery/president-barack-obama-visits-cushing-oklahoma

    Sorry about the mud, the area just received a deluge, first significant rain in months.Our weather pattern swtched to that of a desert a few years ago.

  126. avatar
    G March 23, 2012 at 7:25 pm #

    *ugh!* Yeah, these folks are having a hard time disguising their true racism any more…

    Majority Will: Speaking of Oklahoma: Oklahoma Christian Radio Station General Manager Calls Obama ‘Dumb Ni**er’ link to article: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/23/oklahoma-christian-radio-station-general-manager-calls-obama-dumb-nier-image/

  127. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2012 at 7:29 pm #

    Jesus nailed to the cross by one of his followers, yet again. Sigh.

    Majority Will: Speaking of Oklahoma: Oklahoma Christian Radio Station General Manager Calls Obama ‘Dumb Ni**er’

  128. avatar
    Northland10 March 23, 2012 at 7:44 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Jesus nailed to the cross by one of his followers, yet again. Sigh.

    Agreed.

  129. avatar
    J. Potter March 23, 2012 at 9:10 pm #

    G:
    *ugh!*Yeah, these folks are having a hard time disguising their true racism any more…

    Not much disguising around here in Okieland. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in Cushing for the past week. See the whole atmosphere, what didn’t make the news.

    In my 27 years here, moving through various religious and secular social circles, racism is neither more nor less common based on religiosity. It ties to outlook. Conservatives are likely racist, liberals tend not to not to be. Same as everywhere else. The difference here is …. there’s far more conservatives than liberals!

    Dr. Conspiracy: Jesus nailed to the cross by one of his followers, yet again. Sigh.

    Spring nail gun sale at Lowe’s. Construction time again.

  130. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 24, 2012 at 3:03 pm #

    @ Rickey
    Rambo Ike: McCain was vetted and passed on having 2 citizen parents, both under the complete jurisdiction of the US, his dad under oath to the Constitution, and under military orders that came down through the chain of command from a legal president to be stationed outside the country.

    Rickey: “You are confused. McCain was never vetted. He never produced his birth certificate, other than to show it to one Washington Post reporter who wasn’t allowed to make a copy. McCain never produced any documentation about who his parents are or where he was born (BTW, I believe that he was born on the Navy base in Panama and that he is a natural-born citizen).
    But your real confusion is found in your understanding of the jurisdiction clause in the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment says nothing about the parents being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. It is only necessary for the newborn baby to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
    Obama’s father would not have been subject to the jurisdiction of the United States if he had not been in the United States when Barack was born. But that would not have changed the fact that Barack was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the moment of his birth, hence he was a natural-born citizen.”
    ~~~
    On McCain’s birth certificate I believe you got it right from best I can tell from checking on it. I think it is immaterial when it was well known who his parents were, and that’s is why he was passed with SR511[110]. By sole jurisdiction I’m referring to no other country had a claim to his parent’s citizenship, and the US military had jurisdiction over his father at the time of the birth. That’s a current problem the US having with Mexico who is claiming jurisdiction over many of their citizens that are in the US. Also, there was to my understanding no dual allegiance by McCain’s parents. It looks to me like the Senate based their giving McCain an OK [SR511-110] to be on the presidential ballot according to how Vattel defined natural-born Citizen [food for thought].

  131. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 24, 2012 at 4:21 pm #

    @ JoZeppy

    Rambo Ike: Rather’s producer, Mary Mapes, knew 5 years before that what was being presented by Rather in the Killian documents was a lie

    JoZeppy: “And btw…how exactly did she know it “5 years before” that it was a lie. She first saw the documents between September 2 and 5, 2004, the 60 Minutes story ran on Sept 8, and the debunking began the next day. In less than a week, ABC News ran a story interviewing the expert document examiners, who admitted that they stated had issues with the document that went unanswered. By Sept 20, Dan Rather appologized.
    So besides noting how quickly genuinely bogus documents get called out, when the claims about them are legitimate (two weeks from running the show, to apolgy), how exactly could Mapes know that what was in the documents was a lie? Did she have some super secret access to the real documents no one else ever saw? Or perhaps she jumped into her TARDIS 5 years earlier to see how her career with CBS ended?”
    ~ ~ ~
    Here is a good example of why I’m having a problem believing those that post here. Somebody should have corrected JoZeppy on this instead of letting it stand and G agreeing with him. There is a constant theme that I’ve noticed when ever the subject matter moves into the historical facts. G did it on terrorist groups and Scientist on the Iraq War. There are others that I could mention.

    Mary Mapes was the central figure in the CBS scandal to get Bush. She knew from what she was told 5 years before that what she gave Rather to report was an outright boldface lie. The 1st mention I can remember of someone reporting on it came from Cliff Kinkaid of Accuracy in Media in Jan. 2005:

    http://www.aim.org/press-release/report-says-dan-rather-personally-involved-in-cbs-news-campaign-to-destroy-/

    Then it seemed to go dormant until 2009 when Bernie Goldberg, a past CBS insider, reported on it:

    http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/a-lost-fact-in-the-rathergate-mess-part-1/

    Before moving on from this example I need to clarify something. Don’t believe it was ever determined that Rather knew before hand that what he was reporting was a lie. He did defend it for awhile but eventually stated, if he knew then what he knows now he wouldn’t have reported it. Rather’s problem came 10 years before with one of the most sleazy boldfaced lying reports ever put on the TV regarding Vietnam Veterans.

    The point being made here with the 2 examples [Clinton & Rathergate] is how open you all are to the possiblity of repeating the mistakes of the past. You’re basing your whole pro-Obama position on a giant leap of faith, that what you’ve termed “the custodian of the records”, is telling you the truth.

  132. avatar
    G March 24, 2012 at 6:40 pm #

    Rambo Ike –

    Two things: First, your article does nothing to help your case. The whole reason Joe Zeppy & I called you out on your latest nonsensical statement was because of your unsupported claim of Mary Mapes knowing “5 years before it was presented by Rather”

    Are you really that bad at math? The Rathergate incident occurred in 2004. Five years before that would be 1999. The whole incident unraveled and rather quickly and both Maples & Rather were properly scorned and punished for putting that sham document forward, without proper vetting. You’ve failed to demonstrate anything that backs up that Maples knew about it years prior to that. Citing some article from 2009 that is rehashing the incident is fairly meaningless, as the whole issue is nothing more than discussing history at that point.

    The bottom line here is that the whole thing came up and appropriately went kablooey in their faces all within a matter of weeks from when the incident happened. If anything, the “Rathergate” example demonstrates that any REAL fraudulent document presented in the media will be quickly discovered and outed as such and any media figures who are dumb enough to present it without proper vetting will suffer swift and hefty damange to their careers for being so careless. Therefore, contrast that situation to the nearly 4 years that Obama’s BC has been in the public domain. Common sense would tell you that if there was any *real* problem with his documentation, it would have been quickly discovered a long, long time ago and that no media figure, regardless of profile, would have their career survive by backing a fraud. So, all your example does is demonstrate further evidence for WHY Obama’s documents should be accepted at face value as legit. The very fact that no serious people or organizations question it should TELL you something. Nearly everything in life has some quacks and cranks ranting paranoid loony conspiracies and telling lurid tall tales out on the fringes. Credible sources and people wisely ignore the lunatic fringe for a reason.

    Second point – I’m not sure what you are babbling about in terms of complaing about what either I or Scientist have said in the past. We both have corrected you and called you out on numerous disingenous exaggerations and outright nonsense that you have a habit of spewing. But so far, there is NOTHING I’ve been wrong about in my rebuttals of your hysterics and nonsense. If you are merely throwing a tantrum because we are correcting you, then you need to simply learn to be more responsible with your initial words and claims. The only one making a constant fool out of you here is yourself with your own words.

    Rambo Ike: Rambo Ike: Rather’s producer, Mary Mapes, knew 5 years before that what was being presented by Rather in the Killian documents was a lie

    Rambo Ike: Here is a good example of why I’m having a problem believing those that post here. Somebody should have corrected JoZeppy on this instead of letting it stand and G agreeing with him. There is a constant theme that I’ve noticed when ever the subject matter moves into the historical facts. G did it on terrorist groups and Scientist on the Iraq War. There are others that I could mention.
    Mary Mapes was the central figure in the CBS scandal to get Bush. She knew from what she was told 5 years before that what she gave Rather to report was an outright boldface lie. The 1st mention I can remember of someone reporting on it came from Cliff Kinkaid of Accuracy in Media in Jan. 2005:
    http://www.aim.org/press-release/report-says-dan-rather-personally-involved-in-cbs-news-campaign-to-destroy-/
    Then it seemed to go dormant until 2009 when Bernie Goldberg, a past CBS insider, reported on it:
    http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/a-lost-fact-in-the-rathergate-mess-part-1/

    I accept your clarification, which is simply making the same point that JoZeppy & I were both trying to get through to you. For the record, I’m glad that Rather was punished and pretty much removed from his reporting desk for that shameful incident. I’m simply for truth and accuracy in all reporting and have no sympathy for any reporter or media talking head that doesn’t properly vet their info before presenting it.

    In regards to the latter part of your statement, I have no idea what you are talking about, as I don’t know what Rather was saying about Viet Nam way back when. I’m 40, so Viet Nam pretty much ended when I was a little kid and it is not a subject I paid much attention to, except to now hear stories from my father-in-law who served several tours of duty as a Marine in that conflict. But again, this whole line of conversation is too tangentially disconnected from any actual topic of this blog, so there is no point in derailing the conversation further by discussing something that is so utterly off-topic as the Viet Nam War or what some taliking-head reporter like Dan Rather thought of it back then.

    Rambo Ike: Before moving on from this example I need to clarify something. Don’t believe it was ever determined that Rather knew before hand that what he was reporting was a lie. He did defend it for awhile but eventually stated, if he knew then what he knows now he wouldn’t have reported it. Rather’s problem came 10 years before with one of the most sleazy boldfaced lying reports ever put on the TV regarding Vietnam Veterans.

    You still have not made ANY valid connective point between those two unrelated issues and the nonsense of the Birtherism phenomenon. Therefore, there is no “repeating mistakes of the past”. You are simply whining and stomping your feet but not making any actual points at all.

    There is no “leap of faith” in accepting the DEFAULT position that someone is who they say they are. Burden of proof always remains on the ACCUSER to PROVE solid evidence that disputes the DEFAULT position. Considering that ALL actual evidence to date ALL corroborates the SAME conclusion as the DEFAULT position, it is simply common sense and logical to accept what all official statements and evidence point to – born in Honolulu, HI. Further, when the OFFICIAL agency in charge of his records repeatedly backs it and even goes out of its way to publish multiple statements and links on their own website backing it, yeah, I’d say that is END OF STORY right there.

    Birtherism in contrast, is nothing but a BLIND FAITH fool’s endeavor and its soupy mess of conflicting speculative stories have NOTHING solid to even ground themselves on in the first place. ALL actual real documentation of substance backs Obama’s story, not the Birthers crazy claims, as do ALL official agencies and persons of authority on the matter. To buy into the fantasy religion of Birtherism would require a vast 50+ year conspiracy with just about EVERYONE in on it… HINT – Whenever “everyone” is “in on it”, except you, that means that YOU are simply in the wrong.

    Rambo Ike: The point being made here with the 2 examples [Clinton & Rathergate] is how open you all are to the possiblity of repeating the mistakes of the past. You’re basing your whole pro-Obama position on a giant leap of faith, that what you’ve termed “the custodian of the records”, is telling you the truth.

  133. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 25, 2012 at 5:09 pm #

    @ G

    It has been apparent for a long time you lack the ability to comprehend the most basic parts on any issue. You read something, don’t grasp what you’re reading, then when you make your comments on it and it ends up looking like a bunch of psycho-babble due to you never understanding what you read.

    Why you’re so challenged in comprehending what Goldberg plainly pointed out about Mary Mapes in his article is perhaps biggest laugher of them all.

    The 2 examples demonstrate that taking someone’s word on something isn’t always the wise course of action. How many people in both examples went to bed on those particular nights believing what the Clintons and Dan Rather said [prima facie; at 1st glance] only to find out later it was all a pack of lies. In other words, how can you be sure you’ve been told the truth regarding 0bama’s documents/records? With all the controversary that surrounds the vast majotity of them, shouldn’t they be released for inspection? Hasn’t it been the case for what you’re claiming “nearly 4 years that Obama’s BC has been in the public domain” that the COLBs have been contested in the court of public opinion?

    Lets try this:

    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2012 at 10:41 am: “*While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original*, one can certainly determine if a claim of “probably cause” is true without looking at the original.”

    G: “So, all your example does is demonstrate further evidence for WHY Obama’s documents should be accepted at face value as legit.”

    *While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original*

    G: “There is no “leap of faith” in accepting the DEFAULT position that someone is who they say they are”

    *While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original*

    G: “…it is simply common sense and logical to accept what all official statements and evidence point to – born in Honolulu, HI.”

    *While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original*

    What Dr Conspiracy is pointing out here is known in the Logical World as using common sense, and not blindly swallowing just any ol’ thing people tell you because you want something to be true.

    That has been my position since I 1st looked {Sept-Oct ’08] at the controversies surrounding 0bama’s records/documents.

    G: “We both have corrected you and called you out on numerous disingenous exaggerations and outright nonsense that you have a habit of spewing. But so far, there is NOTHING I’ve been wrong about in my rebuttals of your hysterics and nonsense.”

    I don’t remember any. I did reply to some, but for whatever reason they didn’t post up. I’ll be glad to clear up any of what you’re claiming.

  134. avatar
    G March 26, 2012 at 6:36 pm #

    Oh, Rambo Ike, please stop attempting to PROJECT your own comprehension problems onto others. No one is buying it and the rest of the folks here agree with me and not you.

    Rambo Ike:
    @ GIt has been apparent for a long time you lack the ability to comprehend the most basic parts on any issue. You read something, don’t grasp what you’re reading, then when you make your comments on it and it ends up looking like a bunch of psycho-babble due to you never understanding what you read.Why you’re so challenged in comprehending what Goldberg plainly pointed out about Mary Mapes in his article is perhaps biggest laugher of them all.

    You’re entire premise FAILS utterly for one simple reason – you incorrectly ASSUME that we are just “taking someone’s word” without having looked into an issue further. Neither I nor any non-Birther here has done that.

    In terms of the irrelevant Rathergate example you keep fixating on, we’ve repeatedly addressed this point – the overall media and listeners did NOT simply “take them at their word”… others looked into what they reported and the whole FRAUD was fairly quickly uncovered and came crashing down on their heads in only a matter of days and weeks. Further, Rather, Mapes, etc. appropriately received scorn and their careers suffered as a result of their bad judgment and handling of the matter.

    So reason prevailed fairly quickly BECAUSE the story was NOT simply “taken at face value” and was looked into. As a result , the fraud was quickly revealed and punishment was metered out.

    Many of us here first became interested in the “Birther” phenomenon, because we initially heard the questioning and wanted to look into the issue for ourselves. When we did, we quickly found that NONE of the Birther claims held up and ALL evidence that turned up kept CORROBORATING the SAME conclusion – born in Honolulu, HI and NBC by birth under all actual interpretations of US Case Law. So we started off as “skeptics” and reached a conclusion by looking at the actual evidence at hand. The only thing left for a rational mind to be skeptical of is “Birtherism” itself.

    Had there been any actual “fraud” or real reasons to doubt Obama’s NBC status, it would have been uncovered and come out very early in the process, just as Rathergate demonstrated. So the issue lost its credibility as a real concern a long time ago. There simply is no real controvery at all… only a fake manufactured smear perpetuated by intentional con artists desperate to manufacture one and those that are willing dupes to buy into their lies.

    The whole rest of your post is moot and fails, because you have intentionally MISSED THE POINT, by leaving off the CRITICAL part of what Doc C said, which I’ve put in BOLD in your citation below. . The whole sentence is required in order to grasp the point. Leaving off that ending conditional clause is simply being either comprehensively obtuse or intentionally disingenuous on your part.

    As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, OFFICIAL documents from OFFICIAL agencies are considered legit on their face. It is absurd to demand access to the original source document in order to accept their validity. As others have repeatedly mentioned, a cop can ask to see your ID, but cannot demand to see your original application to prove that ID. That is just absurd. Even more importantly, YOU as a mere citizen and unqualified individual with ZERO authority or responsibility for such issues has ZERO right to even ask to see any other citizen’s ID – mine, the President’s or otherwise.

    Every point that I’ve made which you cited continues to hold up, because it does not just presume “someone’s word”… it takes into account the vast amount of CORROBORATING evidence and UTTER LACK of contradictory evidence in determining probable cause. Put it this way – to challenge the FFAC of any official document in a court of law would require compelling UPFRONT evidence that CONTRADICTS it. Mere fantasy speculation and personal doubt do NOT cut it and “fishing expeditions” to merely “tilt at windmills” are not allowed. To challenge the COLB would require some sort of solid “proof” of an alternate birth scenario to even START legitimate questioning.

    Rambo Ike:

    The 2 examples demonstrate that taking someone’s word on something isn’t always the wise course of action. How many people in both examples went to bed on those particular nights believing what the Clintons and Dan Rather said [prima facie; at 1st glance] only to find out later it was all a pack of lies. In other words, how can you be sure you’ve been told the truth regarding 0bama’s documents/records? With all the controversary that surrounds the vast majotity of them, shouldn’t they be released for inspection? Hasn’t it been the case for what you’re claiming “nearly 4 years that Obama’s BC has been in the public domain” that the COLBs have been contested in the court of public opinion?

    Lets try this:

    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2012 at 10:41 am: “*While one may not be able to determine if the document is a fake or not without looking at the original*, one can certainly determine if a claim of “probably cause” is true without looking at the original.”

  135. avatar
    Majority Will March 26, 2012 at 6:55 pm #

    Rambo Ike: @ G

    It has been apparent for a long time you lack the ability. . . blah blah blah

    You’re projecting again – probably from the blind hatred and extreme fear and bigotry towards people and cultures different than you.

    Your posts on BadFiction and here speak volumes.

    G is what rational people call rational.

  136. avatar
    Scientist March 26, 2012 at 7:42 pm #

    Rambo Ike: The 2 examples demonstrate that taking someone’s word on something isn’t always the wise course of action. How many people in both examples went to bed on those particular nights believing what the Clintons and Dan Rather said [prima facie; at 1st glance] only to find out later it was all a pack of lies.

    I didn’t really follow the Rather thing, but I can tell you in the Clinton case, I and everyone I ever spoke to about it assumed, based on his past history, that he was doing the nasty wiith every female in DC, Maryland and Virgiinia (at a minimum). No one I know rushed to pronoounce Clinton innocent of haviing sex; what we said was “WHO CARES!!!!” It was between him, Hillary and the various women involved, period.

    So I judge based on previous track record and common sense. In the Obama case:

    1. Hawaii has produced 100s of thousands of birth certificates and none have been shown to be fraudulent.
    2. 18 year old girls don’t fly or take a ship halfway around the world to have a baby in a strange country where they don’t know a soul and then rush home with the baby, all while the baby’s daddy stays back in Hawaii.

    There are about 100 other facts I could mention, but those 2 are quite sufficient to establish the truth in my books.

  137. avatar
    Scientist March 26, 2012 at 8:00 pm #

    Just 1 more for you, Ike:

    3. I watched the Florida recount in 2000, the sleazy tactics used against Mccain in the South Carolina primary that year, the Franken-Coleman recount. etc. The only possible conclusion is that American politics is a very dirty game, played to win. The idea that there would be credible evidence against Obama and neither Hillary nor McCain would use it is laughable. As are the birthers