Romney conspiracy theories off topic

I don’t care how many emails and (deleted) comments you send me; this is the Obama Conspiracy Theories blog, not the Mitt Romney conspiracy theories blog. And I don’t care how persuasive this photo indicating that Mitt Romney is a unicorn is, or the theories that unicorns born in the United States are not natural born citizens.

image

I know that over 17,000 people signed a petition to Ken Bennett to get DNA samples from Romney and verify that it’s he’s human. Bennett was right to call the whole thing “ridiculous.”  Bennett might as well be checking Governor Brewer to see if she is a shape-shifting reptoid like Bill and Hillary Clinton.

No, this is off topic for this blog. Forget it.

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Misc. Conspiracies and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Romney conspiracy theories off topic

  1. linda says:

    I do enjoy you, Doc!

  2. Jim says:

    HAHAHA!!! It worked! They got you to write about it! 😀

  3. Lupin says:

    I feel sorry for the unicorns.

  4. Scientist says:

    Where in the Constitution does it say unicorns aren’t eligible to be President? Besides, Romney is a corporation, not a unicorn, and the Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, says corporations are people. Exxon-Mobil 2012!!!

  5. dch says:

    NBC = Natural Born Corporation.

  6. Michael Heuss says:

    Well – I downloaded your photo of Mitt, opened it up in Photoshop, and chose extract layers. Sure enough, I believe I have amassed enough proof to show that the photo you are attempting to foist onto a gullible public is indeed a pure fabrication. This image is a composite, made up of three separate layers. Closer examination also shows a slight “halo” around the inserted facial feature.

    The only mystery is why there was an attempt to provide that false chin? What was wrong with the original one.? Perhaps the rumor that Mitt’s father was charlie the unicorn has roots in the truth? As my dear, not departed mother was want to say “The thick plottens.”

  7. Chef says:

    As the birthers have now been vindicated by Obama’s own publicity, what can a hapless
    conspiracy-theory debunker write about?!

    Romney and unicorns.

    Rich.

  8. Lupin says:

    Is that a rolex on his hand?

  9. Arthur says:

    I was ready to give Romney the benefit of the doubt until I read that once, while driving to Narniaville, he strapped a unicorn to the roof of his car. And you don’t even want to know what he did to Chef’s badger!

  10. It does appear so.

    Lupin: Is that a rolex on his hand?

  11. Loren says:

    For the record, mere pictures of Romney showing a lack a horn are not sufficient proof. Because the truth could be that Romney is not a full-blooded unicorn, but rather is a were-unicorn, and only shows his true form during a full moon.

    Relatedly, I do not believe I’ve seen any pictures of Romney during a full moon.

  12. Arthur says:

    Many people confuse Romney’s Unicorn-Power-Braclete for a Rolex.

    Lupin: Is that a rolex on his hand?

  13. linda says:

    The article is satire. BTW, how do you disregard certified copies of birth certificates and a verification from the State of Hawaii, every court which has ever ruled on it, etc., but accept as gospel a publishing industry PR pamphlet?

    Chef:
    As the birthers have now been vindicated by Obama’s own publicity, what can a hapless
    conspiracy-theory debunker write about?!

    Romney and unicorns.

    Rich.

  14. The Magic M says:

    Loren: mere pictures of Romney showing a lack a horn are not sufficient proof

    Those have obviously been photoshopped. Also, didn’t you know Mormon unicorns may practice horsiyya, which means retracting the horn into the head to mislead the infidels?

  15. The Magic M says:

    Chef: As the birthers have now been vindicated

    That was a good one. You owe me a new keyboard.

  16. Majority Will says:

    linda: The article is satire. BTW, how do you disregard certified copies of birth certificates and a verification from the State of Hawaii, every court which has ever ruled on it, etc., but accept as gospel a publishing industry PR pamphlet?

    Either obstinate bigotry or a severe mental illness. Or both.

  17. Majority Will says:

    Chef: As the birthers have now been vindicated. . . blah, blah, blah

    Aren’t you just a precious, little birther troll?

    Bless your pea-pickin’ heart.

  18. Thomas Brown says:

    linda:
    The article is satire.BTW, how do you disregard certified copies of birth certificates and a verification from the State of Hawaii, every court which has ever ruled on it, etc., but accept as gospel a publishing industry PR pamphlet?

    Simple. Birthers are gullible dipsticks.

    Now that’s rich!

  19. Bob says:

    Unicorn . . . or shape-shifting space alien?

  20. Sef says:

    I think that’s a “strap-on”. Also notice that the horn is right of center.

  21. Michael Heuss says:

    Well, sometimes they just lean that way. It’s natural.

    Sef:
    I think that’s a “strap-on”. Also notice that the horn is right of center.

  22. Majority Will says:

    Sef:
    I think that’s a “strap-on”. Also notice that the horn is right of center.

    Darren Huff consulted. It also has a remote control.

  23. Stanislaw says:

    Chef:
    As the birthers have now been vindicated by Obama’s own publicity, what can a hapless
    conspiracy-theory debunker write about?!

    Romney and unicorns.

    Rich.

    You must mean that mistake that was printed in a pamphlet years ago. Birthers don’t believe the mountains of other evidence that proves the President was born in Hawaii, but a fewbits of gossip and a couple of typos are all you need to conclude that everything else is an absolute hoax.

    I would normally ask if you idiots ever get tired of being wrong but what else should we expect from a group of people with the combined IQ of a pez dispenser?

  24. JPotter says:

    Majority Will: Bless your pea-pickin’ heart.

    I think he deserves the ultimate: God bless your swee’ lil’ pea-pickin’ heart!

  25. clestes says:

    i guess I missed something here cause i do not see how birthers have been vindicated at all.

    Weak kneed publicity seeking Bennet was asking for trouble when he allowed his nose for free publicity to lead him down this road. After a tussle with the HI Dept of Records, in which he looked liked a school boy who gave the wrong answers and was forced to retake the test, he finally got what has been released for years now. An official response from the one person who has the authority to give it. Yes the president has a real authentic BC.

    Feeling like a fool for allowing himself to get drawn into something he should have known to leave alone, since there is not a crediable person associated with these nuts. Now he has to face the howling disappointed birthers at every street corner and coffee shop. Never again will he be able to walk down the street to get a sandwich without some birther ranting at him for not telling the truth. He brought this whole sorry mess on himself.

    If he had had any guts or brains, he would have told those thousand or so constitutes that the issue has been resolved and quoted the Ankeny case in 2009 as proof and told them to move on and stop wasting his time

  26. JPotter says:

    Sef: I think that’s a “strap-on”. Also notice that the horn is right of center.

    Hmm, if indeed a strap-on, then is the story that Romney is indeed a member of the clan Equus unicornis, or that he is merely loony and believes he is a unicorn?

    Hopefully the former, as to my knowledge, there is no mental health requirement for the Presidency. If the word gets around that Romney could be our first (Certifiably) Mentally Ill President, then he’ll have the sympathy vote.

    Black President? Been there, done that.

    Slightly unbalanced, kinda rich old white guy would be old hat. Really Crazy, Really Rich Old White Guy? Now that’s a first!

  27. Thomas Brown says:

    Stanislaw: Birthers don’t believe the mountains of other evidence that proves the President was born in Hawaii, but a fewbits of gossip and a couple of typos are all you need to conclude that everything else is an absolute hoax.

    It’s worse than that: they disbelieve obviously reliable evidence, but believe the hoaxes!

    The photo-shopped Kenyan sign, the fake birth certificates, the satirical “articles”… Birthers actually buy into them even after the jokers who produced them identify them as hoaxes.

    Excrément dans la tête! Incoyable!

  28. Joe Acerbic says:

    Scientist:
    Where in the Constitution does it say unicorns aren’t eligible to be President?

    Where it says you gotta be a natural born citizen. Unicorns as well as elves, leprechauns etc are supernatural even if born citizens, which btw further clarifies the original intent of the Founding Fathers: “natural born citizen” means simply natural person who was born citizen, distinguished from supernatural born or naturalized.

  29. Bob says:

    I’ve come to the conclusion that the Birthers are addicted to being thoroughly humiliated.

  30. donna says:

    “I’ve come to the conclusion that the Birthers are addicted to being thoroughly humiliated.”

    they are UNAWARE they have been “humiliated”

    this am, one poster referred to bennett as a RINO

    i pointed out that he’s a co-chair of the romney campaign

    they believe the incredulous and not the credible

  31. Thrifty says:

    Do you also live in a world where people wear hats on their feet and hamburgers eat people?

    Chef:
    As the birthers have now been vindicated by Obama’s own publicity, what can a hapless
    conspiracy-theory debunker write about?!

    Romney and unicorns.

    Rich.

  32. Thrifty says:

    It doesn’t explicitly, but the Constitution does say you have to be at least age 35. Everyone knows unicorns have a lifespan of 25-30 years. Gregarious Gary was notable for being the oldest unicorn ever when he died in 2007, after a rich and full 32 years.

    Scientist:
    Where in the Constitution does it say unicorns aren’t eligible to be President?Besides, Romney is a corporation, not a unicorn, and the Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, says corporations are people.Exxon-Mobil 2012!!!

  33. While delving into the birther mind is difficult, I think what’s happened here is “well now that we have proof Obama was born in Hawaii, and his father was Barack Obama, Sr., we can conclude with certainty that he’s not eligible because of the father’s non-citizenship.” This is the tack that some of the defendants took in Georgia. They offered proof that the President’s father was really Barack Obama Sr, and then claimed (a claim that the court soundly rejected) that that made him ineligible.

    The birther position is so filled with inconsistencies that normal logic doesn’t apply: black is white, up is down and failure is success.

    clestes: i guess I missed something here cause i do not see how birthers have been vindicated at all.

  34. This reminds me of an email I got last week citing a letter from the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife that said it was OK to kill Bigfoot without a hunting license so long as it was done on private land with the owner’s permission. The same reasoning would apply to unicorn-Romney. Perhaps Romney could try to get unicorns declared an endangered species.

    Now you have me wondering of Romney’s grandmother was really the IPU. That would explain a lot.

    Joe Acerbic: Where it says you gotta be a natural born citizen. Unicorns as well as elves, leprechauns etc are supernatural even if born citizens, which btw further clarifies the original intent of the Founding Fathers: “natural born citizen” means simply natural person who was born citizen, distinguished from supernatural born or naturalized.

  35. Loren says:

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    While delving into the birther mind is difficult, I think what’s happened here is “well now that we have proof Obama was born in Hawaii, and his father was Barack Obama, Sr., we can conclude with certainty that he’s not eligible because of the father’s non-citizenship.” This is the tack that some of the defendants took in Georgia. They offered proof that the President’s father was really Barack Obama Sr, and then claimed (a claim that the court soundly rejected) that that made him ineligible.

    The birther position is so filled with inconsistencies that normal logic doesn’t apply: black is white, up is down and failure is success.

    It’s a wonderfully effective contingency argument:

    “Obama is ineligible because he’s lied about his birthplace and parentage. And if he proves he *hasn’t* lied about his birthplace and parentage…then that also proves he’s ineligible!”

  36. JPotter says:

    Loren: It’s a wonderfully effective contingency argument:

    Self-reinforcing arguments are the heart of popular delusion.Have to have answers for the naysayers! Like houses of cards, each argument/card leaning against its opposite. Structured contrariness!

  37. Lupin says:

    Re the rolex. I like the “common touch.” Walking amongst the peasants. I wonder if touching his sandals cures scabs?

    Birthers are a scabby lot. They might need the miracles.

  38. Dave B. says:

    Well, what I want to know is if Jerome Corsi looked for proof that Mitt Romney was a unicorn, and failed to find it, would he then claim that his failure to find such proof was in itself proof Mitt Romney was a unicorn?

  39. Joe Acerbic says:

    Dave B.:
    Well, what I want to know is if Jerome Corsi looked for proof that Mitt Romney was a unicorn, and failed to find it, would he then claim that his failure to find such proof was in itself proof Mitt Romney was a unicorn?

    Isn’t it clear and obvious proof of how deep, evil and ruthless the conspiracy is to conceal the fact that Romney is a unicorn?

  40. Paper says:

    Bill Maher did a spoof on the Romney “wifer” conspiracy. Video available with this article:

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-counters-birthers-by-creating-artificial-mitt-romney-wifer-controversy/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.