It’s 10:50 PM, December 19, 2012 as I write this article. I’ve just written some comments on a YouTube video posted by ppsimmons. If you had looked at the comment stream as I write this, you would see this exchange:
ppsimmons: … However? the Senate DID investigate J. McCain.
Kevin Davidson: The Senate never investigated McCain. All they did was pass a resolution and put into the record a letter from a couple of constitutional experts about people born in the Canal Zone to US parents being eligible.
ppsimmons: Actually Kevin – you are incorrect. They DID investigate McCain – officially. Senate hearing were held according to Constitutional authority. They pronounced "findings." They were published in Senate Resolution 511. They were very specific. Their findings went to the two requirements of Natural Born as outlined in SCT. rulings…place of birth and both parents US citizens at time of birth. They REFUSED to "investigate" Obama. A travesty of justice. Obama is NOT a US citizen. He is a fraud.
So if you read that exchange, you might think that I had raised a spurious objection and that ppsommons set me right. However, that’s not the whole story. Following that last remark, I said:
Kevin Davidson: If you are correct, then you should have no problem providing the date of the hearing and a link to the transcript. You can’t because it never happened.
You might refer to Chertoff’s remark, but this was an off-hand question asked him during a hearing on another topic.,
There was never any investigation of McCain whatever. It’s just another factoid in the eligibility denialist fantasy world.
Now the question is whether you have the integrity to admit you’re wrong.
Here’s the screen shot:
ppsimmons moderates his YouTube channel. The question is whether ppsimmons exercises thought control in his channel to make people think that he wins the arguments and others cannot respond, or whether it is exactly the opposite.
So I will set this article to automatically publish in 4 days and the reader can see whether thought control is real, or whether ppsimmons is honest, albeit deluded in his birther beliefs.
Here is my article on the subject from May of 2011 in which I concluded, and other commenters agreed, that no hearings were held.
4 days later, my comment is still not approved.
How very strange! It’s not like a birther to obfuscate or refuse to respond to objective evidence. Perhaps your comment was unavoidably lost. On the other hand, this ppsimmons may represent the one or two birthers who are a bit lax in their respect for the truth.
Oh dear . . . I think I’ve been playing sarcastaball too much.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/fmp2de/sarcasm-effects-the-brain
In their worldview, you couldn’t possibly be correct, so no reason to try to appear forthright.
No shock here.
It is interesting to note that SR 511 was cosponsored by Senators Obama and Clinton.
Checking some Google hits it is clear that the birthers are hanging their tin foil hats on the wording in the resolution that says “Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936:”
Sad bunch.
ppsimmons is absolutely right! McCain’s eligibility was fully vetted both by Constitutional experts and ultimately by Senators including Senator Leahy which ultimately resulted in the passage of Senate Resolution 511. Obama’s eligiblity’s was never vetted or analyzed like McCain’s. Perhaps now it has been but not at the time McCain’s was. Obama’s eligibility problem was completely ignored and written off. Here are some relevant links:
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/the-consideration-of-a-senate-resolution
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/McCainAnalysis.pdf
Clearly The Senate looked at the issue, McCain’s eligiblity, and investigated it fully with the backing of Constitutional experts. However, Obots may be correct in the John McCain did not actually produce his BC for the record. The fact may have been stipulated. In any event, McCain’s BC may be part the process of internal inquiry but wasn’t necessarily put into the record. After all, McCain has been a Senator for 20 years. There was no reason to doubt or even inquire on the question of location regarding his birth.
That is Ppsimmons’ stock in trade, whether on birtherism or denying evolution. On the same thread you tried to comment on, I eventually got blocked when he posted only half my comments, and only those where I pointed out that he was a liar and a coward for not posting the comments where I made it undeniably clear that the Hawaiian verifications were the 100% verifiable legal proof he claimed didn’t exist, and that Sheriff Joke’s investiagtion was anything but.
“Mele Kalikimaka”
that’s what we Hawaiians say,
Mele KaIikimaka is Hawaii’s way
To say “Merry Christmas to you”.
A couple years ago, on one of his videos, ppsimmons claimed the COLB was inadequate for obtaining a driver license in his home state (Florida, I think).
I found a florida.gov website that said short form birth certificates were adequate.
Of course he removed my comments and blocked me.
From a fellow Hawaiian:
Mele Kalikimaka and Hau’oli Makahiki Hou! (Merry Christmas & Happy New Year)
Haha really? Well I and my sister would have proved him wrong on that, simply because I got a FL DL when I worked at Disney.
My sister learned to drive when she moved to Florida. She didn’t have anything prior to that, and provided FL with her Hawaii COLB.
not really suprising doc, as quite a lot of birfoon sites are heavily moderated and those posting on youtube will ban a someone from commenting if they prove their point.
something i’ve never seen on an obot site.
i’ve left 3 different comments there and have said screenshots have been taken as proof of what was posted.
plus the quote from lovejoy that ORYR uses 😀
lets see if he lets them through
Hey everyone … Sorry for OT
Please sign my white house petition to “deport everyone who signed their names to the deport Piers Morgan petition”
🙂
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/deport-each-and-every-individual-who-signed-their-names-deport-piers-morgan-petition/RzjkHbNB
Unfortunately, Doc, this is what most birthers do. It is bad enough that they lie constantly, they will not even have an honest conversation about bitherism and they will block your comments or ban you from the page. I was banned from WND, Rick Baker, Orly Taitz, Orly Taitz (fb), Donald Trump (fb), Harry Accorno (fb), Miki Booth (fb), Jerome Corsi (fb), Cody Robert Judy, Millions to Protest (fb) and others simply because I posted the truth about birthers and their arguments. To their credit, Birther Report is less moderated, but still censors.
And we all know what D’Onfrio did. Although Putzie is a joke, I admire the fact that he comes here and tries to defend his position where he can’t censor. Unfortunately, his posts are reflective of a dishonest, delusional ass, but he is still willing to be battered.
I find it ironic, that birthers scream about free speech, but almost all birther sites screen posts.
That is because they are essentially Nazis
Yes, but that doesn’t mean much. Obot sites are always right, so one couldn’t say whether or not they would censor comments proving them wrong since there are none. 👿
I do block some commenters for being insulting and posting large numbers inciting remarks. I deleted one of Hermitian’s recent comments where he pointed out that I called him an idiot before he made a nasty remark towards the forum about which I warned him about civility. But I also deleted a couple of remarks suggesting that another commenter was mentally ill.
Someone making a substantive argument should have no doubts that their comments will be approved, and moderation is not generally used.
It appears that Orly has banned me for pointing out her legal mistakes.
The Tribe-Olson report you cited was prepared at the request of the McCain campaign. They weren’t working for Congress. So the committee read the report that McCain provided and were persuaded by it. The committee discussed McCain’s eligibility; however, they held no hearings on it, nor is there anything in the public record to show that they “investigated” McCain’s birthplace or parentage. Did you read the entire Tribe-Olson report you linked to? It mentions Obama too:
That’s a word I tend not to toss around lightly. Sure, a lot of birthers can be inhuman scum, whose graves I couldn’t be bothered to piss on if the lot of them died tomorrow, but it takes a VERY special scum to be compared to people who gleefully killed millions of men, women and children.
I understand your point, but I have made this point over and over again, and I believe it to be true. Other than for the entertainment value, we want birthers to stop. On the other hand, birthers want us dead. I have absolutely no question, that if they had the ability to organize they would be a very dangerous group. And except for the, so far failure to gleefully killing people, can you tell me one significant difference between birthers and Nazis? Based on the comments I have seen, no.
Do they believe in the big lie propaganda theory? Yes
Do they think that courts should ignore the law in order to achieve their goals? Yes
Do they routinely engage in racist and homophobic behavior? Yes
Do they want to take over the country? yes
Are they paranoid and delusional? Yes
Do the leaders of the birther movement prey on the fear and stupidity of their followers? yes
Do they believe in the abrogation of free speech rights? Yes
I have never threatened a birther. I have been threatened many times.
I heard Frank Arduini say a very insightful thing once on RC’s show. The thing he fears most is a birther with a gun. Amen to that.
I don’t throw the word Nazi out often, but in the birthers and the tea party, I see the makings of just such a party, seeking nothing more than to have a white christian country.
Actually, I do not believe that statement to be true. As we know, the Supreme Court has consistently said that a citizen at birth is a NBC. See Minor, WKA, Luria, Baumgarten. I maintain that while Congress cannot amend the Constitution by statute, it does have the ability to define its terms (one only has to look at the demand from pro-lifers for statutes that define life beginning at conception to understand that they are looking for Constitutional protection for fetuses).
We, or at least I have looked to Title 8, Section 1401 of the US code, which defines those who are citizens at birth, as providing a list of people who would be NBC. Most people have overlooked another section of the code, namely 1405, which provides:
A person born in Hawaii on or after August 12, 1898, and before April 30, 1900, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900. A person born in Hawaii on or after April 30, 1900, is a citizen of the United States at birth. A person who was a citizen of the Republic of Hawaii on August 12, 1898, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900.
As such, as long at the President was not born before August 12, 1898, he was a natural born citizen even if it was before Hawaii became a state.
Yoda:
1) as a jew, I am extremely offended when anybody is compared to nazis, unless they are actively pursuing (or endorsing) genocide. fascists, yes, but nazis, no;
2) the Hawaiian birth issue is really a non-sequitur, under the relevant law at the time, Obama simply needed one prent to be considered a NBC, and nobody questions his mother’s citizenship. HI is, essentially, a giant red herring
Doc:
it’s near Christmas, so is it arguable that he really just hasn’t gotten around to approving your comment over the past few days – I know I’ve been slacking in my own actual responsibilities, let alone something like that? I mean. I’m pretty confident that you are right, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.
I am a Jew too. and perhaps II don’t want to wait until the start building the gas chambers before I call it. if you prefer, I will call them fascists.
Now that I can get behind. Birthers are very much pro-fascism. The ones I’ve had the displeasure I’ve speaking too, want America to be some kind of Conservative run theocracy, where “Free Speech” and other freedoms are reserved for the “right” kind of people. The vilest of which are, or have at least claimed to be, willing to do harm to their own countrymen to get what they want. That includes the servicemen and women whom they claim to honor.
Even in a brief read, it is easy to tell John either did not read it, skipped over the parts that did not tell him what he wants to here, or has a serious reading comprehension problem.
I think you are misreading the statement from the Tribe-Olsen report, as it matches what you have posted. Birth in an incorporated territory is the same as birth in a US state (or in DC). So if Obama were born in 1959, before Hawaiian Statehood, he would still be eligible. Tribe-Olsen are saying exactly that.
Hawaii was a US territory then, wasn’t it?
“nor is there anything in the public record to show that they “investigated” McCain’s birthplace or parentage. Did you read the entire Tribe-Olson report you linked to? It mentions Obama too.”
There was no need to Doc. Everyone knows where McCain was born. It is unquestionable. McCain has been a senator for 20 years and his father was a well-known Admiral. What they were investigating was if McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone presented any eligibility problems. Apparently there was no problem. In the report and investigation, the stipulation of Obama’s birth in Hawaii was made, a highly contested fact that was never investigated. In Addition, The report is silent on the parentage of Obama regarding the NBC meaning. We can say now that these questions have been debated ad nuasum but were never looked into in 2008.
Barry Goldwater was born in the Arizona Territory, in 1909. Arizona became a state in 1912. Apparently the issue was raised during the campaign, but did not prevent the Republican Party from nominating him.
There was no investigation. There is no record of an investigation. The circumstances of Obama’s birth and parentage were well know. There was no need for an investigation into his past as the definition of NBC is well known and understood to anyone but birthers.
No one looked into Obama’s status because there was no question about it. Since he was born in the state of Hawaii he was and is a natural born citizen. Obama was a declared candidate in early 2007. The kooky two parent citizen theory never came up until Leo the other terrible attorney from New Jersey brought it up in late October 2008.
Nor was there any question in anybody’s mind about where Senator Obama was born in April of 2008. It was not until somebody posted a message on the Internet suggesting that he was born in Kenya, a message that gave not a single reason to think that it was true, that the rumors started and folks started trying to come up justification for believing the unfounded rumor, and hence the birther movement arose with all of its delusional nonsense and outright fraud.
The takeaway from this, however, is that given birth in Hawaii, Tribe and Olson, eminent constitutional scholars, say Obama is eligible.
I think fascist is more accurate than Nazi…. and more appropriate..
“We don’t need no thought control…”
Yes, prior to August 21,1959, Hawaii was a US Territory.
“Totalitarian,” or “authoritarian” are words I’d use. Birthers do not admit the right of those who disagree with them to speak. They are un-American and anti-democratic.
What a co-inky-dink! Everyone knows where Obama was born too. Honolulu, Hawaii.
1) there is no need to be a NBC for senator, so I have no idea why you think that his time in office is relevant;
2) a fair number of birthers contend that McCain would not have been eligible either (IMHO, as an effort to keep the moderate-version of McCain from office), so please explain to me what source of law you are using to differentiate yourself from this group (which I consider the “honest” birthers, in that they are consistent, at the very least);
3) show me a single source of law that would override the statutory definitions as created by Congress, that is, something showing that a single parent is not all that was needed (yes, Obama could be born on mars, his mother is all the connection required);
4) finally, show me that the courts have the right to hear anything regarding this, in light of Nixon v US and the sole power the EC has regarding elections
That’s no surprise. LOL
You’re seriously deluded. Obama was born in Hawaii and the state of Hawaii has verified that fact three times. If you choose not to believe it, that is your own mental impairment speaking. Most people are fully aware that Obama was born in Hawaii. It is only those who choose to believe otherwise for personal reasons who don’t know. It’s not like they haven’t been told, they (you) just choose not to believe it. Try another tactic. This one doesn’t bode well for you.
And that was only after the colb for Obama was released by the campaign and confirmed by Dr fukino. They used the two parent citizen claim after their Kenya birth scenarios failed.
But John’s still holding out hope.
One of the many reasons that no one takes birthers seriously. They can’t keep their story straight.
Those are by far, the most accurate terms. Communism and Fascism are, in many ways, polar opposites, but, in the 20th century iterations of these, their commonality was in the totalitarian and authoritarian methods.
This kind of dishonesty is typical of birthers. There were threads where birthers would claim McCain released his birth certificate, and when I corrected them that it was NOT the RNC or the McCain campaign, but Hollander, somebody who was suing McCain, they move on to the next lie without any accountability. I tell them to send me a source where the McCain campaign officially released a birth certificate, that or the RNC, they just move on to the next lie.
Being a conspiracy theorist means never having to say you’re wrong.
Always have a fallback argument.
I have a fringe theory. Remember the Grandfather clause in the Constitution?
Now I understand that most people consider that that clause only applied to people who were alive in 1789 when the Constitution was adopted by the first set of states. But it was actually adopted by different areas at widely different times.
The Constitution was adopted in Hawai’i on April 30, 1900 and those born between August 12, 1898 and April 30th 1900 were declared naturalized, those after are natural born. So since those born between August 12, 1898 and April 30th 1900 were ‘citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution’ in Hawai’i should they not be eligible to be President according to the Grandfather Clause?
I think we need a few court cases to test out this theory. Are there any possible candidates out there we can test it with? We’ll have to get a good Constitutional Lawyer to work the case… Taitz? Klayman? who?
Possible candidates: Bobby Jindal and/or Marco Rubio. Both were born in the U.S. to immigrant parents who were not naturalized at the time of birth.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if birthers got the official test cased solved based on the eligibility of a Republican candidate.
Jindal and Rubio were born in Hawai’i between August 12, 1898 and April 30th 1900??? Wow, I didn’t know that.
Okay, we got our test cases then! I really didn’t think it was going to be that easy.
Struggling to locate anyone who meets exactly that criteria but I know of a guy born in Connecticut in 1890 who still wanders the streets in his zimmer frame lamenting the loss of his SS number over 40 years ago and rambling about theiving Baskin Robbins rascals. Will he do?
Amen, Yoda. Amen!!!
As you can see, I am guilty of being distracted and not reading what you wrote thoroughly. Apologies. Carry on.
Having a little free time on my hands, I thought reading something on a more intellectual basis would be in order. More intellectual than the boob tube.
Intellectual? Possibly. But on the whole, it appears most of these posts were done by bored stiff persons with a lot of time on their hands. It all amounts to pablum, there is no hope of a resolution, it’s just blab, blab, blab.
Get a life. Off your butts, turn off the computers and get out into the world and do something. Life is short, is this how you want to spend it?
This is the ninth time you’ve posted similar comments on the blog, under several screen names:
I don’t know why you waste your time stalking this blog and telling other people not to waste their time, but people make their own choices and don’t need any help from busybodies like you. If you don’t like what you read here, go away.
Gee… Spending time mocking the ridiculous nonsense the Birfers believe, lampooning the seditious anti-American bent of right-wing nut-jobs, deflating the asinine lies spread about Liberals and our President by partisan propagandists, making sure the truth is at least available somewhere about the absurdity of the claim that BHO is not eligible to be President…
Why, yes. That is precisely how I like to spend a few minutes out of my day.
I call it a patriotic duty.
To the multiple personality troll known as betty price, Paula Sweet, Greta Alexander, Petunia Mars, Master Ennui, Elaine Taylor and any other sock puppet character you’re harboring:
irony (noun)
Language device in which the real intent is concealed or contradicted by the literal meaning of words or a situation.
_ _ _
Bravo.
Birthers are a never ending source of entertainment.
Shorter Betty Price: You darned realists, how dare you rain on my fantasy!
You first!
Whoops! Doc, I was copying Betty Price and accidentally copied your quote from her. LOL I meant that for the busybody, of course.
It seems that I have now been banned from Birtherreport.com ORYR.hmmmmmmmmmmm
Welcome to the club. But they are the worst echo chamber anyway, nothing birther-productive (such as organizing another round of whiney letters or debating eligibility issues) comes out of it. I suspect the only reason prolific anti-birthers such as “rikker” have not been banned for months is that ORYR realizes that without the traffic they generate, the site would be dead.
Not surprised. The last thing ORYR wants is competent people explaining to birthers how and why they are wrong. That pesky reality stuff keeps thwarting their efforts, so they hate being reminded of it.
”As you can see, I am guilty of being distracted and not reading what you wrote thoroughly”
hmm, how does one write thoroughly?
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I often use a spell checker for that word.
One correct letter at a time in the proper sequence and with no spaces just as you demonstrated.
More importantly, what would we do if there were no rhetorical questions?
Twila Barnes is Betty Price is
Paula Sweet
Greta Alexander
Petunia Mars
Master Ennui
Elaine Taylor
An infallible troll with a chip on her shoulder?
For example:
Today, Dr. C. posted this gentle explanation about why Klayman’s efforts are for naught,
“Jurisdiction is a fundamental bar in any lawsuit. Once the court decides it doesn’t have jurisdiction, it must dismiss. That’s what happened in Florida. Klayman’s motion for rehearing is frivolous.”
Notice that Dr. C. didn’t call anyone names and his tone was not accusatory or inflamatory, but simply informative. So how did people at ORYR respond? They insulted his appearance, accused him of spreading disinformation; claimed his post was “bullsh*t” and called him a “Statist bootlicker” and a “useful idiot of the Usurper.”
But what I found really hurtful–they called his hat a “turban” and said it should be burned. Those guys are so MEAN! :<(
They’re just bitchy that they can’t rock a hat the way Doc can!
At ORYR it is very easy to draw a sharp contrast between reasonable, fact-based and instructive comments, and other stuff over there. I thought it might be worth the effort at lease for a while.
seeing as you’re not banned doc, have you thought of reminding them to remove the quote from lovejoy?
might be entertaining to see the response.