The Occasional Open Thread – Mark II Turbocharged Special Edition

Posted on February 10, 2011 by Dr. Conspiracy

Marketing hype aside, here’s where you can talk about stuff.

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in Open Mike. Bookmark the permalink.

318 Responses to The Occasional Open Thread – Mark II Turbocharged Special Edition

  1. Black Lion says:
    February 10, 2011 at 4:13 pm  (Quote)

    Speaking of rewriting the Constitution, Jan Brewer wants to use the courts as her personal attack dog….

    “Governor Jan Brewer just announced . . . . on behalf of the State of Arizona, she is suing the Federal Government.

    There are 5 counts . . . . and here is a summary (my notes) from the press conference.

    1/ failure to achieve operational control over the Mexico/Arizona border.

    2/ failure to protect Arizona from invasion and Arizona says invasion not just limited to other countries to invade but applies to people and secured border.

    3 / failure to enforce immigration laws . . . . and their failure causes national security risks . . . abuse of discretion that Fed only enforce the law they want to and they should enforce all.

    4/ declaratory relief about reimbursement for Fed govt’s failure to pay for incarceration of prisoners (illegal).

    5/ under 10th amendment . . . powers not delegated to the Fed, are reserved to the people and while control of border is fed responsibility, when criminals cross border illegally and commit crimes, it is a state responsibility and the Feds are interfering with the state to fulfill its responsibilities.”

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/02/10/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-declares-war-on-obama-regime-files-lawsuit-over-failure-to-secure-border-enforce-immigration-laws-stop-invasion/#comments

  2. Black Lion says:
    February 10, 2011 at 4:20 pm  (Quote)

    “Today on Hardball Chris Matthews was less excited than he has been recently, yet this more subdued tone actually enabled him to conduct a more interesting conversation. With Tea Party guests Phillip Dennis of the Texas Tea Party and Matt Kibbe from FreedomWorks, Matthews explored his fascination with the fact that so many Republicans still believe President Obama is a Muslim.

    Dennis claimed he didn’t know what Obama’s religion was, but “if he’s a Christian I certainly don’t like the brand of Christianity he went to in Chicago for twenty years with Reverend Wright.” Matthews laughed at how Dennis was “playing the game” and Dennis concluded that it was hard to argue that “President Obama certainly has a soft spot in his heart for Islam.” Matthews responded that “I don’t think [Obama’s] anti-Islamic and I wonder why you are?” However, Dennis wasn’t backing down and declared that he thought he had a right to be concerned with Islam, which he thought was anything but a religion of peace.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-amazed-tea-party-leader-thinks-obama-has-soft-spot-for-islam/

  3. sarina says:
    February 10, 2011 at 6:40 pm  (Quote)

    Anybody knows something about Theresa Cao’s hearing?

  4. Daniel says:
    February 10, 2011 at 6:45 pm  (Quote)

    sarina: Anybody knows something about Theresa Cao’s hearing?

    Apparently her high priced lawyer quit, probably after she attempted to make a pro se submission, or possibly because she refused to follow any sane advice.

    She now apparently has been issued a court appointed lawyer and the case is rescheduled for March 15ish?

  5. sarina says:
    February 10, 2011 at 7:00 pm  (Quote)

    Thank you Daniel!

  6. Sean says:
    February 11, 2011 at 3:36 am  (Quote)

    I just had a birther say Obama was telling the terrorists (Egyptian protesters) to rise up. and that he was brainwashing this “new generation.”

    Mubarack has some new followers it seems.

  7. The Magic M says:
    February 11, 2011 at 3:50 am  (Quote)

    With these people, it’s always Catch-22.

    Also because of the diversity of the birther base – among them, you will find everything from a very strong attachment to Israel to the “World Jewish Conspiracy” followers. This is not a contradiction to the conspiracy theory tendencies among them: the latter are the typical conspiracy nuts, the former are the Bible Belt fanatics. (Not that there’s anything wrong with being a strong supporter of Israel, of course, I’m referring to the specific reasons for the birthers to favour either side.)

  8. Lupin says:
    February 11, 2011 at 6:05 am  (Quote)

    Sean: I just had a birther say Obama was telling the terrorists (Egyptian protesters) to rise up. and that he was brainwashing this “new generation.”

    That’s a rather remarkable mental loop-de-loop.

    If Obama endorsed puppies, they would be out slaughtering them.

  9. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 11, 2011 at 10:34 am  (Quote)

    Sean: I just had a birther say Obama was telling the terrorists (Egyptian protesters) to rise up. and that he was brainwashing this “new generation.”Mubarack has some new followers it seems.

    Ahh only in the right wing can a movement funded by corporations and billionaires like the Koch Brothers be seen as a patriotic grassroots movement while an actual people powered movement is seen as terrorists

  10. G says:
    February 11, 2011 at 10:59 am  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Ahh only in the right wing can a movement funded by corporations and billionaires like the Koch Brothers be seen as a patriotic grassroots movement while an actual people powered movement is seen as terrorists

    Indeed! Well stated and sad but seemingly true…

  11. Black Lion says:
    February 11, 2011 at 11:16 am  (Quote)

    The usual nonsensical screed by losing attorney Mario….excerpted below…Note how mario frames the facts to suit his position? Interesting….

    “While the courts have not been too kind to the “birthers,” why has not one court even mentioned the fact that not one court in the whole nation has yet to see Obama’s alleged birth certificate?

    We even have had an Indiana court in Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct.App. 2009), declare that “persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” But the court never even raised the issue that there was no proof before the court that Obama was “born within the borders of the United States.” In fact, the Ankeny court, while dismissing the plaintiffs’ case, never ruled that Obama was “born within the borders of the United States.” Nor did it rule that he was a “natural born Citizen.”

    How can a modern and advanced nation such as the United States, a leader of the free world, a model for constitutional republican government, find itself in such a situation? We have been debating the issue of Obama’s place of birth publicly and in the courts for over 2 years and we as a nation still do not know with any reasonable degree of certainty whether Obama was born in the United States. The place of birth issue is not a conspiracy issue, but rather only one demanding conclusive proof that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    But apart from the place of birth issue, we also have the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Assuming that he was born in Hawaii, does Obama meet the definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen?” The Framers’ constitutional scheme, historical evidence (e.g. Emer de Vattel’s The Law of Nations, Section 212), and U.S. Supreme Court precedent (e.g. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875) show that the American common law definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen” has its basis in natural law and the law of nations and not the English common law. That definition, which to this day has never been changed, is a child born in the country (or equivalent such as being born abroad to parents in the service of their nation) to a U.S. citizen father and mother.

    There is no factual dispute that when Obama was born in 1961, wherever that may be, he was born to a father who under the British Nationality Act of 1948 was a British subject/citizen and that Obama himself by descent from his father was born a British subject/citizen. Not only was Obama’s father not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born, but his father never became a U.S. citizen nor was he even ever a domiciliary or permanent resident of the United States. These undisputed facts show that Obama is not and cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen.”

    So, there are two open issues: was Obama born in Hawaii and if he was, is he an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Assuming that Obama runs for re-election, how will our nation address these issues in the 2012 presidential campaign and election? Will Congress, other political institutions, the media, and candidates exhibit political and moral courage and tackle these issues once and for all or will they like so many others have done just turn a blind eye to the Constitution and the rule of law and continue with business as usual? ”

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/

  12. Daniel says:
    February 11, 2011 at 11:24 am  (Quote)

    Mario confuses courts turning a blind eye with courts rolling their eyes.

    How can one man contain so much stupid?

  13. Sef says:
    February 11, 2011 at 11:35 am  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Assuming that Obama runs for re-election, how will our nation address these issues in the 2012 presidential campaign and election?

    The question for Mario should be not how the nation views President Obama’s candidacy, but rather how it views the stupidity of birthers to raise the question in the 1st place.

  14. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 12:21 pm  (Quote)

    El Putzo is a sad, little birther attention whore who makes thinly veiled racist comments to keep the attention and PayPal clicks going from his klan of flying monkeys. His blatantly puerile sophism only impresses his fellow xenophobes (read: Anglo, Christian or Italian is o.k. but anyone else is less than human with no rights whatsoever) in between Stormfront circle klatches.

    And you can bet that his fragile, self absorbed ego means that he’s a lurker.

    “While the courts have not been too kind to the “birthers,”

    Thank you, Major Obvious but I’m amazed how lenient and patient the courts have been considering the sheer number of frivolous lawsuits filed by illiterate, incompetent, putative attorneys. There should have been more sanctions and at least a few disbarments.

  15. Bovril says:
    February 11, 2011 at 1:22 pm  (Quote)

    In another sign of the puerile, insane and vindictive from Mad Ole Orly’s House O’ Malware

    Use the linky at your own peril

    xxxhttp://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=18943xxx

    Taitz v Dunn is scheduled for 06.06.2011. Deposition of Damon Dunn is rescheduled for 03.17.2011

    Even though Dunn lost the race to be the Sec of State for CA to the Democrats and nothing will change that, Orly is STILL harrassing him for (nonexistent) electoral fraud.

    Even if in some non existent universe she won the case, she doesn’t get a do-over in the SoS run so nothing will change.

    She really is a foul, disgusting, vindictive LSOS.

  16. Scientist says:
    February 11, 2011 at 1:52 pm  (Quote)

    As I watch today’s events, I can’t help noting that it took Mubarak 2 weeks to accept the verdict of the people. Puzo and his tribe haven’t done so in more than 2 years.

  17. Sef says:
    February 11, 2011 at 2:17 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will:
    El Putzo is a sad, little birther attention whore who makes thinly veiled racist comments to keep the attention and PayPal clicks going from his klan of flying monkeys. His blatantly puerile sophism only impresses his fellow xenophobes (read: Anglo, Christian or Italian is o.k. but anyone else is less than human with no rights whatsoever) in between Stormfront circle klatches.

    By El Putzo’s argument that the 14th Amendment is a Congressional Act which a Congressional act can override, so is the 2nd Amendment. I doubt many birthers want Congress to take away their guns.
    And you can bet that his fragile, self absorbed ego means that he’s a lurker.

    “While the courts have not been too kind to the “birthers,”

    Thank you, Major Obvious but I’m amazed how lenient and patient the courts have been considering the sheer number of frivolous lawsuits filed by illiterate, incompetent, putative attorneys. There should have been more sanctions and at least a few disbarments.

  18. Sef says:
    February 11, 2011 at 2:18 pm  (Quote)

    Sef:

    Somehow may comment got embedded in the quote. Sorry.

  19. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 2:34 pm  (Quote)

    Scientist:
    As I watch today’s events, I can’t help noting that it took Mubarak 2 weeks to accept the verdict of the people.Puzo and his tribe haven’t done so in more than 2 years.

    And I’m sure some mideast leaders will call this a sheik down but I see it as the inevitable collapse of an enormous pyramid scheme.

  20. G says:
    February 11, 2011 at 2:56 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Thank you, Major Obvious but I’m amazed how lenient and patient the courts have been considering the sheer number of frivolous lawsuits filed by illiterate, incompetent, putative attorneys. There should have been more sanctions and at least a few disbarments.

    Strongly agreed.

  21. Black Lion says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:30 pm  (Quote)

    Once Again, A Birther Takes The Stage At CPAC
    February 11, 2011 2:00 pm ET by Simon Maloy

    A little while ago at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Laurie Roth, a radio host of sorts, stepped up to the dais to sputter incoherently for a few minutes about how President Obama is “President of Islam,” and then introduce the woman who introduced Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY).

    Interesting stuff. What’s even more interesting is that Roth is a birther.

    She spoke at last year’s CPAC as well, and I noted at the time that she has berated “the media” for “completely avoiding the issue of where Obama was born and if he complied with our constitutional requirements about being born in the U.S.”

    Well, she hasn’t kicked the birther obsession since then. Just a couple of weeks ago she wrote an article for her website with the headline: “Where are the birth records for Obama? It is time get [sic] to the bottom line.” Here’s the money quote: “Our constitution says you cannot be President if you are not natural born in the United States. It appears as if Obama is not natural born.”

    So yeah, a birther on stage at CPAC. For two years running.

    As I said, interesting stuff.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102110038

  22. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:43 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Once Again, A Birther Takes The Stage At CPACFebruary 11, 2011 2:00 pm ET by Simon MaloyA little while ago at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Laurie Roth, a radio host of sorts, stepped up to the dais to sputter incoherently for a few minutes about how President Obama is “President of Islam,” and then introduce the woman who introduced Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY).Interesting stuff. What’s even more interesting is that Roth is a birther. She spoke at last year’s CPAC as well, and I noted at the time that she has berated “the media” for “completely avoiding the issue of where Obama was born and if he complied with our constitutional requirements about being born in the U.S.”Well, she hasn’t kicked the birther obsession since then. Just a couple of weeks ago she wrote an article for her website with the headline: “Where are the birth records for Obama? It is time get [sic] to the bottom line.” Here’s the money quote: “Our constitution says you cannot be President if you are not natural born in the United States. It appears as if Obama is not natural born.”So yeah, a birther on stage at CPAC. For two years running.As I said, interesting stuff.http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102110038

    Not sure if you noticed but Cheney and Rumsfeld stopped by and got booed rather loudly including getting called a War Criminal. Quite an interesting mix over at CPAC.

  23. Rickey says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: Somehow may comment got embedded in the quote.Sorry.

    That happened to me today, too. It looked okay in preview mode but when I posted it the entire thing was italicized.

  24. Stanislaw says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:23 pm  (Quote)

    Daniel: Mario confuses courts turning a blind eye with courts rolling their eyes.
    How can one man contain so much stupid?

    Simple…because he’s a birther.

  25. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:27 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Not sure if you noticed but Cheney and Rumsfeld stopped by and got booed rather loudly including getting called a War Criminal.Quite an interesting mix over at CPAC.

    Donald Trump was booed when he made disparaging remarks about Ron Paul.

    Businessman and television personality Donald Trump says that America needs a winner to run against President Obama in the next election – and libertarian icon Ron Paul isn’t it.
    “Ron Paul cannot get elected, I’m sorry,” Trump said to a rowdy audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. today.

    The remark elicited a huge commotion from the crowd, which was packed with young fans of the Texas Republican, who made a splash in the 2008 Republican primary by gaining the fervent support of libertarians but ultimately won minimal support. Paul’s political action committee put together an extensive campaign to bring his young supporters to this week’s conference, which is considered a platform of sorts for potential presidential contenders.

    While Paul’s young fans booed, a large portion of the crowd – surely growing impatient with Paul’s continuing presence at CPAC (he won the straw poll last year) – rose to their feet and cheered Trump.

    Trump was prompted to address Paul’s chances of winning after some in the audience began cheering for Paul during Trump’s speech.

    (Watch his remarks at left.)

    “Considering the shape the United States, we need a competitive person, a highly competent person” to run for president, Trump said, to which some shouted, “Ron Paul!”

    The 2012 GOP Presidential Field: Strengths and Weaknesses for the Top Contenders

    After the crowd continued to cheer and boo for some time, Trump said, “I think he is a good guy, but honestly, he has just zero chance of getting elected.”

    Trump used most of his speech to tout his own credentials.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20031408-503544.html

  26. Stanislaw says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:35 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Donald Trump was booed when he made disparaging remarks about Ron Paul.

    Businessman and television personality Donald Trump says that America needs a winner to run against President Obama in the next election – and libertarian icon Ron Paul isn’t it.
    “Ron Paul cannot get elected, I’m sorry,” Trump said to a rowdy audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. today.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20031408-503544.html

    I guess the truth hurts. Who knew?

  27. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:51 pm  (Quote)

    Stanislaw: I guess the truth hurts. Who knew?

    “I tell ya. Now I know why tigers eat their young.”
    – Al Czervik (Rodney Dangerfield)

  28. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 11, 2011 at 6:32 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion back to the Weaselzippers. Amazingly dumb comments as usual:

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/02/11/pawlenty-says-he-doesnt-question-existence-of-obamas-birth-certificate/#comment-53266

    Richard Cheese says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:22 pm
    He undoubtedly has a birth certificate. But what does it say? And where is it from?

    sb says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm
    How is it that barry’s mother was taking college courses in Seattle 2 weeks after barry’s “birth?” Superwoman? barry lying about his date of birth? barry born in Washington? So many questions! Who is this guy?

    Rufus says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    Not surprising… NO ONE in Congress will even touch the subject because when the truth comes out, anyone who had knowledge of the big lie will beheld responsible. They are all afraid of the Constitutional crisis that would ensue, and are all fearful of the rioting in the ghettoes when we try and remove their messiah.
    They are all content with letting the states pass eligibility legislation to solve the issue in 2012.

    BHL says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    I’m all for GOPers saying “I personally believe Obama was born in Hawaii.” as long as they follow it up with some pithy pro-birther comment. This way, no matter the outcome, they can still fan the flames and not look like a nutjob if somehow he pulls out some miracle proof.
    There are a few possible explanations for lack of HI hospital BC… born at home, father unknown, born in another state, stolen from records, etc. But I love following the birther story.. can’t wait to find out how it ends in 2012.

  29. JoZeppy says:
    February 11, 2011 at 7:00 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Businessman and television personality Donald Trump says that America needs a winner to run against President Obama in the next election – and libertarian icon Ron Paul isn’t it.
    “Ron Paul cannot get elected, I’m sorry,” Trump said to a rowdy audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. today.

    Why exactly is someone whose political donations since 1999 has gone 60% to Democrats speaking at CPAC?

  30. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 7:11 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):
    Black Lion back to the Weaselzippers.Amazingly dumb comments as usual:

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/02/11/pawlenty-says-he-doesnt-question-existence-of-obamas-birth-certificate/#comment-53266

    Richard Cheese says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:22 pm
    He undoubtedly has a birth certificate. But what does it say? And where is it from?

    sb says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm
    How is it that barry’s mother was taking college courses in Seattle 2 weeks after barry’s “birth?” Superwoman? barry lying about his date of birth? barry born in Washington? So many questions! Who is this guy?

    Rufus says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    Not surprising… NO ONE in Congress will even touch the subject because when the truth comes out, anyone who had knowledge of the big lie will beheld responsible. They are all afraid of the Constitutional crisis that would ensue, and are all fearful of the rioting in the ghettoes when we try and remove their messiah.
    They are all content with letting the states pass eligibility legislation to solve the issue in 2012.

    BHL says:
    February 11, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    I’m all for GOPers saying “I personally believe Obama was born in Hawaii.” as long as they follow it up with some pithy pro-birther comment. This way, no matter the outcome, they can still fan the flames and not look like a nutjob if somehow he pulls out some miracle proof.
    There are a few possible explanations for lack of HI hospital BC… born at home, father unknown, born in another state, stolen from records, etc. But I love following the birther story.. can’t wait to find out how it ends in 2012.

    And good responses from you. These horse’s asses will undoubtedly respond with fright wing drivel and mindless attacks. It’s all they know.

  31. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 7:12 pm  (Quote)

    JoZeppy: Why exactly is someone whose political donations since 1999 has gone 60% to Democrats speaking at CPAC?

    Should we ask him? 😉

  32. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 11, 2011 at 7:26 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: And good responses from you. These horse’s asses will undoubtedly respond with fright wing drivel and mindless attacks. It’s all they know.

    Richard Cheese will most likely go racist like he did before and then try to make the argument about me and then try to change names. Here is an example from another thread:

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/01/18/hawaii-governor-actually-we-cant-find-obamas-original-birth-certificate/#comment-33508

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 11:57 am
    I am not going to dig around for more material until you produced what you promised.
    And you two “boys” are still patrolling the comments page, days later, aren’t you?
    Well you just keep it up.
    Here is how your Black Messiah is doing right now:
    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/01/20/poll-only-42-would-vote-to-re-elect-obama-51-prefer-someone-else/
    Does not look good right now…
    Still waiting….

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 12:38 pm
    Gee Bobby Ross (one of dem black folk I spose) why haven’t you produced what you promised yet?
    I am still waiting…

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 1:00 pm
    Gee I wonder why you “boys” still haven’t produced the evidence I asked for?
    But are still patrolling the comments page like little %$#@.
    I produced plenty of links and evidence for you. And you didn’t produce anything I asked.
    So I am still waiting for the main piece I asked for multiple times.
    Waiting…

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 1:15 pm
    Correction:
    PRODUCE what you “boys” promised.
    Days ago.
    Waiting.

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 4:10 pm
    I guess you’re going to scurry off now.
    =======
    I will be just amused to observe you “boys” trying to patrol this page, desperate, frantic, out of your minds about what might be posted here.
    Great. Good for you.
    The record is above, for all to refer to.
    PS I guess they didn’t teach much about conjugation at that HBCU.

    Richard Cheese says:
    January 22, 2011 at 10:19 am
    that black people are lesser educated than white people
    =====
    That horrific, ignorant sentence construction proves the point exactly. Look boy, learn to read and write English first before you start lecturing everyone else about how brilliant and literate you are.
    You two dufuses are racists and black supremacists, aren’t you? Horrific racists, just like Shamir “kill the cracker babies” Shabazz.
    But that aside (since it is so obvious that anyone can see it, and you are clearly just pathetic Affirmative Action morons), why have you not addressed the question that you previously alleged was true. That you have refused to do, now for days and days and days as you patrolled this page to spew your invective and expletives and insults and lies and obfuscation.
    If it was illegal for Fukino to release the information she did, how did it happen?
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_birth_certificate
    Why wasn’t she prosecuted then?
    Who gave her permission? BL claimed that it was the Governor and the AG. So where is the evidence? Come now, you said you knew it. Where is the evidence?
    Put up or shut up.
    Let’s see what you have.
    Or just admit you are lying sacks of you know what. Same color anyway.

  33. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 7:37 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):
    Richard Cheese will most likely go racist like he did before and then try to make the argument about me and then try to change names.Here is an example from another thread:http://weaselzippers.us/2011/01/18/hawaii-governor-actually-we-cant-find-obamas-original-birth-certificate/#comment-33508Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 11:57 am
    I am not going to dig around for more material until you produced what you promised.
    And you two “boys” are still patrolling the comments page, days later, aren’t you?
    Well you just keep it up.
    Here is how your Black Messiah is doing right now:
    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/01/20/poll-only-42-would-vote-to-re-elect-obama-51-prefer-someone-else/
    Does not look good right now…
    Still waiting….Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 12:38 pm
    Gee Bobby Ross (one of dem black folk I spose) why haven’t you produced what you promised yet?
    I am still waiting…Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 1:00 pm
    Gee I wonder why you “boys” still haven’t produced the evidence I asked for?
    But are still patrolling the comments page like little %$#@.
    I produced plenty of links and evidence for you. And you didn’t produce anything I asked.
    So I am still waiting for the main piece I asked for multiple times.
    Waiting…Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 1:15 pm
    Correction:
    PRODUCE what you “boys” promised.
    Days ago.
    Waiting.Richard Cheese says:
    January 21, 2011 at 4:10 pm
    I guess you’re going to scurry off now.
    =======
    I will be just amused to observe you “boys” trying to patrol this page, desperate, frantic, out of your minds about what might be posted here.
    Great. Good for you.
    The record is above, for all to refer to.
    PS I guess they didn’t teach much about conjugation at that HBCU.Richard Cheese says:
    January 22, 2011 at 10:19 am
    that black people are lesser educated than white people
    =====
    That horrific, ignorant sentence construction proves the point exactly. Look boy, learn to read and write English first before you start lecturing everyone else about how brilliant and literate you are.
    You two dufuses are racists and black supremacists, aren’t you? Horrific racists, just like Shamir “kill the cracker babies” Shabazz.
    But that aside (since it is so obvious that anyone can see it, and you are clearly just pathetic Affirmative Action morons), why have you not addressed the question that you previously alleged was true. That you have refused to do, now for days and days and days as you patrolled this page to spew your invective and expletives and insults and lies and obfuscation.
    If it was illegal for Fukino to release the information she did, how did it happen?
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_birth_certificate
    Why wasn’t she prosecuted then?
    Who gave her permission? BL claimed that it was the Governor and the AG. So where is the evidence? Come now, you said you knew it. Where is the evidence?
    Put up or shut up.
    Let’s see what you have.
    Or just admit you are lying sacks of you know what. Same color anyway.

    Ah yes. A cowardly pig representing Stormfront who couldn’t get laid even if you blindfolded the crack whore and paid her $1,000 up front.

  34. Majority Will says:
    February 11, 2011 at 9:05 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Richard Cheese will most likely go racist like he did before and then try to make the argument about me and then try to change names.

    And by his nick, at least he openly admits he’s nothing more than smegma.

  35. misha says:
    February 11, 2011 at 10:14 pm  (Quote)

    Pawlenty goes birther:

    “Now, I’m not one who questions the existence of the President’s birth certificate. But when you listen to his policies, don’t you at least wonder what planet he’s from?”

    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/02/11/pawlenty-pummels-obama/

  36. misha says:
    February 11, 2011 at 11:33 pm  (Quote)

    As a kibbutznik, I would like to recommend this article:

    In Israel, Galleries With a Kibbutz Soul:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/arts/12iht-sctelaviv12.html?_r=1&ref=global-home&pagewanted=all

  37. US Citizen says:
    February 12, 2011 at 12:35 am  (Quote)

    Rufus says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    Not surprising… NO ONE in Congress will even touch the subject because when the truth comes out, anyone who had knowledge of the big lie will beheld responsible. They are all afraid of the Constitutional crisis that would ensue, and are all fearful of the rioting in the ghettoes when we try and remove their messiah.
    They are all content with letting the states pass eligibility legislation to solve the issue in 2012.

    That’s sooo true!
    You know, I heard Obama say this the other day….

    “It is with our deep admiration for the ghettos across the US,
    they comprising the largest populations of the US and our finest individuals.
    With our interests for the welfare of the people in those ghettos,
    that they not get hurt during the riots that will ensue once my widely discussed secret comes out,
    have so ordered all 500+ members of Congress to sit back and remain hush hush until the states sort it all out in 2012.”

    It all makes perfect sense.
    Praise Obama!

  38. Keith says:
    February 12, 2011 at 12:48 am  (Quote)

    Black Lion (quoteing Mario Apuzzo) : “While the courts have not been too kind to the “birthers,” why has not one court even mentioned the fact that not one court in the whole nation has yet to see Obama’s alleged birth certificate?

    Because it isn’t true, Mario

    It has been reviewed thoroughly by the Court of Public Opinion and found to be more than satisfactory.

  39. Majority Will says:
    February 12, 2011 at 12:56 am  (Quote)

    Yesterday on her infested site, Oily Titz ruminated, “We saw the changes in Egypt and it is time for similar changes in US. Our system is more corrupt, than one in Egypt.
    Ironically their usurper at least had papers. Our usuper, Barack Hussein Obama, is a complete fraud. He sits in the White House with a stolen social security number from CT and without a valid long form BC. The question is; are Americans dumber than Egyptians? It is time to clean up the mess, it is time for Americans to make sure we have a constitutionally eligible president in office. Tea Party patriots convention is scheduled for February 25 in Phoeniz, AZ. Maybe Phoenix will be our Tahrir square and our ground zero.”

    Our ground zero? What is this clueless sack of guano planning exactly?

  40. misha says:
    February 12, 2011 at 11:01 am  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Our ground zero? What is this clueless sack of guano planning exactly?

    She and Sharron Angle believe in 2nd Amendment remedies. See Tucson.

  41. Sef says:
    February 12, 2011 at 11:44 am  (Quote)

    Majority Will:
    Yesterday on her infested site, Oily Titz ruminated, “We saw the changes in Egypt and it is time for similar changes in US. Our system is more corrupt, than one in Egypt.
    Ironically their usurper at least had papers. Our usuper, Barack Hussein Obama, is a complete fraud. He sits in the White House with a stolen social security number from CT and without a validlong form BC. The question is; are Americans dumber than Egyptians? It is time to clean up the mess, it is time for Americans to make sure we have a constitutionally eligible president in office. Tea Party patriots convention is scheduled for February 25 in Phoeniz, AZ. Maybe Phoenix will be our Tahrir square and our ground zero.”

    Our ground zero? What is this clueless sack of guano planning exactly?

    When is this harridan going to be placed on the no-fly list?

  42. charo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 1:01 pm  (Quote)

    You need to take a closer look at that rabbit before it bites your nose.

    I think abortion is a decision between a woman and her doctor,

    And I claim nothing. I observe.

    I wouldn’t hesitate to beat the living crap out of a self-righteous hypocrite preaching about how I should live and believe in my own personal life.

    You will never live my life or die my death. So STFU about how you pray it should go.

    – Praying peacefully in front of an abortion center within a specified distance has been upheld by the law. No one can browbeat, or for that matter, beat, anyone into believing something they don’t want to believe.

  43. charo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 1:02 pm  (Quote)

    Above is carried over from the other thread and is a response to Majority Will.

  44. US Citizen says:
    February 12, 2011 at 1:17 pm  (Quote)

    As if she has ever seen Mubarak’s papers.
    I would still like to see *her* papers too.
    Has anyone ever checked her naturalization papers (if possible)?
    She IS a foreign-born person with an almost fake set of credentials attempting to take down a US president.

  45. Sef says:
    February 12, 2011 at 1:36 pm  (Quote)

    charo: – Praying peacefully in front of an abortion center within a specified distance has been upheld by the law. No one can browbeat, or for that matter, beat, anyone into believing something they don’t want to believe.

    Tell that to the RCC, or the idiots who believe in Thetans.

  46. misha says:
    February 12, 2011 at 2:40 pm  (Quote)

    charo: Praying peacefully in front of an abortion center within a specified distance has been upheld by the law.

    Keep out of the affairs of strangers. Are you the guardian of the public morals?

  47. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm  (Quote)

    Ahh today’s drivel from our friends at WeaselZippers:

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/02/11/pawlenty-says-he-doesnt-question-existence-of-obamas-birth-certificate/#comment-53907

    9-11 Infidel says:
    February 11, 2011 at 10:51 pm
    Lemme see. John McCain was vetted and the argument was that he was not a citizen because he was born in the old Panama CZ….which was a US territory, at the time…which granted anyone born there automatic US citizenship.
    Obama has used several SSN’s and has a CT SSN? Now why is that? I own a BC which I can produce…and have done so for several jobs that has a SSN of my birth state. I can also produce my college transcripts.
    Seems to me that the media can did up information…and frequently does on anyone but Obama. And BTW, a digital BC is not proof US birth.
    Furthermore anyone born in 1961 that happens to be black, with a black father, would have had his race listed as Negro, not African-American.
    Produce the those college transcripts, as was done in the Kerry-GW POTUS contest.
    Produce the real BC. Otherwise the issue will not go away.
    Calling us “birthers” isn’t going to make us go away either. If you got nothing to hide, then stop acting like you got something to hide and produce the evidence of US birth and that Obama is so damn smart.
    Otherwise, people will continue to think that you-neo-Obaminites are hiding something, because your Kenyan water-boy is inelligible to be POTUS and should be impeached.
    The real BC is not in Hawaii, otherwise Abacronnie would have produced it.

    Blacksmith8 says:
    February 11, 2011 at 11:26 pm
    I’m glad someone brought up Juan McShamNasty born in Panama.
    If in fact l’il barry dunham WAS born to an UNDERAGE female who as of the date of birth had not achieved the age of 21 (that’s 16 + 5 for you booby) and a BRITISH citizen barak obama senior, then young barry soetoro wouldn’t be a citizen according to the law of the land way back in ’61.
    NOT being a citizen, barry soetoro was ADOPTED by a foreign national IN Jakarta and registered as a local student in a mandrassa all of which is inconsequential.
    Having reached the age of “maturity” (notice the scary quote marks) AFTER returning to live with his maternal grandmother, barak obowmao JUNIOR NEVER BOTHERED to make the officially required sworn statement to our Department of State that he had been born a citizen and would continue to be a citizen of the Greatest Nation on EARTH!
    But he never did, because he didn’t BELIEVE he really was a citizen. Did he?
    Fast forward to adulthood and we find our moose-limb leglislator wannabe travelling to POCK-eee-sTAHN on what passport? Certainly not a U.S. passport as Pakistan was interdicted from travel by U.S. citizens that year (and several years before and after for that matter)
    Hears how this plays out in my mind. btw: it’s beautiful
    barry boy travelled as a foreign national on a foreign passport. barry commited fraud when he ran for US Senate. That’s a prison term right there. After the fact he further commited similar and numerous ILLEGAL acts under the heading of high crimes and misdemeanors.
    l’il barry dunham gets impeached. D’oh Biden becomes President. The new conservative house of representatives catches a clue and asks Sarah Palin to be the Speaker of the House because everybody doesn’t like Boehner (oh yea I went there). The most bribed senator in history can’t go a week without getting himself marched out of the White House in handcuffs.
    TADA Madam President Sarah Palin #44. Because if we put barak in jail, he doesn’t get to keep his number.
    Oh, and one more thing-
    BITE ME

    Ringo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:03 am
    @ Bob Ross
    I beleive Bahgdad Bob Gibbs posted an HI COLB JPEG on the internet. That tells us Uh-bama was born a British Subject.
    Born a Brit not legit.
    It also appears Uh-bama is a self hating Brit

    Blacksmith has to be pretty funny sounds like a new rendition of Barry and the Pirates

  48. Majority Will says:
    February 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm  (Quote)

    charo:
    Above is carried over from the other thread and is a response to Majority Will.

    Let’s consider that my god is not your god as your evangelicals will chant en masse.

    Well, mine is vengeful, old and original testament . . there shall be no other gods before me –

    He wants to smite you.

  49. Majority Will says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:32 pm  (Quote)

    charo: I/m not evangelical.I am Catholic, which I said in the comment that you attacked.I never told you what to do.You need anger management.You are a dangerous person.

    Sweet Jesus, thank you. I had no doubt that you knew the answer to everything!

    Now please, fsck off. I said please.

  50. Sef says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:35 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Now please, fsck off. I said please.

    If they used zfs there would be no need for fsck.

  51. charo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:41 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will: Sweet Jesus, thank you. I had no doubt that you knew the answer to everything!

    Now please, fsck off. I said please.

    Back at ya- you interjected yourself FIRST- Way back at

    Majority Will February 11, 2011 at 10:31 pm Majority Will(Quote) #

    Don’t start it if you don’t want to hear it back.

  52. Majority Will says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:42 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: If they used zfs there would be no need for fsck.

    Excellent point.

    I’m a obj c programmer.

  53. Majority Will says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:46 pm  (Quote)

    charo: Back at ya- you interjected yourself FIRST- Way back at

    Majority Will February 11, 2011 at 10:31 pmMajority Will(Quote) #

    Don’t start it if you don’t want to hear it back.

    You win.

    Now go terrorize a teenager while 30,000 children just starved to death.

    You do know how many children starve to death every minute of every day?

    Pick your battles, you self-righteous ass.

  54. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 12, 2011 at 11:45 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: If Obama endorsed puppies, they would be out slaughtering them.

    Hey, they attacked Michelle Obama for urging children to exercise and eat healthy food.

  55. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 13, 2011 at 12:47 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Hey, they attacked Michelle Obama for urging children to exercise and eat healthy food.

    But but she was telling them to walk out into oncoming traffic!!!! /birther

  56. misha says:
    February 13, 2011 at 2:38 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Hey, they attacked Michelle Obama for urging children to exercise and eat healthy food.

    Doing that is communism. Have you ever seen a CEO at a gym? I rest my case.

    Here’s a photo showing the evils of communism:
    http://godhatesprotesters.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/little_rock_integration_protest.jpg

  57. BatGuano says:
    February 13, 2011 at 9:50 am  (Quote)

    misha: Here’s a photo showing the evils of communism:
    http://godhatesprotesters.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/little_rock_integration_protest.jpg

    i’m not sure if it’s communism but combining stock car and drag racing definitely could be dangerous. i can see why they felt the need to protest.

  59. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 1:18 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: A new poster boy and martyr for the birther cause:http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/localnews/headlines/Man_gets_8_years_for_attacking_Obama_supporter.html

    That’ll teach them libruls. It happened in Georgia, which explains everything. Georgia is also the home of Nathan Deal:
    http://blogs.ajc.com/cynthia-tucker/2010/08/11/nathan-deal-among-15-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/

  60. G says:
    February 14, 2011 at 1:32 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: A new poster boy and martyr for the birther cause:http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/localnews/headlines/Man_gets_8_years_for_attacking_Obama_supporter.html

    Wow. Purely disgusting the anger management issues of that racist jerk. Glad to hear that he will be spending considerable time in prison for that.

  61. Black Lion says:
    February 14, 2011 at 3:58 pm  (Quote)

    What Michael Medved Left Out Of His WSJ Column
    February 14, 2011 1:00 pm ET by Eric Boehlert

    As Media Matters noted, conservative radio host Michael Medved penned a must-read opinion column in today’s Wall Street Journal in which he eviscerates right-wing pundits like Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin for pushing the noxious notion that Obama is purposefully weakening and destroying America; that he’s some sort of black Manchurian Candidate fixated on stripping us of our freedoms.

    Writes Medved:

    They label Mr. Obama as the political equivalent of a suicide bomber: so overcome with hatred (or “rage”) that he’s perfectly willing to blow himself up in order to inflict casualties on a society he loathes.

    Noting the absurdity of the claim, not to mention its offensiveness, Medved makes the excellent point that the Obama Derangement Syndrome strategy is a sure-fire loser if the ultimate goal is to block the president’s re-election next year:

    Republicans already face a formidable challenge in convincing a closely divided electorate that the president pursues wrong-headed policies. They will never succeed in arguing that those initiatives have been cunningly and purposefully designed to wound the republic.

    And here’s another point Medved could have made: The strategy has already proven itself to be a political loser, yet Obama haters in the far-right press trudge on.

    Just look at Obama’s job approval rating. It has remained essentially unchanged for the last 18 months. Think about that. Palin and Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have thrown the kitchen sink, the bathroom sink and the basement sink at Obama with their he’s-trying-to-destroy-America shtick for going on two years now. And the collective public response? A shrug of the shoulders.

    Most voters don’t care and they’re tuning out the crazy, Obama-hating talk. But yes, other than than that the strategy is working to perfection.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102140018

  62. Black Lion says:
    February 14, 2011 at 4:02 pm  (Quote)

    So They’re Just Calling Michelle Obama Fat Now
    February 14, 2011 11:53 am ET by Simon Maloy

    First Lady Michelle Obama is in the midst of a nationwide anti-obesity campaign aimed at shrinking America’s collectively expanding waistline. The conservative media are striking back against Mrs. Obama’s message of fitness and nutrition by decrying what they see as government intrusion into our pantries.

    At least, that’s what they’re doing when they’re not calling Michelle Obama fat.

    Rush Limbaugh’s long been laying the groundwork for this sexist attack, using stories about the First Lady’s nutrition programs to call the fitness-fanatic Mrs. Obama “Michelle, My Butt.” (The jab’s lack of sense it exceeded only by its lack of self-awareness.)

    Yesterday, the resident cartoonists at Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com posted this offering:

    (see link for cartoon)

    If there’s a “joke” in there, I’m missing it. Notably, the version of the cartoon online now differs slightly — but significantly — from the version that showed up in my RSS reader, in which the First Lady demands: “Shut up and pass the lard!”

    It’s been a long time since I’ve expected anything approaching comity from the conservative media, but this is the sort of stuff most of us left at the grade school playground.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102140015

  63. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 14, 2011 at 4:22 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: So They’re Just Calling Michelle Obama Fat NowFebruary 14, 2011 11:53 am ET by Simon MaloyFirst Lady Michelle Obama is in the midst of a nationwide anti-obesity campaign aimed at shrinking America’s collectively expanding waistline. The conservative media are striking back against Mrs. Obama’s message of fitness and nutrition by decrying what they see as government intrusion into our pantries.At least, that’s what they’re doing when they’re not calling Michelle Obama fat.Rush Limbaugh’s long been laying the groundwork for this sexist attack, using stories about the First Lady’s nutrition programs to call the fitness-fanatic Mrs. Obama “Michelle, My Butt.” (The jab’s lack of sense it exceeded only by its lack of self-awareness.)Yesterday, the resident cartoonists at Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com posted this offering:(see link for cartoon)If there’s a “joke” in there, I’m missing it. Notably, the version of the cartoon online now differs slightly — but significantly — from the version that showed up in my RSS reader, in which the First Lady demands: “Shut up and pass the lard!”It’s been a long time since I’ve expected anything approaching comity from the conservative media, but this is the sort of stuff most of us left at the grade school playground.http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102140015

    Just what we need fitness advice from a drug addled braindead fat guy named Rush

  64. Black Lion says:
    February 14, 2011 at 4:22 pm  (Quote)

    Be Nice To Bigots

    Republican leaders tiptoe around the smear campaign against Obama’s faith and citizenship.

    By William Saletan

    The party that was supposed to stand up to President Obama can’t even stand up to its own fringe.

    Six months ago on Meet the Press, NBC’s David Gregory asked Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell about a survey in which 31 percent of Republicans said President Obama was a Muslim. McConnell demurred: “I think the faith that most Americans are questioning is the president’s faith in the government to generate
    jobs.” Gregory persisted: “As a leader of the country, Sir—as one of
    the most powerful Republicans in the country—do you think you have an
    obligation to say to [31] percent of Republicans in the country … who
    believe the president of the United States is a Muslim, ‘That’s
    misinformation’?”

    The best McConnell would do was this: “The president says he’s a Christian. I take him at his word.”

    Reviewing the exchange in Slate, my colleague John Dickerson tartly observed: “If McConnell wasn’t trying to stir the pot, he also wasn’t trying to lower the boil.”

    Well, that was half a year ago. And McConnell was just one Republican leader.
    And if he didn’t explicitly denounce the Obama-Muslim conspiracy theories, as Gregory had requested, perhaps that was a result of being surprised by the question.

    But since then, the leadership’s pattern of cowardice in the face of Obamaphobic falsehoods has grown.

    On Jan. 6, John Boehner’s first day of business as speaker of the House, a heckler in the chamber challenged Obama’s citizenship. NBC’s Brian Williams asked Boehner:
    “You’ve got 12 members co-sponsoring legislation that does about the
    same thing: It expresses doubt [about Obama’s citizenship]. Would you be
    willing to say: ‘This is a distraction. I’ve looked at it to my satisfaction. Let’s move on’?” Boehner replied: “The state of Hawaii has said that President Obama was born there. That’s good enough for me.” For me, lest anyone feel that the speaker was imposing his personal beliefs.

    Williams persisted: “Would you be willing to say that message to the 12 members
    in your caucus who seem to either believe otherwise, or are willing to express doubt and have co-sponsored legislation?”

    Boehner answered: “Brian, when you come to the Congress of the United States,
    there are 435 of us. We’re nothing more than a slice of America. People come regardless of party labels. They come with all kinds of beliefs and ideas. It’s the melting pot of America. It’s not up to me to tell them what to think.”

    Not up to me. Obama’s citizenship, like one’s religion or favorite color, is a matter of personal belief. Think what you want to.

    On Jan. 23, Gregory asked House Majority Leader Eric Cantor: “There are elements of this country who question the president’s citizenship, who think that his birth certificate is inauthentic. Will you call that what it is, which is crazy talk?” Cantor replied, “I don’t
    think it’s nice to call anyone crazy.” Gregory asked: “Is it a legitimate or an illegitimate issue?” Cantor answered: “I don’t think it’s an issue that we need to address at all.” So Gregory made the case for addressing it: “I feel like there’s a lot of Republican leaders who don’t want to go as far as to criticize those folks.”

    Cantor, like Boehner and McConnell, spoke for himself but refused to repudiate the
    conspiracy theorists. “I think the president’s a citizen of the United States,” he said. “Why is it that you want me to go and engage in name-calling?”

    Yesterday on Meet the Press, Gregory gave Boehner another chance. He showed the speaker a Fox News focus group in which nine of 25 Iowa Republican caucus-goers said Obama was a Muslim. Gregory asked: “As the speaker of the House, as a leader, do you not think it’s your responsibility to stand up to that kind of ignorance?”

    Boehner replied: David, it’s not my job to tell the American people what to think. Our job in Washington is to listen to the American people. Having said that, the state of Hawaii has said that he was born there. That’s good enough for me. The president says he’s a Christian. I accept him at his word.

    Again, Boehner was answering in terms of his own beliefs. And when Gregory
    asked him whether the Muslim theory was “nonsense,” Boehner softened his
    affirmation of Obama’s version. “I just outlined the facts as I understand them,” said Boehner. As to anyone else’s beliefs to the contrary, he shrugged, “Listen, the American people have the right to think what they want to think. I can’t—It’s not my job to tell them.”

    How about the members of Boehner’s own caucus? Is it his job to tell them when they’re spreading falsehoods? Gregory asked the speaker: You had a new Tea Party freshman who was out just yesterday speaking to conservatives, and he said, “I’m fortunate enough to be an American citizen by birth, and I do have a birth certificate to prove it.” That was Raul Labrador … a congressman from Idaho. Is that an appropriate way
    for your members to speak?

    Boehner dismissed the comment as probably a joke. But he repeated, “It really is not our job to tell the American people what to believe.” That’s four straight interviews in which the country’s three top Republicans—the speaker of the House and the GOP leaders in each chamber—have refused to condemn the spreading of lies about Obama’s faith and citizenship. These three men are confident enough in the personhood of fetuses to support banning abortion. They’re confident enough in the efficacy and justice of the
    U.S. health care system to block funding of the Affordable Care Act. They’re confident enough in Wall Street, despite the recklessness and bailouts of the last three years, to press for repeal of the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law. But ask them whether Obama is a Muslim or was born in the U.S., and suddenly they’re too humble to impose their beliefs on others. They can only describe “the facts as I understand them.” They can only speak “for me.” They can only “listen to the American people,” not “tell them what to think.”

    These men aren’t leaders. They’re followers. To lead a party, much less a country, you
    have to be able to say no. You have to stand up to liars, lunatics, and dupes on your party’s fringe

    Why can’t Boehner, Cantor, or McConnell speak that bluntly? Why won’t they call a lie a lie? If they want to be leaders, it’s time to lead.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2285017/

  65. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 4:36 pm  (Quote)

    BL: about the Slate article. What do you expect from conservatives? Cantor is the only Jewish repug. The only explanation I can think of is that he is clinically insane.

  66. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 5:42 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): An Arizona jury convicted anti-illegal immigration activist Shawna Forde of murder Monday in the killing of a Latino man and his 9-year-old daughter during a 2009 vigilante raid she led on their home.

    Sharron Angle’s 2nd amendment remedy. Conservatives only care about life if it’s a fetus. See Tuscon.

  67. G says:
    February 14, 2011 at 6:55 pm  (Quote)

    misha: Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): An Arizona jury convicted anti-illegal immigration activist Shawna Forde of murder Monday in the killing of a Latino man and his 9-year-old daughter during a 2009 vigilante raid she led on their home.

    Misha:Sharron Angle’s 2nd amendment remedy. Conservatives only care about life if it’s a fetus. See Tuscon.

    Very sad and disturbing..even worse are some of the comments on that CNN news article, which seem to bare out examples of what Misha just said.

    Quite sickening to see some of those commenters be mad at CNN for reporting on the article and defending the shooter, suggesting that it is ok to kill “illegal aliens”.

    Even more disturbing than seeing that sick rationalization that it is somehow ok to go out and kill people & children (under any circumstance) is the wilful character assassination by selective reading that such posters displayed.

    The article clearly states: “The child and her father were American-born U.S. citizens.”.

    Yet these same commenters supporting the killer, smear the victims as “illegals”. The only answer I can come up with for such is clear racism.

  68. GeorgetownJD says:
    February 14, 2011 at 6:56 pm  (Quote)

    The Arizona bill, upon which the Tennessee proposal is modeled, did not make it out of committee on the Senate side. With three Republicans joining the two Democrats, it appears that the sane voices prevailed. The bill has been the subject of much derision in the local press. Let’s see if the Arizona teabaggers in the House attempt to revive what appears to be DOA.

  69. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 7:22 pm  (Quote)

    G: The article clearly states: “The child and her father were American-born U.S. citizens.”.

    The wrong kind of citizens.

    G: Quite sickening to see some of those commenters

    I read the comments too. Vermin.

  71. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 8:19 pm  (Quote)

    Hey everyone: Shawna Forde was just doing her Christian duty:

    http://www.justiceforshawnaforde.com/

    “Thanks to our Christian brothers and sisters at the AZ State Fair for this prayer: Your heavenly Father knows all your needs. His uncompromising word protects you.”

    “The Pima County Sheriff’s round up of an innocent white Christian Conservative patriot is not considered racial profiling.”

  72. misha says:
    February 14, 2011 at 9:01 pm  (Quote)

    More on Forde:

    Experts say all of Arizona’s crazy middle-aged white people would be deported from America, but no other country will take them.

    http://wonkette.com/438125/anti-immigrant-fanatic-found-guilty-of-home-invasion-murders

  73. Black Lion says:
    February 14, 2011 at 9:48 pm  (Quote)

    misha: BL: about the Slate article. What do you expect from conservatives? Cantor is the only Jewish repug. The only explanation I can think of is that he is clinically insane.

    Misha, you are correct…The Slate article points out the hypocrisy….The repubs claim to “denounce” the birthers but they actually wink and nod at them….The leaders like Cantor and Bohener are even more pathetic because they pretend to accept that Obama is born here but leave themselves “wiggle room” so that they keep the birther support….

  74. Black Lion says:
    February 14, 2011 at 10:13 pm  (Quote)

    Arizona: Border Activist Is Convicted
    Published: February 14, 2011

    Shawna Forde, the leader of a border security group, was convicted of first-degree murder Monday in the 2009 shootings of a man and his daughter. Ms. Forde, claiming to be a law enforcement officer, barged into the Flores home in Arivaca with accomplices. Raul Flores and his daughter, Brisenia, 9, were killed. The jury also convicted Ms. Forde of the attempted murder of Gina Gonzalez, Mr. Flores’s wife. Trials for Jason Bush and Albert Gaxiola, accused of accompanying Ms. Forde, are scheduled for this spring. Prosecutors said the attackers considered Mr. Flores a drug smuggler and wanted to use his drug proceeds for a paramilitary organization to seal off the border to immigrants.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/15brfs-BORDERACTIVI_BRF.html

  75. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 14, 2011 at 10:33 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion:
    Arizona: Border Activist Is Convicted
    Published: February 14, 2011

    Shawna Forde, the leader of a border security group, was convicted of first-degree murder Monday in the 2009 shootings of a man and his daughter. Ms. Forde, claiming to be a law enforcement officer, barged into the Flores home in Arivaca with accomplices. Raul Flores and his daughter, Brisenia, 9, were killed. The jury also convicted Ms. Forde of the attempted murder of Gina Gonzalez, Mr. Flores’s wife. Trials for Jason Bush and Albert Gaxiola, accused of accompanying Ms. Forde, are scheduled for this spring. Prosecutors said the attackers considered Mr. Flores a drug smuggler and wanted to use his drug proceeds for a paramilitary organization to seal off the border to immigrants.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/us/15brfs-BORDERACTIVI_BRF.html

    I remember listening to the 9-11 call. It was heartbreaking hearing the mother talk about what was happening as it was going on and her having to fend for herself as they tried to come back in and all she had was a handgun.

  76. Lupin says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:54 am  (Quote)

    G: Yet these same commenters supporting the killer, smear the victims as “illegals”. The only answer I can come up with for such is clear racism.

    Ding! Ding! 🙂

    There’s a reason why the UN (and we, limp-wristed Yurpeans) don’t use the word “illegal(s)” when referring to undocumented migrants or foreigners; it’s because it dehumanizes the people to whom it is applied, and taken to the extreme, justifies killing them. Maybe if we started to refer to the banksters who defrauded your country (and the world) as “illegals” (based on a the recent SEC study about their “illegal” activities), the tune would change.

  77. nc1 says:
    February 15, 2011 at 3:34 am  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Misha, you are correct…The Slate article points out the hypocrisy….The repubs claim to “denounce” the birthers but they actually wink and nod at them….The leaders like Cantor and Bohener are even more pathetic because they pretend to accept that Obama is born here but leave themselves “wiggle room” so that they keep the birther support….

    Since you know that Obama told the truth about his birthplace, why are you worried about state laws that would require presidential candidates to submit a copy of the original birth certificate as evidence of eligibility prior to being included on the ballot?

    All presidential candidates will have to provide such proof, not just Obama – why are you against it?

    Could it be that you don’t have faith about Obama telling the truth about his birthplace? That is how I see it.

  78. Expelliarmus says:
    February 15, 2011 at 4:15 am  (Quote)

    A state law that required the candidate to submit written evidence of place of birth and/or citizenship, via official, certified documents would not be a problem.

    A requirement that the candidate submit a “copy of the original” is, because that is not a document that all people have or can reasonably obtain. It is standard practice for birth registrars in most jurisdictions to issue certifications attesting to the fact of birth rather than copies of the original; in cases of adoption original certificates are often sealed; and individuals who are born abroad to US Citizens rely on consular documentation rather than birth certificates to prove their status.

    So any law that would require a candidate to secure a specific form of documentation not necessarily available to all, would be patently discriminatory and clearly inappropriate. The state of Arizona or Tennessee or Maine or wherever doesn’t have the right to tell Hawaii what form of records to maintain or to issue.

  79. G says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:58 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Since you know that Obama told the truth about his birthplace, why are you worried about state laws that would require presidential candidates to submit a copy of the original birth certificate as evidence of eligibility prior to being included on the ballot?
    All presidential candidates will have to provide such proof, not just Obama – why are you against it?
    Could it be that you don’t have faith about Obama telling the truth about his birthplace? That is how I see it.

    No.

    Read what Expelliarmus has already said…plus try reading this blog, as these very same points have been made multiple times.

    Your are either stupid or a completely dishonest shnook for asking this question again and not already knowing the answer.

    I’ll make it real simple for you – there is no problem with laws that require birthplace proof in what would be a consistent and Constitutionally legit mannner that applies equally to ALL candidates for the office of President.

    There ARE problems with laws where states try to add any additional requirements to a FEDERAL Law, that go beyond or are more restrictive than what the Constitution requires.

  80. misha says:
    February 15, 2011 at 9:30 am  (Quote)

    The White House just announced that President Obama will hold a news conference this morning at 11 a.m. ET.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/02/15/133772551/obama-to-hold-news-conference-this-morning

  81. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 11:12 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Since you know that Obama told the truth about his birthplace, why are you worried about state laws that would require presidential candidates to submit a copy of the original birth certificate as evidence of eligibility prior to being included on the ballot?All presidential candidates will have to provide such proof, not just Obama – why are you against it? Could it be that you don’t have faith about Obama telling the truth about his birthplace? That is how I see it.

    You can see it anyway you want. But the bottom line is that the so called Presidential laws are being thought up for one reason only, and that is to somehow find a way to get President Obama off the ballot. The GOP is pandering to the birther faithful, and the birthers are so filled with hate of Obama they can’t see that any of these so called laws that are proven to be constitutional will not prevent the President from running. I don’t mind a law that requires that proof of birth/citizenship. Why? Because I know that the COLB from the State of HI will be suffcient to meet any legal law that is enacted. Deep down you know that the COLB will be suffcient, which is why you continue with your irrelevant nonsense regarding Vattel and dual citizenship…

  82. Rickey says:
    February 15, 2011 at 11:54 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Since you know that Obama told the truth about his birthplace, why are you worried about state laws that would require presidential candidates to submit a copy of the original birth certificate as evidence of eligibility prior to being included on the ballot?

    Because the Constitution doesn’t require the President to even have an “original” birth certificate. The Constitution doesn’t require a President’s birth to be attended by a physician with witnesses in a hospital.

    It would be wise for you birthers to familiarize yourselves with Article 4, Section 1 of the Constitution:

    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

    The full faith and credit clause has been written into the United States Code. TITLE 28, PART V, CHAPTER 115 § 1738:

    The records and judicial proceedings of any court of any such State, Territory or Possession, or copies thereof, shall be proved or admitted in other courts within the United States and its Territories and Possessions by the attestation of the clerk and seal of the court annexed, if a seal exists, together with a certificate of a judge of the court that the said attestation is in proper form.
    Such Acts, records and judicial proceedings or copies thereof, so authenticated, shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken.

    Do you understand what that says? It says that it doesn’t matter what form of proof of birth Arizona or Montana or Nebraska wants. They are required by both the Constitution and the United States Code to accept whatever the birth state chooses to give them. Obama’s Hawaii COLB states “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.” If the COLB is good enough for Hawaii, both the Constitution and the U.S. Code state that it is good enough for the other 49 states. There is no way around this.

    In addition, the Constitution doesn’t require a President to provide proof of the citizenship of his or her parents.States cannot impose qualifications for Federal offices which go beyond the qualifications set out in the Constitution. U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995)

  83. Scientist says:
    February 15, 2011 at 12:08 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: But the bottom line is that the so called Presidential laws are being thought up for one reason only, and that is to somehow find a way to get President Obama off the ballot.

    If Obama is as bad a President as his enemies claim, they should demand he be on the ballot, since he should be easy to beat,

  84. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:03 pm  (Quote)

    In the tradition of unintentional comedy, the Post and Fail and its harp playing editor are upset for being called out by Bill Bowman and the Examiner for their anti American and seditionous screeds….Classic…

    “The Post & Email has been made aware of an opinion piece by someone named Bill Bowman who writes for a publication named “The Examiner.” He apparently calls himself the “Birther Movement Examiner” and has written a series of articles on “the Birthers.” A full listing of his articles as presented by The Examiner is here.

    Bowman’s article today refers to the editor of The Post & Email as a “hobby seditionist.” Bowman is reportedly “an award-winning journalist” and author of a book entitled Savage Lies: The Half-Truths, Distortions and Outright Lies of a Right Wing Blowhard which allegedly “fact checks the first three political books by radio commentator Michael Savage.”

    As Mr. Bowman has never contacted The Post & Email via email, our office telephone number, nor by standard mail, he knows nothing about this writer or whether or not I write for The Post & Email as a “hobby.” In fact, his statement is completely inaccurate, because as editor I am paid for my work, rendering his term “hobby” completely false.

    The Post & Email was founded by John Charlton in August 2009 to expose government corruption, particularly in light of the questionable eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as President of the United States. No one, whether liberal, conservative, Republican, Democrat, Independent, nor Libertarian, should object to the exposure of corruption in government; not even Mr. Bowman, who states that he supports the U.S. Constitution.”
    ……….

    “In a previous article, Bowman stated, “Sharon Rondeau is a professional harpist and full-time America hater. As editor of the Web-based Post & Email, she has plenty of opportunity to display her anti-Americanism through her own writing and by publishing screeds written by other America haters.”

    But what about Bowman’s “screeds” which are full of falsehoods? Is he not also availing himself of “plenty of opportunity” to express his own opinions without impunity?

    The Post & Email has never exposed any individual’s personal information, whether or not he or she agrees with our viewpoint, to the public. We have never revealed IP addresses, occupations, first or last names, or places of residence, although we have this information on many of our political opponents. We do not pick fights with nor slander writers with opposing viewpoints. We believe there are more important things to do. Apparently neither Mr. Bowman nor The Examiner employs the same high standards.

    If Mr. Bowman is an award-winning author, why is he spending his time denigrating LCDR Walter Fitzpatrick, Dr. Orly Taitz, Ron Ewart, Dr. Lyle Rapacki, this writer, or anyone else, for that matter? He fails to provide links to support the claims he makes, instead preferring to editorialize and ridicule people, complete with obscenities unpublishable at The Post & Email due to our editorial policy.

    Bowman provides as one of his “preferred links” the website “Fogbow,” about which The Post & Email wrote several weeks ago after it came to light that Fogbow took the database of another like-minded website, Politijab, in violation of Politijab’s promise to its subscribers not to share personal information with a third party. If Bowman considers Fogbow a “preferred” site, then it is not surprising that he would employ the same questionable tactics.

    It would seem that an “award-winning” author would at least be able to express another publication’s title correctly. We are not “the Post and Email;” but rather, “The Post & Email.” That is a detail that a good journalist should have gotten right, in this writer’s humble opinion.”

    ………….

    Date: Monday, February 14, 2011
    Re: YOUR WRITER BILL BOWMAN – POSSIBLE LEGAL ACTION FOR DEFAMATION

    I am the editor of The Post & Email, an electronic newspaper incorporated in the state of Wyoming.

    Your writer Bill Bowman has named me as a “hobby seditionist,” and as the owner of a corporation, I plan on using the full force of law to refute his defamatory remarks in his column today here: http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/orly-taitz-walt-fitzpatrick-and-the-post-and-email-axis-of-anti-americanism

    I am demanding a retraction of the term “hobby seditioninst.” I believe in enforcing the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, which hardly makes me a seditionist.

    If I do not receive a retraction from you or Mr. Bowman within the next 72 hours, I plan on consulting our corporate attorney about legal action against your publication.”

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/15/the-post-email-responds-to-examiner-writer-bill-bowman/

  85. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:09 pm  (Quote)

    More nonsense by seditionist Neil Turner…I guess it is finally sinking in that none of the new GOP Congressmen are going to officially embrace the birthers or go full birther, and it is making them mad….

    “Congratulations and kudos on your great closing speech at CPAC 2011. While I was moved by your impassioned and patriotic statements of what you will and will not do, I was also moved by the avoidance of some patriotic statements that you did and did not say. I will highlight these points in italics, if I may:

    You said: “I shall never let Israel down!”

    But you failed to say: “I shall never let fellow patriot military officers like LTC Terry Lakin and LTCDR Walt Fitzpatrick down!”

    You said: “We cannot give Constitutional rights to terrorists while we imprison soldiers for killing terrorists.”

    But you failed to say: “We cannot give Constitutional rights to the muslim Usurper and his cohorts (aka terrorists) in our White House, while we imprison fellow decorated officers (like LTC Lakin) for questioning the ‘killing’ of our Constitution!”

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/14/open-letter-to-rep-allen-west/

    dotdotcom says:
    Monday, February 14, 2011 at 9:18 PM
    The following are a few of the comments I made at another site under an eligibility thread, they fit here too *sigh*

    WHY THE HECK WON’T THEY TOUCH THE ELIGIBILITY ISSUE OR THE FRAUDULENT SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS?????

    I just faxed for a couple weeks, I did the eligibility letters again (available for anyone to use at http://www.stamppeeve.com under the link “Presidential Eligibility”) to every damn republican in congress and senate plus to governors, lt. governors and attorneys general…how the hell can we make anyone in power stand up on this issue??? Even the media is complicit in this, they refuse to let anyone talk about the real issues of natural born citizen, it just makes me SICK!!!!!

    The fact that they ignore the eligibility issue and the criminal background of this con man, fraud, criminal while he destroys our country means THEY ARE ALL COMPLICIT AND NEED TO GO TO PRISON RIGHT ALONG WITH HIM…ISSA, PENCE, DEMINT, BACHMANN, ALLEN WEST, ALL OF THEM, IF THEY DON’T STAND UP AND THEY LET THIS CONTINUE, IF THEY LET LTC LAKIN ROT IN LEAVENWORTH AND DON’T SAY A WORD, THEY ALL NEED TO GO TO PRISON TOO, I’VE HAD IT!!!!!

    You know, this is just so sad…your buddy Issa has the authority, he has the means, he could save our Republic, he could be a hero, he could subpoena all the hidden records and documents, he has the power…Obama would be removed and all his crap would be null and void, he would go to prison where he belongs and yes, there would still be a lot of work to do but this would be a helluva start and we could restore our country after this but Issa refuses…WHY???

    Neil Turner says:
    Tuesday, February 15, 2011 at 12:29 AM
    dotdotcom;

    Yes, it really is sad. my’ buddy Issa and his entire Committee of 23 members were all formally served with the transcripts of the CIA COLUMBIA OBAMA Sedition & Treason TRIAL in January of this year (www.CRS-Reports.org).

    Now none of them can say they did not know’, and are therefore all chargeable with misprision of TREASON. All we need is ENFORCEMENT’. Perhaps The Republic for the United States of America can do just that. Check it out here: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DC43C33686FE6CFC

  86. Stanislaw says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:19 pm  (Quote)

    In addition, the Constitution doesn’t require a President to provide proof of the citizenship of his or her parents.States cannot impose qualifications for Federal offices which go beyond the qualifications set out in the Constitution. U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995)

    Thank your for citing to that case, Rickey. I knew that the Supreme Court ruled on the issue but I’d forgotten just when. I’ve been looking for it for a while.

  87. Bovril says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:28 pm  (Quote)

    Sharon Ronduuuuuuh’s really pissy because she was slighted by being called a “hobby” seditionist as opposed to the reality which is she is a full time seditionist.

    As for the utter lie

    The Post & Email has never exposed any individual’s personal information, whether or not he or she agrees with our viewpoint, to the public. We have never revealed IP addresses, occupations, first or last names, or places of residence, although we have this information on many of our political opponents.

    What’s this then…?

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/26/outing-obamas-internet-brownshirts/

    She really is a LSOS and not a very clever one either……

  88. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:30 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril: Sharon Ronduuuuuuh’s really pissy because she was slighted by being called a “hobby” seditionist as opposed to the reality which is she is a full time seditionist.As for the utter lie What’s this then…?http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/26/outing-obamas-internet-brownshirts/She really is a LSOS and not a very clever one either……

    Bov, I nearly fell off my chair laughing when I read her screed today. For her to have the gall to be upset after the amount of seditious crap she has published is amazing…..

  89. Bovril says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:33 pm  (Quote)

    Ah, happy days when I finally knew that I was right, they were crazy, bigotted feckwits and I was pissing them off mightily…..No better validation or sweeter taste than a screeching Birfoon harpy attempting to out you in real life……..

  90. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:34 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril: Sharon Ronduuuuuuh’s really pissy because she was slighted by being called a “hobby” seditionist as opposed to the reality which is she is a full time seditionist.As for the utter lie What’s this then…?http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/26/outing-obamas-internet-brownshirts/She really is a LSOS and not a very clever one either……

    Hey you made the list! Congrats!

  91. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:38 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril: Ah, happy days when I finally knew that I was right, they were crazy, bigotted feckwits and I was pissing them off mightily…..No better validation or sweeter taste than a screeching Birfoon harpy attempting to out you in real life……..

    I had forgotton about that…I wonder what ever happened to good old John Charlton….Maybe he and Rondeau are one in the same?

  92. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 2:39 pm  (Quote)

    AIM, WND Treat Boehner’s Refusal To Condemn Birthers As Affirmation
    Topic: Accuracy in Media

    When House Speaker John Boehner was asked by NBC’s David Gregory on “Meet the Press” whether he would criticize a focus panel on Fox News’ “Hannity” that mostly believed that President Obama is a Muslim, or at least not a Christian, Boehner refused, claiming that “it’s not my job to tell the American people what to think.” As Slate’s William Saletan points out, that refusal to criticize a lie — echoed by other Republican leaders — only perpetuates the lie and demonstrates a lack of GOP leadership.

    As if to illustrate the point, two of the leading media outlets that have promoted the idea that Obama is not a real American were eager to embrace Boehner’s refusal to criticize those beliefs.

    WorldNetDaily framed it this way in a Feb. 13 article by Joe Kovacs: “Despite intense egging on by NBC newsman David Gregory, House Speaker John Boehner refused today to attack people who have doubts about Barack Obama’s eligibility for the presidency.”

    Cliff Kincaid served up a similar framing in a Feb. 14 Accuracy in Media column:

    NBC “Meet the Press” Host David Gregory berated House Speaker John Boehner on Sunday because members of the public and the Congress have doubts about President Obama’s professed Christian faith and alleged birth in the United States. Gregory wondered if all the doubts about Obama were undermining his legitimacy as President. He wanted Boehner to denounce these questions and concerns as “ignorance.” Boehner refused to do so.

    […]

    In fact, as AIM has noted, calling yourself something is not the same thing as proving it is the case. Obama’s Christian claim deserves to be scrutinized, even when it involves a sensitive and personal matter such as religious belief. Our media are supposed to question the statements of those in power.

    The facts show that there is no evidence that Obama was baptized in a traditional Christian sense of the term. Indeed, Muslims could join the church in Chicago that Obama attended.

    […]

    Here are the facts, from Obama’s own perspective. Obama acknowledges in Dreams from My Father that his grandfather was a Muslim (page 104) and that he spent two years in a Muslim school in Indonesia studying the Koran (page 154). In The Audacity of Hope, he says (page 204) that “my father had been raised a Muslim” but that by the time he met his mother, his father was a “confirmed atheist.” His stepfather was not particularly religious and his mother professed “secularism,” Obama wrote (pages 204-205), but as a child he went to a “predominantly Muslim school,” after being first sent to a Catholic school. His mother, he said, was concerned about him learning math, not religion.

    Kincaid went on to complain that “Pro-Obama journalists have consistently ignored questions about the constitutional eligibility of the current occupant of the oval office.” Gotta love how Kincaid denigrates Obama as ann “occupant,” as if he wasn’t genuinely elected to the job.

    http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/

  93. misha says:
    February 15, 2011 at 3:01 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Hey you made the list! Congrats!

    I punked them, and did not make the list. Sigh.

  94. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 15, 2011 at 3:02 pm  (Quote)

    I’m confused about how Kincaid thinks one can prove they belong to a particular religion?

  95. Wile E. says:
    February 15, 2011 at 3:17 pm  (Quote)

    I know some of you here will find this hard to believe…..but I’ve recently run across a couple of birthers, in my local Topix chat-room, who happen to be stubborn and firmly attached to certain misconceptions regarding birth certificates from the State of Hawai’i.

    Some questions for anyone who may be inclined to answer:

    (1) Is there any evidence to date of any person having been issued a “certified copy” of their birth certificate using the so called “long form” after 2001? (Yes, I’ve read about the non-certified copy posted by Danae)

    (2) Is there any evidence of any employers, state agencies, or organizations which accept only the so called “long form”?……other than this one…
    http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl
    which accepts the new standard version but prefers the old standard version.

    (3) Regarding the Nordyke twins’ birth certificates…..I was under the impression that these were “certified copies” that had been photo-statically generated from either microfilm or microfiche, thus the appearance of a negative image, or black background with white lettering. But why then would the lower certification portion also have that same negative image appearance?

  96. Bovril says:
    February 15, 2011 at 3:31 pm  (Quote)

    misha: Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Hey you made the list! Congrats!
    I punked them, and did not make the list. Sigh.

    The ridiculous part was, at that point in time I was still only cautiously paddling in the cess pool of Birferism and had made generally rather courteous(ish) comments.

    That attempt at scaring me off simply made me a firm member of the sharp, pointy, jagged poking stick tendency.

    By my enemies ye shall know me…..>8-)

  97. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 15, 2011 at 4:04 pm  (Quote)

    Wile E.:
    I know some of you here will find this hard to believe…..but I’ve recently run across a couple of birthers, in my local Topix chat-room, who happen to be stubborn and firmly attached to certain misconceptions regarding birth certificates from the State of Hawai’i.

    Some questions for anyone who may be inclined to answer:

    (1)Is there any evidence to date of any person having been issued a “certified copy” of their birth certificate using the so called “long form” after 2001?(Yes, I’ve read about the non-certified copy posted by Danae)

    I have not seen such evidence. However, I would not bet the farm that it won’t happen. Danae said that when she talked to Dr. Onaka, he asked her whether she needed a certified copy or not, and she said she didn’t need a certified copy.

    (2)Is there any evidence of any employers, state agencies, or organizations which accept only the so called “long form”?……other than this one…
    http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl
    which accepts the new standard version but prefers the old standard version.

    I’m not aware of any such requirement. Danae believed that an organization she was trying to join (which I would loosely categorize as a fraternal organization) would expect it. Whether they actually do, I wasn’t able to determine and I won’t name the organization since it was part of a private email.

    (3)Regarding the Nordyke twins’ birth certificates…..I was under the impression that these were “certified copies” that had been photo-statically generated from either microfilm or microfiche, thus the appearance of a negative image, or black background with white lettering.But why then would the lower certification portion also have that same negative image appearance?

    Now that is an extremely interesting question. I must admit that I had always thought that they were printed microfilm copies too. However, that doesn’t fit the facts as you point out.

    It would appear that the Nordyke certificates were produced in the following manner:

    1) The original birth certificate was removed from its volume
    2) The certification appendix was signed and dated
    3) The two were photocopied together using a process that created a negative image
    4) A raised seal was added

    Other ideas on this?

  98. Black Lion says:
    February 15, 2011 at 4:05 pm  (Quote)

    Poll stunner: Birthers are half of GOP primary voters
    2/15/11 11:31 AM
    51 percent of likely primary voters nationwide think President Obama wasn’t born in the United States

    28 percent think he was born here, 21 percent aren’t sure

    Among those who don’t think he was born in U.S., Sarah Palin has 83 percent favorability ratings

    Mike Huckabee follows with 64 percent favorability among birthers

    But Huck wins a birther primary with 24 percent of the vote (Palin 19 percent, Gingrich 14 percent)

    A slightly greater proportion of women are birthers (53 percent)

    A higher proportion of voters 18 to 29 and older than 65 are birthers

    Public Policy Polling survey of 400 voters. Margin of error 4.9 percent

    Poll: 51 percent of GOP’ers still want the birth certificate

    In a shocking finding, more than half of GOP primary voters believe President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, according to a new poll.

    Fifty-one percent of 400 Republican primary voters surveyed nationwide by Public Policy Polling said they ascribe to the controversial birther conspiracy theory — despite the fact that the state of Hawaii has posted Obama’s certificate of live birth.

    Only 28 percent said they think the president was born in the United States — a constitutional requirement to be president. Twenty-one percent said they were “not sure.”

    “Any thought that the birther theory has been put to rest can be thrown out the window,” said Dean Debnam, the president of the Democratic-leanign polling firm. “That view is still widely held in Republican circles.”

    Even a number of Republicans officials have said they believe Obama was born in the US and have called for an end to the debate

    Among those who do not believe Obama was born in the United States, Mike Huckabee is their first choice for president, followed by Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and then Mitt Romney.

    Those who do think the president is a citizen favor Romney over the rest of the field. Huckabee, Palin and Ron Paul trail Romney among believers in Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

    A CNN/Opinion Research poll in August showed that a quarter of Americans have doubts about Obama’s citizenship, with 11 percent saying the president was definitely not born in the United States.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49554.html#ixzz1E416tTdZ

  99. misha says:
    February 15, 2011 at 4:12 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Among those who don’t think he was born in U.S., Sarah Palin has 83 percent favorability ratings

    Exclusive!! A Palin approved marriage:
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2008/10/palin-approved-marriage.html

  100. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 15, 2011 at 4:16 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril: The ridiculous part was, at that point in time I was still only cautiously paddling in the cess pool of Birferism and had made generally rather courteous(ish) comments.That attempt at scaring me off simply made me a firm member of the sharp, pointy, jagged poking stick tendency. By my enemies ye shall know me…..>8-)

    You should see the laughable email I received from the admin over at weaselzippers in which he claimed no they weren’t being cowardly even though they removed most of the comments I made where I refuted birthers theories and left most of the comments where I was responding to birthers making personal attacks on me. He went about claiming my comments were “irrational” and “harrassment”. “Oh no you tried to destroy my echo chamber, how will I ever keep my rather large paypal button being pushed?”

  101. Wile E. says:
    February 15, 2011 at 5:49 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Now that is an extremely interesting question. I must admit that I had always thought that they were printed microfilm copies too. However, that doesn’t fit the facts as you point out.

    It would appear that the Nordyke certificates were produced in the following manner:

    1) The original birth certificate was removed from its volume
    2) The certification appendix was signed and dated
    3) The two were photocopied together using a process that created a negative image
    4) A raised seal was added

    Other ideas on this?

    That is kinda how I had it figured too. Any idea what kind of process or machine would have produced those types of copies? Apparently they weren’t uncommon.

    Alternatively, do we know for sure that the documents that we have seen Mrs. Nordyke holding in her hands actually have the “raised seal”? Is it possible that these are some kind of “non-certified” copy of a “certified copy” which had been put on microfilm?

  102. gorefan says:
    February 15, 2011 at 6:57 pm  (Quote)

    Wile E.: The two were photocopied together using a process that created a negative image

    It looks like it was made on an old photostat machine. They produced a negative copy.
    Although, why they used that process into the late 1970’s (the Jenna BC also is a complete negative and was issued in1979) is beyond me.

  103. Slartibartfast says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:08 pm  (Quote)

    Rich T posted this list of grievances against President Obama over at Dr. Kate’s – half of them I don’t even understand what he’s talking about. The crazy is very strong in this one…

    Rich T
    February 15, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    Our Founding Fathers had this long train of abuses…

    What would ours today look like?

    Probaly not much different.

    He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

    He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

    He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

    He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

    He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

    He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

    He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

    He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

    He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

    He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

    He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

    He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

    He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

    For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

    For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

    For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

    For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

    For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

    For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

    For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

    For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

    He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

    He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

    He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of the head of a civilized nation.

    He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

    He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

  104. Scientist says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:10 pm  (Quote)

    I just watched the IBM computer array, Watson, demolish the 2 best players in the history of Jeopardy. This involves complex linguistic reasoning, way beyond what is involved in linear tasks like playing chess or calculating rocket trajectories. The advances in AI are such that it seems likely that within many of our lifetimes computers will far exceed our own feeble reasoning and decision making capacities. That raises the question of why we would want the Presidency in the hands of a fallible and slow-witted human (so many of whom can’t even grasp the nature of a birth certificate) when we could have these important decisions made by a computer array that had the sum of all known information and impeccable decision-making abilities. In prepation for the fiirst cyber President we need to re-consider some of the basic ideas of eligibility:

    1. When one talks about natural born citizen computters does that refer to the hardware being made in the US, the software being developed here or both? Can they use visitors on H1-B visas?
    2. Who are the parents of a computer?
    3. Does the computer really have to be 35 years old?

    I await the answers, oh wise ones…

  105. gorefan says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:25 pm  (Quote)

    Scientist: I just watched the IBM computer array, Watson, demolish the 2 best players in the history of Jeopardy.

    NOVA did an extensive story on Watson last week. amazing stuff.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/smartest-machine-on-earth.html

  106. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 15, 2011 at 8:45 pm  (Quote)

    Scientist:
    I just watched the IBM computer array, Watson, demolish the 2 best players in the history of Jeopardy.This involves complex linguistic reasoning, way beyond what is involved in linear tasks like playing chess or calculating rocket trajectories.The advances in AI are such that it seems likely that within many of our lifetimes computers will far exceed our own feeble reasoning and decision making capacities.That raises the question of why we would want the Presidency in the hands of a fallible and slow-witted human (so many of whom can’t even grasp the nature of a birth certificate) when we could have these important decisions made by a computer array that had the sum of all known information and impeccable decision-making abilities.In prepation for the fiirst cyber President we need to re-consider some of the basic ideas of eligibility:

    1. When one talks about natural born citizen computters does that refer to the hardware being made in the US, the software being developed here or both?Can they use visitors on H1-B visas?
    2. Who are the parents of a computer?
    3. Does the computer really have to be 35 years old?

    I awaitthe answers, oh wise ones…

    Quick someone hide John Connor

  107. G says:
    February 15, 2011 at 10:27 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Quick someone hide John Connor

    Beat me to it! 😉

  108. G says:
    February 15, 2011 at 10:28 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast: Rich T posted this list of grievances against President Obama over at Dr. Kate’s – half of them I don’t even understand what he’s talking about. The crazy is very strong in this one…

    Wow. Just wow. I have absolutely NO idea at all what that nut is talking about…just off the hook paranoia fantasy-land nonsense…

  109. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 15, 2011 at 10:45 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast: Rich T posted this list of grievances against President Obama over at Dr. Kate’s – half of them I don’t even understand what he’s talking about. The crazy is very strong in this one

    These are grievances against King George, not Obama.

  110. Sef says:
    February 15, 2011 at 11:18 pm  (Quote)

    Totally OT, but a heads-up. Passover is approaching & every year Coke markets the “real stuff” (sugar, not that corn stuff). Check for it in your super market in the Kosher section.

  111. Slartibartfast says:
    February 15, 2011 at 11:27 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: These are grievances against King George, not Obama.

    Thanks – I thought it was the birther’s version of the grievances (against President Obama rather than King George) – I guess my mistake was in thinking that a birther could do something creative…

  112. Wile E. says:
    February 15, 2011 at 11:51 pm  (Quote)

    gorefan: It looks like it was made on an old photostat machine. They produced a negative copy.
    Although, why they used that process into the late 1970′s (the Jenna BC also is a complete negative and was issued in1979) is beyond me.

    Jenna BC? Pardon my ignorance, but my search on this site gave me no results and my search on the Google got me a picture of some Playboy playmate named Jenna….frolicking on the beach with a man who could pass for Gov. Abercrombie….
    http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTlJQfpidQ0q1EKZPkwbUrFWx5CY07lkNCDWOqOuFpUZeWLsT6dJQ

    I think Dr. C’s thoughts on how these “black image” birth certificates came to be make sense as well as your thinking that it was made by using an old Photostat machine (or possibly a Rectigraph). Here is a little background I found on these particular machines.

    http://www.officemuseum.com/copy_machines.htm

    Camera-Based Photocopying Machines

    “”””The Rectigraph Co. introduced camera-based photocopying machines in 1906 or 1907, and the Photostat Corp. (an affiliate of Eastman Kodak) did so at some point during 1907-11. Rectigraph and Photostat machines (Plates 40-42) combined a large camera and a developing machine and used sensitized paper furnished in 350-foot rolls. “The prints are made direct on sensitized paper, no negative, plate or film intervening. The usual exposure is ten seconds. After the exposure has been made the paper is cut off and carried underneath the exposure chamber to the developing bath, where it remains for 35 seconds, and is then drawn into a fixing bath. While one print is being developed or fixed, another exposure can be made. When the copies are removed from the fixing bath, they are allowed to dry by exposure to the air, or may be run through a drying machine. The first print taken from the original is a ‘black’ print; the whites in the original are black and the blacks, white. (Plate 43) A white ‘positive’ print of the original is made by rephotographing the black print. As many positives as required may be made by continuing to photograph the black print.” (The American Digest of Business Machines, 1924.) Du Pont Co. files include black prints of graphs dating from 1909, and the company acquired a Photostat machine in 1912. (Yates, p. 248, n. 81)”””””

    Interesting that they could have taken these black prints and re-photographed them with the same machine in order to get a normal looking white background with black lettered print. Just another step they didn’t feel necessary…..waste of paper and money?

    Yes, why did they use this process until at least 1979? Seems like Xerox copies were the bees knees by then. Inertia? Somebody order an extra case or two of the paper, which came in 350 ft. rolls and they thought they’d keep using the machine till the paper ran out?

  114. gorefan says:
    February 16, 2011 at 12:35 am  (Quote)

    Wile E.: The Rectigraph Co. introduced camera-based photocopying machines in 1906 or 1907,

    And on a side note – the company (Haloid Recorder Paper) that made the paper for the rectigraph, eventually bought the Rectigraphy Company. The Haloid Company was struggling in the late 1940’s when its owner met an inventor named Chet Carlson, an inventor who had developed a patent for a way to transmit a powdered image onto a zinc plate and then transfer it to a piece of paper. And thus the Xerox Company was born.

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/copies.html

  115. misha says:
    February 16, 2011 at 2:07 am  (Quote)

    My NYS BC is in the negative.

  116. misha says:
    February 16, 2011 at 2:09 am  (Quote)

    Sef: Totally OT, but a heads-up. Passover is approaching & every year Coke markets the “real stuff” (sugar, not that corn stuff). Check for it in your super market in the Kosher section.

    I wish we had excommunication, so Cantor, Brietbart, and the rest of the neocons could be told they are not welcome.

  117. nc1 says:
    February 16, 2011 at 3:54 am  (Quote)

    If Anderson Cooper believed in Obama telling the truth about his birthplace – why would he fight the proponents of “birther bills”?

    http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/15/video-birther-bill-proposed-in-montana

    Cooper stll claims that the COLB version 1.0 (redacted registration number) is an official document.

  118. The Magic M says:
    February 16, 2011 at 6:15 am  (Quote)

    > If Anderson Cooper believed in Obama telling the truth about his birthplace – why would he fight the proponents of “birther bills”?

    Again the crank strategy?

    “If The Magic M believed in scientists telling the truth about Earth being spherical – why would he fight the proponents of “flat Earth bills”?” Yeah, right.

    As I said, you always try to wrap people up in a Catch-22.

    If no-one opposes you, it’s “because we are right”.

    If someone opposes you, it’s “because there’s something to hide”.

    Nice, but doesn’t work among people with 3 brain cells and above.

  119. Keith says:
    February 16, 2011 at 7:21 am  (Quote)

    Scientist:
    I just watched the IBM computer array, Watson, demolish the 2 best players in the history of Jeopardy.This involves complex linguistic reasoning, way beyond what is involved in linear tasks like playing chess or calculating rocket trajectories.The advances in AI are such that it seems likely that within many of our lifetimes computers will far exceed our own feeble reasoning and decision making capacities.That raises the question of why we would want the Presidency in the hands of a fallible and slow-witted human (so many of whom can’t even grasp the nature of a birth certificate) when we could have these important decisions made by a computer array that had the sum of all known information and impeccable decision-making abilities.In prepation for the fiirst cyber President we need to re-consider some of the basic ideas of eligibility:

    1. When one talks about natural born citizen computters does that refer to the hardware being made in the US, the software being developed here or both?Can they use visitors on H1-B visas?
    2. Who are the parents of a computer?
    3. Does the computer really have to be 35 years old?

    I awaitthe answers, oh wise ones…

    I think there was a documentary about this a while back… I think it was calledBattlestar Galactica.

  120. Keith says:
    February 16, 2011 at 7:32 am  (Quote)

    gorefan: It looks like it was made on an old photostat machine. They produced a negative copy.
    Although, why they used that process into the late 1970′s (the Jenna BC also is a complete negative and was issued in1979) is beyond me.

    Its possible that they didn’t. I believe microfilm is/was archived in negative in anticipation that prints made from it would go via the photostat machine and end up as a positive image.

    Replacement of photostat machines with positive copy machines in the 70’s would then have resulted in the negative images.

  121. Greg says:
    February 16, 2011 at 9:24 am  (Quote)

    nc1: If Anderson Cooper believed in Obama telling the truth about his birthplace – why would he fight the proponents of “birther bills”?

    What? Something can’t be stupid AND wrong? Stupid AND unconstitutional? Stupid AND an offense to the rule of law?

  122. Steve says:
    February 16, 2011 at 9:40 am  (Quote)

    nc1: If Anderson Cooper believed in Obama telling the truth about his birthplace – why would he fight the proponents of “birther bills”?http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/15/video-birther-bill-proposed-in-montanaCooper stll claims that the COLB version 1.0 (redacted registration number) is an official document.

    It IS the official document.

  123. Bovril says:
    February 16, 2011 at 9:57 am  (Quote)

    Steve,

    Be careful, you’ll have NC1 go into full, “the image is not the thing” mode…

    The original of the image noted is an official document….. (birfoons…what can I say)

  124. Steve says:
    February 16, 2011 at 10:01 am  (Quote)

    Bovril: Steve,Be careful, you’ll have NC1 go into full, “the image is not the thing” mode…The original of the image noted is an official document….. (birfoons…what can I say)

    Birthers split hairs. Courts don’t.

  125. Rickey says:
    February 16, 2011 at 10:05 am  (Quote)

    nc1:

    Cooper stll claims that the COLB version 1.0 (redacted registration number) is an official document.

    We’ve been over this a thousand times, but I’ll try again.

    The registration number was redacted on the scan of the COLB, not on the COLB itself. As this photograph clearly shows, the COLB itself was not altered in any way.

    http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg

    And it is an official document, as it contains the state’s seal and bears the signature of Hawaii’s registrar, Alvin T. Onaka.

    http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_7.jpg

  126. gorefan says:
    February 16, 2011 at 10:11 am  (Quote)

    Keith: I believe microfilm is/was archived in negative in anticipation that prints made from it would go via the photostat machine and end up as a positive image.

    That may be true and would explain why some BC’s from the 1960’s are positive images. But in the case of the Nordyke twins and the Janna BC, both documents are entirely negative images, even the recent signatures and the date the copies were issued (Nordyke’s – 1966, Janna – 1979).

    The way I see it, is they took a BC lay it on a plate then place a second smaller piece of paper on the bottom (this piece contains both the copies issue date and the current signatures), at this point both the BC and the signature paper are in a positive image. Then the composite document is photographed to produce the negative image.

  127. Black Lion says:
    February 16, 2011 at 10:14 am  (Quote)

    Farah Lies Yet Again That WND Never Claimed Obama Wasn’t Born in U.S.
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    Joseph Farah’s notorious thin skin about criticism of him and his website shows up yet again in his Feb. 15 WorldNetDaily column — as if his childish opening reference to the Wall Street Journal as the “Wall Street Urinal” wasn’t a clue.

    This time Farah has his undies in a bunch about WSJ columnist James Taranto’s claim that WND publishes “demonstrable falsehoods about Barack Obama’s birthplace,” specifically “claim[ing] falsely that Obama was born outside the U.S.” Cue Farah in freak-out mode:

    I immediately challenged Taranto to provide just one example of WND ever claiming Obama was born outside the country. I have not heard from him with such an example, nor do I expect to hear from him – for the simple reason it has never happened.

    Be my guest – search for the accusation in WND’s free public archives. You will not find any such accusation or characterization by WND or any of its staff writers, columnists or even letter writers. I invite the George Soros-sponsored Media Matters organization to assist Taranto in his futile search. They won’t find any such assertion in the hundreds of stories WND has published seeking the truth about Obama’s still mysterious origins.

    By the way, it would not be a lie to say Obama was born in a foreign country. It would just be an unsubstantiated assertion. However, it is a lie to say WND has made such an assertion.

    Well, I work for Media Matters, so that may be close enough for Farah’s purposes. It’s an indisputable fact that WND — including Farah himself — has characterized Obama as being born outside the U.S. Here are just a few examples:

    “The only living person who claims publicly to have been present at Obama’s birth is his paternal grandmother, Sarah Obama, who says the birth took place in Mombassa, Kenya.”– Farah, July 23, 2009
    “Of course, the only living person in the world who claims to have been present for Obama’s birth is his paternal grandmother, Sarah Obama, who says it took place in Mombasa, Kenya.” — Farah, July 15, 2009
    “California attorney Orly Taitz, who has filed a number of lawsuits demanding proof of Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president, has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication. … WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.” — WND, Aug. 2, 2009
    (Of course, the claim attributed to Obama’s grandmother has been discredited, and the “Kenyan birth certificate” was ultimately found to be a fake, but not before WND published it without bothering to verify it first.)

    We can keep going if Farah wants. For example, here’s a Nov. 23 column by Jim Fletcher calling Obama “the Man from Kenya” (something he does again in columns on July 19 and Sept. 14).

    That pretty much destroys Farah’s claim that there is no “such accusation or characterization by WND or any of its staff writers, columnists or even letter writers” that Obama was born outside the U.S.

    Farah frequently claims that he and WND have never claimed or suggested that Obama wasn’t born in the U.S. He’s lying every single time he does so.

    http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/

  128. misha says:
    February 16, 2011 at 10:37 am  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Joseph Farah’s notorious thin skin

    Of course Farah has a thin skin. He flies into a rage every time I merely mention that it appears barnyard animals become skittish when he is near. I have never directly accused Farah of taking liberties with sheep or other ruminants. That would be unethical.

    Also, Glenn Beck has never denied raping and murdering a girl in 1990. All he has to do is release his criminal record abstract stamped “subject has clear record to date,” and this can be over today.

    I simply issue this challenge to Beck: prove to me you never raped and murdered a girl in 1990.

    I also issue this challenge to Joseph Farah: prove to me you never molested a barnyard animal.

    The silence is deafening.

  129. G says:
    February 16, 2011 at 11:01 am  (Quote)

    nc1: If Anderson Cooper believed in Obama telling the truth about his birthplace – why would he fight the proponents of “birther bills”?http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/15/video-birther-bill-proposed-in-montanaCooper stll claims that the COLB version 1.0 (redacted registration number) is an official document.

    Anderson Cooper’s job as a journalist is to deal with the facts and to challenge those providing false information. Which he does very well, as illustrated by this clip where both he and legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin are correct and pointing out all the errors in that birther from Montanta’s thinking and the Constitutional flaws in their bill.

    The COLB has already been explained to you over and over and over again. You are just a whiny person unhappy that reality completely contradicts your silly believes and too obstinate to accept how constantly wrong you are.

    So thank for providing that excellent newsclip from AC, where as usual he was right and you birthers are just a sad and deluded lost cause.

  130. Black Lion says:
    February 16, 2011 at 11:24 am  (Quote)

    Bill Bowman responds to Rondeau’s threats in yesterday’s Post and Fail…

    Sharon Rondeau at the Post and Email haz a mad about me
    By Bill Bowman
    .
    First of all, before I begin, I’d like to make a correction.

    In a previous post, I labelled The Post & Email editor Sharon Rondeau “a full–time harpist and a hobby seditionist.” Well, I have been provided with more accurate information by Ms. Rondeau herself, via a post in the P&E:

    As Mr. Bowman has never contacted The Post & Email via email, our office telephone number, nor by standard mail, he knows nothing about this writer or whether or not I write for The Post & Email as a “hobby.” In fact, his statement is completely inaccurate, because as editor I am paid for my work, rendering his term “hobby” completely false.

    I stand corrected. Since she is paid for her work, it is now my opinion that Ms. Rondeau is a professional seditionist. I apoligize for minimizing her role in the effort to overthrow a democratically elected president.

    Now, let’s get on with it.

    In the lead story today, Ms. Rondeau makes a spirited defense of her actions at the P&E, and also gets a little threaty.

    The Post & Email was founded by John Charlton in August 2009 to expose government corruption, particularly in light of the questionable eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as President of the United States.

    Well, right from the get-go we get the P&E’s mission statement: Get rid of that usurpin’ mofo in the White House.

    Rondeau writes that the P&E supports the Declration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution, especially the First Amendment.

    That is the point behind exposing corruption in government: making it known to the public, contacting our elected officials about the corruption, petitioning them to correct it; and if they fail to do so, bringing them to account, which means voting them out, bringing them up on charges if indicated, and meting out fair punishment according to the provisions of the aforementioned founding documents.

    Actually, what that means in the P&E’s case, in my opinion, is presenting one-sided information, ignoring the facts and calling for the arrest of a democratically elected president.

    Which, of course, they are perfectly within their rights to do. And I, and others, are perfectly within our rights to call them on it and give our opinions based on certain facts.

    Ms. Rondeau also apparently objects to my identifying her as a “professional harpist,” and says that the P&E never revealed any personal information about anyone.

    No, you’ve just published lies about our president, designed to foment anger and who knows what else.

    Oh, and I have a potty mouth. (Remember what she said about supporting the First Amendment? You get my point.)

    She also apparently haz a mad about the Fogbow, a bulletin board site I have recently joined. Rondeau made a post several weeks ago about the Fogbow, reprinting in part an Examiner (not me) article alleging that the Fogbow and its sister site, Politijab, may have violated the latter’s terms of service.

    Oh, and remember that bit earlier when Rondeau asserted that she never revealed personal information about anyone? This is from the Jan. 24, 2011 post about the Fogbow:

    The Fogbow was started by a lawyer (Foggy). Both The Fogbow and Politijab have a lawyer as their Administrator. This lawyer’s Internet handle is Realist. He also has the Internet handle of Jack Ryan.

    And:

    Just a few of the lawyers at FogBow include Butterfly Bilderberg, Tes, Paul Lenz, Loren, bob, nbc, Allison, Sternguard, Texasfilly, Realist and Dwight Sullivan (you’ll see why I emphasized his name in a second). A good number of these anonymous legal identities are in fact employees of the Federal Government.

    And:

    Politijab supporters have reportedly attended court hearings regarding the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as President of the United States. The issue has also had internet radio exposure with guest Lt. Col. Dwight Sullivan …

    So, apparently Sharon Rondeau is also a professional liar.

    Anyone who’s been on the Internet for even a month knows how easy it is to track people once you have basic information about them. Knowing someone’s “handle” and what they do for a living can be all you need to discover their true identity. Apparently that fact has eluded professional journalist Sharon Rondeau.

    In that Jan. 24 post, Rondeau also mentions that comments to the P&E are moderated, and those that do not meet their standards are not printed.

    Really.

    jc says:
    Thursday, January 27, 2011 at 9:13 PM
    Maybe what needs to be done to these Communist and unAmerican scum is to expose them in their own communities.
    Since Bill owns a flower shop in XXXXXXXX, NC and with Valentine’s Day being huge for their pockets, is to provide Bill with a nice big ad in several local papers letting his customers know what their money is supporting and even including some of his comments along with his picture. That way his own customers can see what he really thinks of this country. The picture with Bill in the hat with the sickle and hammer should be center stage.
    Maybe advertising it again before Mother’s Day would help Bill out.

    Let’s see, IDing a Fogbower’s employment, giving his first name, suggesting that P&Eers interfere with his business, and calling him a communist and scum. Are those your standards, Ms. Rondeau? Is that how you honor the Declration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution?

    Oh, and then there’s this comment:

    ObamaRelease YourRecords says:

    Wednesday, January 26, 2011 at 4:59 AM

    VIDEO: Exposed: Meet the two vile Obots Bill (Rondeau printed his last name here, I will not) AKA PJ Foggy of the Fogbow forum and Justin of the Politijab forum, Got Hammer & Sickle!?

    This was followed by a link to the aforementioned video, which I will not reprint. So even though she didn’t print the fellow’s last name in the former comment, she did let it run in the latter.

    Then there’s:

    Redd says:
    Monday, January 24, 2011 at 9:48 PM
    Of course I didnt forget rikker and allison on politijabo either!! rikker in florida and allison in california, how sweet. A couple of dunham hacks that are now in deep doo doo.

    And:

    Mia says:
    Monday, January 24, 2011 at 9:43 PM
    BRAVO!!!

    Good job, Mrs. Rondeau — you rock!
    ——————
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: I’m working at it.

    So Ms. Rondeau modestly accepts congratulations for her work. Still stand by your comment that the P&E never released personal information, Ms. Rondeau?

    Let’s go back to today’s post.

    This gave me a chuckle:

    It would seem that an “award-winning” author would at least be able to express another publication’s title correctly. We are not “the Post and Email;” but rather, “The Post & Email.” That is a detail that a good journalist should have gotten right, in this writer’s humble opinion.

    Well, I stand corrected. Maybe I should turn in my credentials.

    Ms. Rondeau says she has also sent an email and left a telephone message for the folks here at the Examiner, claiming that I have defamed her, and demanding a retraction within 72 hours.

    I am demanding a retraction of the term “hobby seditioninst.” I believe in enforcing the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, which hardly makes me a seditionist.

    I already did that. As for your contention that you are “hardly a seditionist:”

    Sedition is defined by the Merriam-Webster disctionary as “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”

    Hmmm. Let’s see.

    The Post & Email regulalry prints posts and comments calling the duly elected president of the United States a fraud, an imposter, a communist and other epithets, and calls for his removal, peaceful and otherwise.

    On Jan. 30, Rondeau wrote this:

    Was Obama installed by massive election fraud despite his apparent ineligibility for office and forced upon an unsuspecting, uninformed American public? Have peaceful protests and communications with our elected officials gone unheeded? Is our government unresponsive in light of the constitutional crisis which exists if Obama is not eligible to occupy the White House?

    Why has Congress not responded to evidence that Obama was born in a foreign country, thereby bringing his eligibility into serious question? Some have stated that the U.S. is already “in a war” because of Obama’s “psychopathic wish fulfillment” and communist background.

    And in a Sept. 2, 2010 interview with fellow seditionist “Dr. Kate,” Rondeau prints the following comment from Kate:

    (Dr. Kate) What I’d really like to see, frankly, is the Sergeant-at-Arms shut down the House and keep everybody in there until we get this thing straightened out.

    SHARON: Does he have the authority to do that as far as you know?

    DR. KATE: As Sergeant-at-Arms, yes, for illegal behavior. And this is misprision of felony. This is outright treason. This is outright criminal actions. At this point, all of the Congress, by their silence, is involved. I personally would favor shutting down the whole thing with those people inside and have them get their lawyers, but essentially, straighten this thing out. I could also accept it if it was at the State of the Union address. We don’t know where we’re going to be, but right now, I honestly feel that they need to deal with this or we are so out-of-luck. Revolution could happen; a bloody rebellion could happen. Our constitution gave us the tools so we wouldn’t have to do that again, but they’re baiting us. At this point, OK, fine. We’re going to bring it to your door, too.

    Now, a rational person would have questioned Kate’s comment about bloody rebellion, but Rondeau did not. Instead, she gave it her tacit approval.

    SHARON: To me personally, the fact that they’ve chosen to carry on this charade for almost two years now is astounding. We’re talking about the shredding of the U.S. Constitution which the original 13 colonies agreed upon, along with the Bill of Rights, which have been cast aside and opens up the doors to foreigners always ruling us from this day onward.

    And then there was a Jan. 11, 2011 screed published by Rondeau, written by Kathleen Gotto, in which the latter wrote:

    And yet, what else can we expect from that man? He serves in his office as a usurper, employs thug tactics, cavorts with criminals, lies, deceives, bows to foreign leaders, has close connections to Islam, has a demonstrated bias against Christianity and disrespects America at every opportunity.

    Sedition: “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”

    Continuously publishing statements that question the qualifications and character of the president can have as its effect a mobilizing of those who would use violence to remove him from office. Rondeau plays to her audience of virulent Obama haters with this tactic; in my opinion, knowing full well what the consequences of her actions could be. And posting comments — since they are moderated, a de facto agreement with them — that call for his violent ouster serves only to inflame passions.

    Charge that the sitting president has “shredded the Constitution,” claim that treason has been committed, allege that he has a bias against the religion to which he professes faith. Otherwise known as “stirring the pot.” Otherwise known as sedition, in my opinion.

    Barack Obama is the duly elected president, whether Sharon Rondeau and her band of anti-Americans likes it or not. What I’ve just presented are but a few of many articles by her, articles by others she published, and comments she approved which, in my opinion, fit the definition of sedition.

    Rondeau finishes her response to me with this:

    From the lack of editorial ethics apparent in Mr. Bowman’s piece today, your publication appears to be nothing but drivel. Publishing personal information about anyone defies proper journalistic standards. The Post & Email has never given out personal information on anyone, whether or not the person agrees with the views expressed by our newspaper.

    First of all, The Post & Email is not a newspaper. It’s an electronic publication. Second, real journalists publish personal information about people every single day. Third, the Post & Email has published personal information about those it consideres its enemies. Those are all details that a good journalist should have gotten right, in this writer’s humble opinion.

    Rondeau ends her piece with a threat to sue me and the Examiner. Speaking soley for myself, i say: bring it.

    Keep the faith.

    http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/sharon-rondeau-at-the-post-and-email-haz-a-mad-about-me?render=print#print

  131. misha says:
    February 16, 2011 at 11:40 am  (Quote)

    I wish Rondeau and Farah would sue me. I need the publicity.

  132. Black Lion says:
    February 16, 2011 at 4:21 pm  (Quote)

    The infamous “White Hat” report is pure comedic gold…It makes anything made up by Sven or John look like childs play….A excerpt of the most recent post is below…

    “We have waited through Saturday to see if any further activity was going to take place in reference to any investor repayment and Global Settlements, but nothing is scheduled for early week as of noon Sunday, February 13th.

    It is important that the world understands who Obama really is. What is the real truth about Obama? All his activities must be investigated. Obama needs to explain to Congress his vast personal accumulation of funds recently moved from both the Vatican Bank and Bank Santander, as he and the Bush family seek to avoid detection and exposure.

    Obama had close ties with the Giannoulias family commencing when he first began his political career as an Illinois State Senator. Obama and Alexi Giannoulias met in the late 90’s at the East Bank Club in Chicago. Giannoulias expanded his roles within the Broadway Bank, which Obama selected to keep most of his Senatorial campaign funds. In April 2010, Federal regulators shut down the Broadway Bank. Congressman Darrell Issa has hinted at the possibility of the need to investigate the missing hundreds of millions from the Broadway Bank and its outreach into the White House.

    When?

    Obama was further cross involved with Tony Rezko, a Syrian born felon convicted of fraud and bribery, clearly well suited for Washington. Rezko helped fund and ran Obama’s campaign in 1995. Rezko helped facilitate the purchase of Obama’s home in Kentwood for $1.65m, against which he was availed of a significant discount on the mortgage. Chicago rules?

    The Obama and Jarrett relationship and conduct with the former Governor Rod Blagojevich has been well publicized. Valerie Jarrett was part of the manipulative Chicago (insiders?)set, being well-schooled in the Windy City rules and practices, hence, brought in as a White House enforcer. She affects almost complete authoritarian control now on White House policies and affairs of state, unelected and with her own often mercurial agendas.

    We can also confirm that in addition to all the information others have supplied to the Supreme Court, each Supreme Court Justice has viewed a You Tube video by Wayne Madsen, a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist.

    Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FIptCAkrcc

    We only report the fact that each Supreme Court Justice received copies of this video. Intelligence has also reported that Obama is worried and is doing everything possible to shut down this video. We have no further comment, and leave it to the video’s producer to support his claims.

    Every form of media restraint is exercised in reference to the Truth. Truth is suppressed. The media is bought, purchased, intimidated and scared to report the truth or take an opposite position to the Administration. We must all do whatever we can to pass these truths on.

    We now have an acting President, an illegal immigrant, who carried a Foreign Student Visa, and acquired his own American passport by a false declaration. There is only proof of his ineligibility to serve as the US President by Law. The fraudulent vetting and security to validate his citizenship has been alarming. Bush Sr. has lost no opportunity to enforce his will for Obama to acquiesce to Bush family demands, against which Obama now is visibly enriching himself conspiring with the Bush’s and the collective associates, using his Chicago rules to silence dissent, and maximize the asset stripping of the country. Indeed, this low caliber Manchurian Candidate was well selected and groomed for just that purpose.

    Congress must speed up and announce a wide and sweeping corruption inquiry, which can cross encompass the Bush, Clinton and Obama regimes, and request a global search for all such illegal proceeds of crime stolen under their stewardship in office. Congress must demand an answer from the Supreme Court relating to the clear judgment on this illegal fraudster. Let the Political establishment effect the solution based on the rule of law.

    Look at the groundswell of opinion and views of so many of our readers. The White Hats reports have now recorded logs from multiple tracking sites, and will soon be in the millions. Truth is on the march here and will only gain momentum. Congressional Freshmen are following us for Leadership. World Leaders are recorded as tracking us with each release. Truth will not be suppressed.

    Why is Obama still ordering the Settlements to be withheld? How much money in addition to the $2,000,000,000 dollars has he personally now accrued from his own questionable conduct, abuse of office as a fraudulent illegal immigrant who has evaded the vetting system checks and made fools of the Democratic Party? Who will start a global investigation of his banking, his wife and family? Why has he not acted on Biden having been told by parties of substance that Biden has been bribed and witnesses attest to it? Biden is dirty.

    The sheer scale of crimes perpetrated by this stagger credibility that so much has been suppressed. So many deaths, drug money laundering, bribery and corruption, it’s off the Richter scale. But all open to investigation. For America to go forward now, it has to deal with and heal its past.

    Congressman Issa, you promised so much.”

    http://tdarkcabal.blogspot.com/

  133. Keith says:
    February 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm  (Quote)

    misha:
    My NYS BC is in the negative.

    So is my Michigan one.

  134. G says:
    February 16, 2011 at 5:08 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: The infamous “White Hat” report is pure comedic gold…It makes anything made up by Sven or John look like childs play….A excerpt of the most recent post is below…

    Makes you wonder if these fan-fic folks are the same ones who were involved with that cRAP masters silliness and their “secret American government nonsense”.

    Really, who falls for this obvious fictional bunk, anyways? Its so laughably absurd that I’m sure its even hard for many hard-core birthers to swallow…

  135. Northland10 says:
    February 17, 2011 at 8:07 am  (Quote)

    G: Really, who falls for this obvious fictional bunk, anyways? Its so laughably absurd that I’m sure its even hard for many hard-core birthers to swallow…

    I have always wondered if the White Hat report is actually somebody having great fun with the birthers. I would figure, however, that attempting to write a satirical pro-birther report is no easy task. Where most people would be concerned that they make it at least partially believable, the birthers have proven many times there is no theory to outlandish for them to swallow. You would have to turn off your “keep it plausible” checker.

  136. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 17, 2011 at 8:52 am  (Quote)

    Northland10: I have always wondered if the White Hat report is actually somebody having great fun with the birthers. I would figure, however, that attempting to write a satirical pro-birther report is no easy task. Where most people would be concerned that they make it at least partially believable, the birthers have proven many times there is no theory to outlandish for them to swallow. You would have to turn off your “keep it plausible” checker.

    It reminds me much of the whole Terri Schiavo affair, so many on the RTL side would believe any vicious lies about the husband including abuse even though there was none and the police investigated and found no foul play. They would believe pretty much anything without question. I know someone who purposely wrote an outlandish piece just to see what they would do with it. Sure enough the RTLers on AOL were quoting the completely made up article as if it was a true story. They claimed somehow that Michael Schiavo had bought off everyone from the doctors up to the state and even Jeb Bush.

  137. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 9:24 am  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): It reminds me much of the whole Terri Schiavo affair, so many on the RTL side would believe any vicious lies about the husband including abuse even though there was none and the police investigated and found no foul play. They would believe pretty much anything without question. I know someone who purposely wrote an outlandish piece just to see what they would do with it. Sure enough the RTLers on AOL were quoting the completely made up article as if it was a true story. They claimed somehow that Michael Schiavo had bought off everyone from the doctors up to the state and even Jeb Bush.

    The Schiavo situation was a key political straw that broke my back in terms of being willing to support certain politicians. It was such a blatent over-the-top interference into a very personal matter, based on myth instead of reality that I’ve been permanently disgusted by it. The final straw was when the brain scans came back showing that her mind was clearly liquid mush with barely a functioning brain stem keeping her organs functioning, yet these con artists tried to claim that she somehow spoke.

    I don’t expect any politician to be perfect and I expect that I’ll disagree with their decisions, actions or statements a number of times. I normally try to look at the broader context when re-election time comes around and weigh out the whole to see what I think of them at the time. However, after Schiavo, any politician that involved themselves in that affair on the side of Randal Terry and his extremist agenda nuts is permanently on my vote AGAINST list….and possibly actively campaign against. For that reason alone.

  138. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:44 am  (Quote)

    G: The Schiavo situation was a key political straw that broke my back in terms of being willing to support certain politicians.

    While on the Senate floor, Bill Frist viewed a video and made a diagnosis. He declared she could recover, and called her “a living, breathing human being.”

    G: on the side of Randal Terry and his extremist agenda nuts

    Randall Terry is a former used car salesman, and anti-semite. He has disowned both of his adopted children, and had an adulterous affair with a staffer, whom he married after a messy divorce.

    Both of his children were from women he stopped at clinics. His son told Terry he was gay, and his daughter became pregnant with a boyfriend.

    When Dr. Tiller was gunned down, Terry said he did not condone murder, but “I’m not unhappy.”

    You can google all of this.

  139. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:50 am  (Quote)

    G: Randal Terry and his extremist agenda nuts

    Terry calls himself “a covenant Christian.” Google it.

  140. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:58 am  (Quote)

    misha: While on the Senate floor, Bill Frist viewed a video and made a diagnosis. He declared she could recover, and called her “a living, breathing human being.”Randall Terry is a former used car salesman, and anti-semite. He has disowned both of his adopted children, and had an adulterous affair with a staffer, whom he married after a messy divorce.Both of his children were from women he stopped at clinics. His son told Terry he was gay, and his daughter became pregnant with a boyfriend.When Dr. Tiller was gunned down, Terry said he did not condone murder, but “I’m not unhappy.”You can google all of this.

    Thanks Misha, but I’m very familiar and well aware of all this.

    Thankfully, Bill Frist is gone. I hope he never comes back. His “video diagnosis” was shameful and I feel he should have lost his medical license for his actions during that fiasco. Same reason Santorum is gone…and I hope he goes down in flames in his “potential” presidential bid attempt. These wacky types are just a disgrace and have no further business being in positions of authority.

    Randall Terry is one of the most vile and sickest agitators out there. I do feel he IS directly culpable for inciting Dr. Tiller’s murder and well as numerous other acts of violence, vandalism and intimidation. If there is any justice in this world, he will one day be held to account.

  141. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 17, 2011 at 12:16 pm  (Quote)

    G: Thanks Misha, but I’m very familiar and well aware of all this.Thankfully, Bill Frist is gone. I hope he never comes back. His “video diagnosis” was shameful and I feel he should have lost his medical license for his actions during that fiasco. Same reason Santorum is gone…and I hope he goes down in flames in his “potential” presidential bid attempt. These wacky types are just a disgrace and have no further business being in positions of authority.Randall Terry is one of the most vile and sickest agitators out there. I do feel he IS directly culpable for inciting Dr. Tiller’s murder and well as numerous other acts of violence, vandalism and intimidation. If there is any justice in this world, he will one day be held to account.

    Bill Frist also said he was unsure if one could get HIV from tears or sweat even though the general medical field has said that it’s not possible. As for Randall Terry he is a sick human being. He’s nothing short of a domestic terrorist and associated with many of the killers of doctors in the 80s and 90s. He’s the guy who had a dead fetus sent to Bill Clinton in 1992 at the convention. One of his followers James Kopp was convicted in 1998 of second degree murder when he killed a doctor in Buffalo, NY

  142. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Bill Frist also said he was unsure if one could get HIV from tears or sweat even though the general medical field has said that it’s not possible. As for Randall Terry he is a sick human being. He’s nothing short of a domestic terrorist and associated with many of the killers of doctors in the 80s and 90s. He’s the guy who had a dead fetus sent to Bill Clinton in 1992 at the convention. One of his followers James Kopp was convicted in 1998 of second degree murder when he killed a doctor in Buffalo, NY

    I agree with viewing and treating him and his organization as domestic terrorists.

  143. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): One of his followers James Kopp was convicted in 1998 of second degree murder when he killed a doctor in Buffalo, NY

    I knew Dr. Slepian from my synagogue.

    There are thousands of news stories about “Islamic terrorists,” or “Muslim terrorist.” Usually it’s one word like mommiedearest.

    No one ever writes “Christian terrorist,” like McVeigh or clinic violence.

    As I wrote many times before, Christianity to me is the Jesuits, SVdeP, the Catholic peace movement and the Berigan brothers. I had one professor, a Jesuit, who regularly used the Berigan brothers in his lectures, as examples.

  144. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 12:41 pm  (Quote)

    WND Inadvertently Tells Truth About ‘Eligibility’ Film
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    A Feb. 15 WorldNetDaily article is promoting a special deal on the WND-produced “documentary” “A Question of Eligibility,” with a headline declaring it to be the “Most radioactive film of the decade.”

    The film is radioactive, but not for the reason WND thinks it is. As we detailed, “A Question of Eligibility” is riddled with discredited conspiracy theories and apparent violations of copyright law, as you might expect any film starring Jerome Corsi, Alan Keyes, Orly Taitz and Janet Porter to be.

    There’s a reason the filmmakers’ names “are being withheld at the request of the filmmakers,” and it ain’t because of the stated claim that “They fear reprisals from their government” — they are much more likely to be embarrassed about their participation in such a slapdash, factually challenged production.

    http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/

  145. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm  (Quote)

    More birther fiction….Reminds me of the Race Bannon story or Tim Adams work of fiction regarding the HI election office….

    “Barry Soetoro versus The Birthers

    There is no shame in questioning Mr. Soetoro’s background, loyalty or nationality, nor is there any shame in demanding that he produce his birth certificate.

    At this point you may be wondering why I refer to our president as Barry Soetoro rather than Barack Hussein Obama, quite simply it is because “Barack Hussein Obama” does not exist.

    Barack Hussein Obama was known as Barry Soetoro when he was in Indonesia and was registered for school by Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo as first reported here on this blog on 24 January 2007. It would be August of 2008 before the Associated Press would release the photo of Barry Soetoro’s school registration and as such vindicating what I originally wrote.

    There is however one document missing, and that is the birth certificate of Barry Soetoro, the original document that was used by Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo to register his child for school. Barry Soetoro, the son of Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo and Stanley Ann Dunham was born on 4 August 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    The document shown by the Obama campaign is in fact a forgery. The original birth certificate was amended to change both the father and the name on the birth certificate and was used by Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo register his child in public school in Indonesia. Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo never adopted Barack Hussein Obama, he didn’t need to.

    Shortly after the release of the school registration photograph in August of 2008, I would receive a visit from two gentlemen from Virginia who would convince me that is was not in my interest or the interest of the nation to pursue this matter any further – Alea iacta est – It was then that I took a break.

    There is a Chinese saying – “If you don’t have a big head, don’t try to wear a big hat.” I’ve learned a lot since then, one thing I learned was that your voice can be drowned out in the marketplace of ideas and sometimes if you want to be heard you simply need a bigger bullhorn and more resources than your opposition.”

    http://laotze.blogspot.com/2011/02/barry-soetoro-versus-birthers.html

  146. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 1:00 pm  (Quote)

    misha: No one ever writes “Christian terrorist,” like McVeigh or clinic violence.

    Although I would agree that the clinic violence is definitely tied to religion – Christianity in particular, I do not think that is a proper assessment of McVeigh.

    McVeigh’s actions and beliefs are simply more inline with the anti-government “black helicopter” and militia crowds. There is no direct connection to what he did to some faith-based reason. While he might have had a Christian background, most of the serious research and subsequent interviews show that he would be better classified as an agnostic.

    Regardless, it is inaccurate and improper to categorize McVeigh’s act of domestic terrorism as tied to Christianity in any way whatsoever.

    Similarly, it is improper to be casting what that crazed anti-government nut Loughner did as either right or left or tied to any religion. The evidence to date just points to a mentally ill person with severe paranoia and some recently developed anti-government beliefs.

  147. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 1:03 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Barry Soetoro, the son of Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo and Stanley Ann Dunham was born on 4 August 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    Leslie Lynch King, Jr. is better known as Gerald Ford.

    William Blythe is better known as Bill Clinton.

    The complete story is here:
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2009/06/famous-willards.html

  148. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 1:05 pm  (Quote)

    G: it is inaccurate and improper to categorize McVeigh’s act of domestic terrorism as tied to Christianity in any way whatsoever.

    McVeigh was influenced by Christian Identity.

  149. Slartibartfast says:
    February 17, 2011 at 1:17 pm  (Quote)

    G: Although I would agree that the clinic violence is definitely tied to religion – Christianity in particular, I do not think that is a proper assessment of McVeigh.

    McVeigh’s actions and beliefs are simply more inline with the anti-government “black helicopter” and militia crowds.There is no direct connection to what he did to some faith-based reason.While he might have had a Christian background, most of the serious research and subsequent interviews show that he would be better classified as an agnostic.

    Regardless, it is inaccurate and improper to categorize McVeigh’s act of domestic terrorism as tied to Christianity in any way whatsoever.

    Similarly, it is improper to be casting what that crazed anti-government nut Loughner did as either right or left or tied to any religion.The evidence to date just points to a mentally ill person with severe paranoia and some recently developed anti-government beliefs.

    I agree with you completely – McVeigh and Loughner were terrorists, but not Christian terrorists like Scott Roeder and Randall Terry. McVeigh may have been influenced by Christian groups (which seems a misnomer for groups that would be an anathema to that nice Jewish boy, Jesus…), but his terrorism was clearly anti-government. In the case of Loughner, I don’t think that his ideology was coherent enough to tell what philosophy his act of terrorism grew out of or his intent in its commission.

  150. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 1:50 pm  (Quote)

    misha: McVeigh was influenced by Christian Identity.

    Misha – I think you are falling for the same guilt by association trap as the right does by trying to tie Obama to Wright, Ayers, etc.

    There is no evidence at all that McVeigh himself subscribed to Christian Identity.

    Did he have contacts that were part of such beliefs? YES. That is not in dispute.

    However, I think you fail to see the actual common denominator here – BOTH he and his contacts subscribed to anti-government paranoia. THAT is the their link. There is NO evidence that they shared religious belief systems.

    You’ve forgotten that paranoid and hateful nuts tend to subscribe to a whole bunch of crazy things…certain elements of those may bring a broader set of crazy together… but it then masks the fact that there is usually also a lot of disagreement between larger nut groups on specific theories, philosophies and even religious or political views.

    The Tea Party phenomenon is probably a good example of that on an even broader scale. Are there racists amongst the Tea Party? Obviously. Are ALL Tea Partiers racist? NO. Do many of them hold fundamentalist Christian beliefs? YES. Are there also quite a few who are of different religions or even not very religious at all – YES. There is a lot of friction between the more “libertarian” and more “socially conservative” elements in the Tea Party. Are there quite a few militia folk, birthers and/or truthers amongst them? YES. Are there also a lot of Tea Partiers that try to drive out certain of those crazy groups from their movement? YES.

    Do I think the overall Tea Party movement has got it wrong and is angry for the wrong reasons/excuses, with no actual useful solutions and that on a whole, they are a wacky, angry fringe? YES. That’s about all I think they have in common. But if one of those Tea Party folks went full bore nuts and did something crazy, you would have to know more specifics about THAT individual’s beliefs and motives to know what all they subscribed to and where they differed from others in other overall movement.

    Bottom line – although guilt by association is a simple and common trait, it is also a lazy one. The facts of McVeigh, his beliefs and his past have been looked into quite extensively.

    He was definitely an anti-government paranoid and “militia” type nut.

    He HAD connections to other anti-government nuts who also happened to be religious nuts.

    But there is NO credible evidence that he himself was a religious nut or had religious motivations to his actions.

  151. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 17, 2011 at 2:14 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Barry Soetoro, the son of Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo and Stanley Ann Dunham was born on 4 August 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii.

    Quite an excellent bit of fiction. So somehow we have a time travel story where Stanley Ann Dunham somehow travelled back in time to procreate with a man she hadn’t even met yet and had a son of him.

  152. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 3:26 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Quite an excellent bit of fiction. So somehow we have a time travel story where Stanley Ann Dunham somehow travelled back in time to procreate with a man she hadn’t even met yet and had a son of him.

    I thought so….I am waiting for some birther to use this as the gospel….Birthers will believe anything negative regarding the President, no matter how ridiculous….Between this fiction and the so called White Hat insider, no wonder the birthers always look like fools…

  153. Stanislaw says:
    February 17, 2011 at 3:46 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Quite an excellent bit of fiction.So somehow we have a time travel story where Stanley Ann Dunham somehow travelled back in time to procreate with a man she hadn’t even met yet and had a son of him.

    Well at least the one of the poor birthtards is finally admitting that he was born in Hawaii. On the other hand, they’ve simply traded one insane delusion for another one. Like the old saying goes, one step forward…

  154. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 4:01 pm  (Quote)

    Over at the Post and Fail, the usual letter upset that the GOP is not “going after Obama” nonsense…

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/16/citizen-tells-senate-minority-leader-why-obama-is-not-a-natural-born-citizen/

    “Obama/Soebarkah/Barry Soetoro’s purported mother, Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro (there is no long-form birth certificate provided to prove that she actually gave birth to him) was too young to confer U.S. citizenship on Obama at birth, since she was not yet 19 years old as required by law when he was born in August, 1961. At best he is an “anchor-baby”, and a DUAL-CITIZEN. There is no evidence that after he was adopted by his step-father Lolo Soetoro and entered in an Indonesian school listing Indonesian citizenship for him that he ever naturalized himself as an American citizen.”

    But interesting is one of the comments by the birthers and his attack on WKA…

    MichaelN says:
    Wednesday, February 16, 2011 at 5:36 AM
    Most of the proponents of jus soli use the Wong Kim Ark court’s holding, (as opposed to the decision) based on Lord Coke in Calvin’s case, where they concluded that a child of an alien, visiting, temporarily is an English natural born subject’ so therefore a US Article II natural born Citizen’ is one who is born of an alien, as long as they are born in USA.

    But if you read Calvin’s case, where Calvin was deemed a natural born subject’ of England, you will find that Lord Coke actually said:
    “Calvin the Plaintiff naturalized by PROCREATION and birth right”

    “There is found in the law four kinds of ligeances: the first is, ligeantia naturalis, absoluta, pura, et indefinita,42 and this originally is due by NATURE and birthright, and is called alta ligeantia42a and he that oweth this is called subditus natus.”

    This was NEVER mentioned in the WKA court.

    A reading of Calvin’s case proves that sanguinis was ONE of the TWO essential elements to qualify a natural born’.

    Quite the opposite to what the WKA court held.

    It proves an error in the holding WKA court and this error has festered and grown ever since.

    Bottom-line is that sanguinis IS essential in English common law & not only soli for natural born’.

    The very legally educated framers with their very learned and comprehensive knowledge of English common law, must have seen this holding of sanguinis and soli in Coke’s report of Calvin’s case, and the principle of sanguinis and soli was applied in the USC Art. II for a US natural born Citizen’.

    Given the clear intention of the framers to protect and secure the office of POTUS from any foreign influence and claim, the TWO element qualification principle was a perfect fit.

    Maybe a writ of error is in order to be filed with SCOTUS, particularly to correct the Indiana decision in Ankeny case and maybe to correct WKA holding (not decision).

    Striking at the heart of the festered error, like the WKA case would be a step toward stripping back the error from its origins.

  155. Stanislaw says:
    February 17, 2011 at 4:19 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion:
    Over at the Post and Fail, the usual letter upset that the GOP is not “going after Obama” nonsense…

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/16/citizen-tells-senate-minority-leader-why-obama-is-not-a-natural-born-citizen/

    “Obama/Soebarkah/Barry Soetoro’s purported mother, Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro (there is no long-form birth certificate provided to prove that she actually gave birth to him) was too young to confer U.S. citizenship on Obama at birth, since she was not yet 19 years old as required by law when he was born in August, 1961. At best he is an “anchor-baby”, and a DUAL-CITIZEN. There is no evidence that after he was adopted by his step-father Lolo Soetoro and entered in an Indonesian school listing Indonesian citizenship for him that he ever naturalized himself as an American citizen.”

    “Purported mother?” Jesus Christ, these people are stupid.

  156. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 4:28 pm  (Quote)

    Stanislaw: “Purported mother?” Jesus Christ, these people are stupid.

    Yes…Part of the attack on the President is questioning if Stanley Ann is really his mother or not…The brithers have attacked and malinged the reputation of the President’s mother in such a way that it is disgusting….This is just par for the course…

  157. Black Lion says:
    February 17, 2011 at 4:40 pm  (Quote)

    michele-bachmann-refuses-to-say-whether-president-obama-is-a-citizen-on-gma

    Chris Matthews welcomed two frequent guests to Hardball, Salon’s Joan Walsh and Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson to discuss some controversial Republican stories ranging from Governor Haley Barbour refusing to denounce license plates that honor the KKK’s founder to Speaker of the House John Boehner refusing to tell Americans whether or not they should believe President Obama is a Muslim. Somehow Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann snuck into the conversation too, with Matthews finally just concluding that Republicans are a “party of crazy people.”

    Walsh found it peculiar that Boehner “makes his living telling Americans what to believe” on issues like the economy, yet demonstrates a cowardice to stand up to the half of his base that still believes Obama is a Muslim. Walsh warned that Republicans are playing with “racist fire.” Matthews admitted he was having fun discussing the “new group of crazy people” taking over the Republican party, but worried that establishment Republicans soon might not recognize their party anymore. Matthews concluded, “I think it’s a crazy coalition . . . all these guys from main street who run a little business [are going to] realize they are in a party of crazy people.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-a-new-group-of-crazy-people-are-taking-over-the-republican-party/

  158. The Magic M says:
    February 17, 2011 at 5:39 pm  (Quote)

    > “Purported mother?” Jesus Christ, these people are stupid.

    Of course, some of the birthers still hatch the dream that his mother was a Hawaiian hooker knocked up by Stanley Ann’s dad. Or some black Marxist, whatever. Anything that, in their mind, would make people stop voting for him. Why do you think some people over at drkate’s even bother saying things like “his ancestors owned slaves”? Throw enough dirt and…

  159. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 7:13 pm  (Quote)

    G: Misha – I think you are falling for the same guilt by association trap as the right does by trying to tie Obama to Wright, Ayers, etc.

    I’m repaying the favor from Beck and Limbaugh. I learned well. See how well:
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2010/08/coincidence.html

    G: The Tea Party phenomenon is probably a good example of that

    The Tea Party is another incarnation of the John Birch Society.

    Every time I hear someone bash Reverend Wright and Obama’s guilt by association, I tell them about Palin’s church which preaches that Auschwitz and terror against Israel is devine retribution because we do not accept their lord.

    Watch John Hagee, a closet anti-semite who loooves Israel, in action:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7706179979766534830&hl=en#

  160. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 7:18 pm  (Quote)

    Stanislaw: “Purported mother?” Jesus Christ, these people are stupid.

    Not stupid – calculating and vicious.

  161. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 8:37 pm  (Quote)

    G: I feel he should have lost his medical license for his actions

    Frist is licensed in Tennessee. Not a chance. Just like Rand Paul has his license in Kentucky – he couldn’t pass an exam in NY, NJ, PA or New England.

    I say this as a NYS licensed optician: I would not let Rand Paul near me.

  162. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:09 pm  (Quote)

    misha: Frist is licensed in Tennessee. Not a chance. Just like Rand Paul has his license in Kentucky – he couldn’t pass an exam in NY, NJ, PA or New England.I say this as a NYS licensed optician: I would not let Rand Paul near me.

    Didn’t Rand Paul create his own licensing accreditation? Its not even real, is it?

    …just scary that people can do that stuff. Rand Paul’s license is no more legit than Manning’s ministries.

  163. Sef says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:30 pm  (Quote)

    With all the talk about sock puppets her I thought this might be of interest http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All

  164. gorefan says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:34 pm  (Quote)

    It looks like the Supreme Court is getting ready to smackdown Hollister again:

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-678.htm

    And WND is all excited

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=264897

  165. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:36 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: With all the talk about sock puppets her I thought this might be of interest http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All

    Ugh! Such shameful propoganda control…

    Of course, it only shows the true weakness of those that have to resort to such tactics to overinflate their pitiful little numbers…

  166. Sef says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:46 pm  (Quote)

    Fun fact from Letterman tonight: Moldova has highest per capita alcohol consumption of any country in the world. Maybe that explains some of Orly.

  167. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:47 pm  (Quote)

    G: Didn’t Rand Paul create his own licensing accreditation? Its not even real, is it?

    That’s correct. It’s a libertarian thing.

    G: Rand Paul’s license is no more legit than Manning’s ministries.

    …and far more dangerous.

  168. misha says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:48 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: Fun fact from Letterman tonight: Moldova has highest per capita alcohol consumption of any country in the world. Maybe that explains some of Orly.

    And Avigdor Lieberman. (You beat me to it. I was just about to post the same thing.)

  169. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:51 pm  (Quote)

    gorefan: It looks like the Supreme Court is getting ready to smackdown Hollister again:http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-678.htmAnd WND is all excitedhttp://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=264897

    WOW. WND likes to “keep plucking that chicken!” What a load of horse manure in that article!

    Of course it will have nothing but the hilarious result of getting all their gullible followers all hot and moist, just to be completely cold showered by yet another simple one-word “denied” from the Supremes…

  170. G says:
    February 17, 2011 at 11:52 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: Fun fact from Letterman tonight: Moldova has highest per capita alcohol consumption of any country in the world. Maybe that explains some of Orly.

    …Good point – as in Orly’s mom must have been drinking too much during her pregnancy with her…that might explain the apparent brain damage.

  171. misha says:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:00 am  (Quote)

    G: Orly’s mom must have been drinking too much during her pregnancy with her

    And Orly continued.

  172. G says:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:03 am  (Quote)

    misha: G: Didn’t Rand Paul create his own licensing accreditation? Its not even real, is it?
    Misha:That’s correct. It’s a libertarian thing.

    ROTFL!!!

    misha: G: Rand Paul’s license is no more legit than Manning’s ministries.
    Misha:…and far more dangerous.

    Well, I guess that depends.

    If you are a patient, then yes, Rand Paul’s fake accredidation is much more of a personal danger to your health…

    However, as a fake ordained preacher with a pulpit, claiming “higher authority” in his rants…there is a greater danger of inspiring some unhinged lone nuts to think they are “carrying out God’s will” and cause harm to innocents…

  173. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:09 am  (Quote)

    G: just to be completely cold showered by yet another simple one-word “denied” from the Supremes…

    Does the fact that it’s been rescheduled for about two weeks from now, suggest that it is DOA?

    Like this is just a formality, so let’s get it over with quickly.

  174. G says:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:19 am  (Quote)

    gorefan: Does the fact that it’s been rescheduled for about two weeks from now, suggest that it is DOA?Like this is just a formality, so let’s get it over with quickly.

    I believe that fits the standard profile pattern for such things, based on what others with experience in such matters have said in the past.

  176. Lupin says:
    February 18, 2011 at 3:38 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Donofrio’s thoughts about false claims by CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin:

    Donofrio who does not read French and obviously has no knowledge or understanding of the historical context in which Vattel was writing is completely wrong — I suspect, purposefully so.

    You can quote me as a French lawyer far more knowledgeable about this issue than Donofrio.

    The misquoting of Vattel is in my opinion one of the birthers’ most egregious lies.

  177. nc1 says:
    February 18, 2011 at 4:31 am  (Quote)

    Lupin: Donofrio who does not read French and obviously has no knowledge or understanding of the historical context in which Vattel was writing is completely wrong — I suspect, purposefully so.

    You can quote me as a French lawyer far more knowledgeable about this issue than Donofrio.

    The misquoting of Vattel is in my opinion one of the birthers’ most egregious lies.

    ====================================================================

    Read posts on free republic:
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2675437/posts

    There are several references (post #33) to old English-French dictionaries that define native and natural as having the same meaning.

    You can also find a reference (post #75) to 1720 translation of Cicero’s letters. It uses the phrase “natural born Citizen”.

    If you think Donofrio misquoted Vattel – post your thoughts on FreeRepublic- don’t just preach here to the choir.

    Vattel says the following about citizenship:

    Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
    The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ”

    It is clear that Obama is not a NBC.

  178. Lupin says:
    February 18, 2011 at 5:41 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Read posts on free republic:
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2675437/posts

    There are several references (post #33) to old English-French dictionaries that define native and natural as having the same meaning.

    You can also find a reference (post #75) to 1720 translation of Cicero’s letters. It uses the phrase “natural born Citizen”.

    If you think Donofrio misquoted Vattel – post your thoughts on FreeRepublic- don’t just preach here to the choir.

    Vattel says the following about citizenship:

    Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
    The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ”

    It is clear that Obama is not a NBC.

    This is complete and utter rubbish, probably deliberate lies to bolster the “cause”.

    I tried posting several rational and objective posts on Vattel (and only on Vattel and I took great pains to say I had otherwise no opinions about Obama’s legitimacy) on both Dr Kate and FR and they were deleted in less than ten minutes (!!!) and I was immediately banned.

    According to Vattel, Obama is definitely a natural-born citizen, assuming that one chooses to equate that term with the ones Vattel uses. (Which in itself is debatable.)

    Until you find even a single French jurist (like myself) who agrees with your coterie of grifters, hucksters and cheaters (not to mention ignoramuses when it comes to French Law), you have zero credibility.

    (But then what else is new?)

    Let me make it clear: you will not find any, because Apuzzo’s and Donofrio’s interpretations of Vattel are blindingly false.

    The mere fact that a couple of second-rate American shysters even try to pass themselves off as French legal scholars is patently ridiculous.

  179. Keith says:
    February 18, 2011 at 6:07 am  (Quote)

    Sef:
    With all the talk about sock puppets her I thought this might be of interest http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All

    I have been getting more and more suspicious about this for some time now. This just confirms it.

  180. Keith says:
    February 18, 2011 at 6:13 am  (Quote)

    Lupin: Until you find even a single French jurist (like myself) who agrees with your coterie of grifters, hucksters and cheaters (not to mention ignoramuses when it comes to French Law), you have zero credibility.

    (But then what else is new?)

    Let me make it clear: you will not find any, because Apuzzo’s and Donofrio’s interpretations of Vattel are blindingly false.

    The mere fact that a couple of second-rate American shysters even try to pass themselves off as French legal scholars is patently ridiculous

    Hey, don’t hold back Lupin!

    Tell us what you really think!

    😉

  181. Scientist says:
    February 18, 2011 at 7:01 am  (Quote)

    nc1: I say

    Who cares what some long-dead Swiss/French/Prussian writer says? Aristotle believed that the heart, not the brain, was where thinking took place. People believed and believe all kinds of nonsense. So what? You can bow down before dead people if you like, but I refuse to.

  182. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 10:06 am  (Quote)

    Lupin: Vattel says the following about citizenship:

    And Blackstone said this about “natural born”:

    “The children of aliens, born here in England, are generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such.”

    And what Swift said about “natural born”:

    “The children of aliens born in this state are considerded as natural born subjects and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”

    And what Rawle said about “natural born”:

    “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution”

    Ok, so you choose to believe a guy(Vattel) who never set foot in the United States and died even before the Declaration of Independence was written, over a guy who taught law to the founders (Blackstone), a guy who became the Chief Justice of the Connecticutt Supreme Court (Swift) and a guy who was appointed by President Washington to be the United States District Attorney for Pennsylvania (Rawle).

    Is it true, you weren’t born in the United States? Well, as James Madison said allegiance comes from where you are born, not your parents. Do you disagree with him too?

  183. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 11:09 am  (Quote)

    Sorry Lupin, obviously not meant for you.

  184. The Magic M says:
    February 18, 2011 at 11:09 am  (Quote)

    > so you choose to believe a guy(Vattel) who never set foot in the United States and died even before the Declaration of Independence was written

    … and whose book didn’t even have a translation that contained the words “natural born” before the Constitution was written.

    But you see, the Constitution obviously incorporates Vattel’s Law of Nations. 😉

    The crazy is so strong in the birthers that they don’t argue much about Vattel’s importance, it is clear to them by simply misunderstanding the Constitution in the way they need to misunderstand it.

    As I’ve said, birthers believe the Founders were pranksters who sneaked in an alternative meaning of “natural born” (contradictory to the 400+ years of the established term) and the only clue they’ve left is the reference to “The Law of Nations”. Just so that 200+ years later, we all can have a laugh about the latest-hitting punchline in the history of jokes.

  185. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 11:15 am  (Quote)

    nc1: Vattel says the following about citizenship:

    Let me repeat myself, this time for NC1,

    And Blackstone said this about “natural born”:

    “The children of aliens, born here in England, are generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such.”

    And what Swift said about “natural born”:

    “The children of aliens born in this state are considerded as natural born subjects and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”

    And what Rawle said about “natural born”:

    “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution”

    Ok, so you choose to believe a guy(Vattel) who never set foot in the United States and died even before the Declaration of Independence was written, over a guy who taught law to the founders (Blackstone), a guy who became the Chief Justice of the Connecticutt Supreme Court (Swift) and a guy who was appointed by President Washington to be the United States District Attorney for Pennsylvania (Rawle).

    Is it true, you weren’t born in the United States? Well, as James Madison said allegiance comes from where you are born, not your parents. Do you disagree with him too?

    Update:

    At the time the Constitution was written, the terms “natural born subject” and “natural born citizen” were used interchangeably.

    Therefore, President Obama by virtue of his birth in Hawaii is a “natural born citizen”.

  186. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 11:18 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: the only clue they’ve left is the reference to “The Law of Nations”.

    Sounds like we need to get Benjamin Franklin Gates on it.

  187. Sef says:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:38 pm  (Quote)

    This is what these AZ nutcases are all about: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41654874/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001 I don’t think a sufficiently hellish place has been reserved yet for someone of this ilk.

  188. Rickey says:
    February 18, 2011 at 3:02 pm  (Quote)

    G:

    Of course it will have nothing but the hilarious result of getting all their gullible followers all hot and moist, just to be completely cold showered by yet another simple one-word “denied” from the Supremes…

    Precisely.

    I have written to Bob Unruh a couple of times, taking great care to explain to him how the Supreme Court works. No response from the respondents, combined with no call for a response from even a single justice = no grant of certiorari.

    I first learned about this from Dwight Sullivan at CAAFlog. I put it to the test, and sure enough every case in which SCOTUS has granted cert there has been a response from the respondent(s). The only time that SCOTUS will consider granting cert without a response is if the respondent foolishly ignores a request for a response.

    So WND definitely knows better, but they would rather pander to their readers than give them the truth. No surprise there.

  189. G says:
    February 18, 2011 at 3:05 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: This is what these AZ nutcases are all about: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41654874/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001 I don’t think a sufficiently hellish place has been reserved yet for someone of this ilk.

    UGH! That is just shameful and disgusting! There is something really wrong going on out there when political bigotry has gone that far…

    If people can’t leave their political or prejudicial leanings at home, they have no business in our military, as police, as first responders, fire-fighters, medical, etc.

  190. FUTTHESHUCKUP says:
    February 18, 2011 at 4:46 pm  (Quote)

    gorefan:
    It looks like the Supreme Court is getting ready to smackdown Hollister again:

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-678.htm

    And WND is all excited

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=264897

    Didn’t they just recently deny that case after a conference of the court? Isn’t this guy is asking for trouble by refiling it after it was just denied by the whole court?

  191. FUTTHESHUCKUP says:
    February 18, 2011 at 5:26 pm  (Quote)

    Typical birther klan recipe for “success” – if at first you don’t succeed, annoy the judge. lmao

  192. Rickey says:
    February 18, 2011 at 7:06 pm  (Quote)

    FUTTHESHUCKUP: Didn’t they just recently deny that case after a conference of the court? Isn’t this guy is asking for trouble by refiling it after it was just denied by the whole court?

    It’s a request for a rehearing, which is permitted by the rules. Hemenway’s argument is that Kagan and Sotomayor should have recused themselves from the first conference. Of course, the Hollister petition wasn’t even discussed at the conference, because it already had been dead-filed due to lack of interest from any of the Justices, so there was nothing from Kagin and Sotomayor to recuse themselves from.

  193. Keith says:
    February 18, 2011 at 7:24 pm  (Quote)

    nc1: Vattel says the following about citizenship:

    Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
    The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ”

    You left out this bit:


    § 214. Naturalization.(58)

    A nation, or the sovereign who represents it, may grant to a foreigner the quality of citizen, by admitting him into the body of the political society. This is called naturalization. There are some states in which the sovereign cannot grant to a foreigner all the rights of citizens, — for example, that of holding public offices — and where, consequently, he has the power of granting only an imperfect naturalization. It is here a regulation of the fundamental law, which limits the power of the prince. In other states, as in England and Poland, the prince cannot naturalize a single person, without the concurrence of the nation, represented by its deputies. Finally, there are states, as, for instance, England, where the single circumstance of being born in the country naturalizes the children of a foreigner.

    It is clear that Vattel understood that England followed jus soli, and that the US followed England’s example, and that Obama is a “Natural Born Citizen”.

  194. Keith says:
    February 18, 2011 at 7:35 pm  (Quote)

    Sef:
    This is what these AZ nutcases are all about: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41654874/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?GT1=43001 I don’t think a sufficiently hellish place has been reserved yet for someone of this ilk.

    Agreed, this stinks.

    I am, however, reserving my judgment for now.

    The crew was not a first responder, they were dispatched for follow up duties, not emergency response. All victims had already been evacuated.

    The individual named was a political supporter of Gabby’s, and was personally distraught. I don’t know what the ‘political argument’ with his crew was about, but someone may have made a distasteful, cynical, snide remark about just about any semi-related topic that set him off (e.g. racist or sexist or just plain offensive about the political situation?) .

    Understand, I am not attempting to excuse the behavior, and the 28 year veteran has taken responsibility for his actions and resigned. I am merely trying to get the facts of the situation before I condemn him altogether.

  195. gorefan says:
    February 18, 2011 at 8:22 pm  (Quote)

    nc1: Read posts on free republic:

    Ok I read the freerepublic thread. i posted to freerepublic some time ago but they banned me. No reason was given. Guess they could not handle the truth.

    But here is what they are saying, Vattel editions existed when the Constitution was written and the phrase natural born citizen also existed as early as 1720. So what. This is really nothing that new or surprising. The 1720 translation of Cicero only uses the phrase “natural born citizen”, it doesn’t define it. And the denizens of FR still cannot provided any proof that the founders used Vattel to define citizenship. And we know that the founders used the term natural born subject in 1732. And also demanded that that by the law of nature, they be treated like natural born subjects as late as 1774. And that they continued to use the term natural born subject as late as 1795.

    And by that definition the President is a natural born citizen

  196. Paul Pieniezny says:
    February 19, 2011 at 5:25 pm  (Quote)

    Keith:

    (quoting nc1, or rather nc1 quoting De Vattel) The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. …The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent.

    Surprise, surprise, you need fatherS – meaning that if we use the birfers’ way of thought, a natural born citizen must have at leat two citizen fathers, ie being born into a male same-sex marriage. Yes, right.

    Me and Lupin have already proven that in light of French vocabulary and grammar used at the time Vattel wrote, the first sentence should properly be translated from the French version as “The indigenes or natives are those born in the country and related by blood to a citizen or citizens.”

    Obama was born in the country and his mother was a citizen. You lose.

    As for the father argument, in case you want to go for that one, a later edition said that under certain circumstances (death, divorce, abandonment) the mother suffices. You lose.

    And the reason why any deus ex machina proving that the natural born citizen stipulation was based on Van Vattel (wonder where it was hidden for 200+ years) would cause SCOTUS to look at the original French version – is that the natural born citizen phrase was never mentioned in any translation that the Framers had available.

    Absent that, the Ankeny court has already decided how relevant Von Wattel still is today “a philosophical treatise from the 18th century”.

  197. Slartibartfast says:
    February 19, 2011 at 5:33 pm  (Quote)

    Paul Pieniezny: you need fatherS

    So what you are saying is that Vattel was a proponent of gay marriage and gay adoption, right? Man – translating Vattel is complicated!

  198. obsolete says:
    February 20, 2011 at 1:07 am  (Quote)

    Hilarious!
    nc1 suggests we post on FreeRepublic, which bans obots immediately and erases our posts.

    I’ll make you a deal nc1- I’ll register on FR, and when they ban more for doing no more that arguing against birtherism, you will self-ban yourself here and stop posting- agreed?

  199. obsolete says:
    February 20, 2011 at 1:07 am  (Quote)

    Should read: “no more than arguing against birtherism”

  200. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 20, 2011 at 2:19 pm  (Quote)

    obsolete:
    Hilarious!
    nc1 suggests we post on FreeRepublic, which bans obots immediately and erases our posts.

    I’ll make you a deal nc1- I’ll register on FR, and when they ban more for doing no more that arguing against birtherism, you will self-ban yourself here and stop posting- agreed?

    Of course in NC1’s world people can post at Free Republic but in reality only certain people are allowed to. Most of us have been over to free republic and have tried posting over there only to have our comments censored, our accounts banned and virtually little to no explanation. This is how most birther sites act. Look at the contrast NC1, you are able to freely post whatever crackpot theories you have over at this site while none of us can freely post at freerepublic. We’ve had several freepers over here or should we say 1 or 2 depending on the amount of sockpuppets. I know Danae came over here for a while but once people picked apart her “long form” story she fled. Then there was dancingrabbit, draggingcanoe, etc who came here lying about quotes, misquoting, bsing. He was banned for cause, there was an explanation for why he even got another chance when he came back as a sockpuppet only to do the same thing.

  201. Northland10 says:
    February 20, 2011 at 3:16 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Of course in NC1′s world people can post at Free Republic but in reality only certain people are allowed to.

    There is not enough water in the world for the amount of showers I would need after hanging out at that site. During the election, when Colin Powell endorsed Obama, there was a thread where many angry Freepers posted their displeasure at Powell. I would have no problem with them arguing policy or how they feel his opinion was in error, however, that was not their point. Instead, they were angry that he had been disrespectful to his benefactors Reagan and Bush. They stated that Reagan and Bush had been so kind to to give him a job he needed to be more grateful. In short, to the Freepers posting, he was not selected due to the strengths he would bring in foreign policy and defense but only because Reagan and Bush wanted to be nice and he should just shut up and be a good house __________.

    In the few times I have been there, I have seen a few well principled conservatives, but it has been hard to get past that absolute rubbish I read back in 08. Those people had created a pile of stink that not even Mike Rowe would put on his show.

  202. nc1 says:
    February 21, 2011 at 3:28 am  (Quote)

    obsolete:
    Hilarious!
    nc1 suggests we post on FreeRepublic, which bans obots immediately and erases our posts.

    I’ll make you a deal nc1- I’ll register on FR, and when they ban more for doing no more that arguing against birtherism, you will self-ban yourself here and stop posting- agreed?

    When did I ask you or anybody else here to post on free republic?

    I provided a link to a topic on free republic because it had several images of old English-French dictionaries proving that words native and natural had the same meaning. I asked Lupin to look at it.

  203. Greg says:
    February 21, 2011 at 3:43 am  (Quote)

    When did you aak anyone to post on FR? I don’t know, remember this?

    If you think Donofrio misquoted Vattel – post your thoughts on FreeRepublic- don’t just preach here to the choir.

    I guess not even you read the stuff you post.

  204. Lupin says:
    February 21, 2011 at 5:18 am  (Quote)

    nc1: I provided a link to a topic on free republic because it had several images of old English-French dictionaries proving that words native and natural had the same meaning. I asked Lupin to look at it.

    Let me see if I can explain it simply.

    In his writings on the topic, Vattel uses three words: indigène, naturel et citoyen. But at no point does he combine them or equate them. If Vatter had wished to establish a difference such as the one the birther clain (ie: “natural(-born) citizen” he would have written about ” citoyens naturels” or ‘ citoyens indigenes”. He never does. You may INFER or SUPPOSE that ” naturel” or ‘ indigene” describe a separate class of ” citoyens” but Vattel simply does not say so, when it would have been easy for him to do so.

    I said this entire issue was highly DEBATABLE (my term) because that’s exactly what it is.

    Further, Donofrio and Apuzzo, being incompetent, meretricious, or both, ignore the obvious and unarguable group plural of ” parents” which means EITHER parents, not BOTH. I find it hard to consider this a simple mistake as English uses the same terminology (e.g. ” only children whose parents are members of the club may use the pool” = either parent, not both)

    Finally, ignorance of period French also lead Donofrio and Apuzzo to conclude that ” parens” (the t was then omitted in the plural form) means father/mother. That is simply not true. It means blood relatives. Even today, in modern French, I could say: ” mes parents viennent de Corse” which might mean ” my family comes from Corsica” ie: my grandparents, not necessarily my father and/or mother, or ” j’ai des parents qui habitent a Paris”, meaning : I have family living in Paris” — it could be an uncle or a cousin — and everyone French would understand what I mean.

    And finally as someone already pointed out, Vattel also recognized the alternate method of granting citizenship by jus soli as practiced in England. He goes out of his way to point out that this exists and it is equally acceptable.

    The absolutely, indisputable fact is that there is NOTHING in Vattel that helps the birthers’ cause. Absolutely nothing. Zero., Nada. Zilch.

    This was explained here in great details to Apuzzo, who has meretriciously continued to spread his lies.

  205. The Magic M says:
    February 21, 2011 at 9:51 am  (Quote)

    I provided a link to a topic on free republic because it had several images of old English-French dictionaries proving that words native and natural had the same meaning.I asked Lupin to look at it.

    Then why are birthers still claiming that “native born” and “natural born” are two different things?
    Actually, if you birthers wanted to, you could claim that “natural born”, “native born”, “citizen at birth” and “naturalized at birth” are all different things that make up different classes of citizens.
    Just like you could claim that “father”, “male parent”, “daddy”, “dad” and “pops” are all different kinds of relatives. It just wouldn’t make any sense this side of the hill.

    > The absolutely, indisputable fact is that there is NOTHING in Vattel that helps the birthers’ cause. Absolutely nothing. Zero., Nada. Zilch.

    And additionally one would have to believe that not only did Vattel dictate the “secret meaning” of “natural born citizen”, but that there is also a 200+ year coverup of that fact orchestrated by the evil conspiracy.

    I’ve said all along that this is one of the reasons the birthers focus so much on the birth certificate: Because the “missing original long form” could fool enough gullible people to create a significant minority. (You don’t even need the “all of Congress and both major parties and courts and military are part of a conspiracy” for that.)
    To make people believe in the Vattel theory would be a lot harder since it involves making them believe in that kind of vast conspiracy theory in the first place. And we all know how well that went for “chemtrails” or “the lizard people” or “hollow Earth”. 😉

  206. Lupin says:
    February 21, 2011 at 10:21 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: And we all know how well that went for “chemtrails” or “the lizard people” or “hollow Earth”.

    Death to the heretic! 🙂

  207. nc1 says:
    February 21, 2011 at 6:28 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: Let me see if I can explain it simply.

    In his writings on the topic, Vattel uses three words: indigène, naturel et citoyen. But at no point does he combine them or equate them. If Vatter had wished to establish a difference such as the one the birther clain (ie: “natural(-born) citizen” he would have written about ” citoyens naturels”or ‘citoyens indigenes”. He never does. You may INFER or SUPPOSE that ” naturel”or ‘indigene” describe a separate class of ” citoyens”but Vattel simply does not say so, when it would have been easy for him to do so.

    I said this entire issue was highly DEBATABLE (my term) because that’s exactly what it is.

    Further, Donofrio and Apuzzo, being incompetent, meretricious, or both, ignore the obvious and unarguable group plural of ” parents”which means EITHER parents, not BOTH. I find it hard to consider this a simple mistake as English uses the same terminology (e.g. ” only children whose parents are members of the club may use the pool” = either parent, not both)

    Finally, ignorance of period French also lead Donofrio and Apuzzo to conclude that ” parens” (the t was then omitted in the plural form) means father/mother. That is simply not true. It means blood relatives. Even today, in modern French, I could say: ” mes parents viennent de Corse” which might mean ” my family comes from Corsica”ie: my grandparents, not necessarily my father and/or mother, or ” j’ai des parents qui habitent a Paris”, meaning : I have family living in Paris” — it could be an uncle or a cousin — and everyone French would understand what I mean.

    And finally as someone already pointed out, Vattel also recognized the alternate method of granting citizenship by jus soli as practiced in England. He goes out of his way to point out that this exists and it is equally acceptable.

    The absolutely, indisputable fact is that there is NOTHING in Vattel that helps the birthers’cause. Absolutely nothing. Zero., Nada. Zilch.

    This was explained here in great details to Apuzzo, who has meretriciously continued to spread his lies.

    ===================================================================

    1. Could you provide the analysis of the rest of that paragraph in Vatell’s book, let’s not just focus on the sentence containing disputed phrase “natural-born citizens” :

    “..The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ”

    2. What does the US naturalization law from 1790 say about children born in USA, whose father was a foreigner?

  208. gorefan says:
    February 21, 2011 at 6:48 pm  (Quote)

    nc1: What does the US naturalization law from 1790 say about children born in USA, whose father was a foreigner?

    Nothing

    But what does Justice Swift say about children born to aliens in 1795 Connecticutt?

    (Hint: He paraphases Blackstone.)

  209. Paul Pieniezny says:
    February 21, 2011 at 7:42 pm  (Quote)

    Intergalactic message to nc1. Doctor Who wants the Tardis back.

    (meaning; stop using a translation that was unavailable to those who wrote the Constitution, or acknowledge that you now need to have two fathers to be a natural born citizen)

  210. Sef says:
    February 21, 2011 at 8:23 pm  (Quote)

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Intergalactic message to nc1. Doctor Who wants the Tardis back.

    (meaning; stop using a translation that was unavailable to those who wrote the Constitution, or acknowledge that you now need to have two fathers to be a natural born citizen)

    Would that they would wander into “the crack.” But we would miss all the fun as we would never have known of their existence.

  211. nc1 says:
    February 22, 2011 at 3:50 am  (Quote)

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Intergalactic message to nc1. Doctor Who wants the Tardis back.

    (meaning; stop using a translation that was unavailable to those who wrote the Constitution, or acknowledge that you now need to have two fathers to be a natural born citizen)

    Why are you jumping into conversation if you are not willing to understand its context?

    Lupin claims to be an expert in Vattel.

    I provided a complete translated paragraph asking for his comment on that translation – translation from French was the main point in earlier conversation about the phrase “natural born citizen”. In that post he was focused only on one sentence.

    I hope he will translate the rest of the paragraph from French and provide his opinion whether the rest of the paragraph (of the original text) provides an explanation/justification for translator using the phrase “natural-born citizen”.

  212. The Magic M says:
    February 22, 2011 at 4:26 am  (Quote)

    > whether the rest of the paragraph (of the original text) provides an explanation/justification for translator using the phrase “natural-born citizen”

    What does it matter? If the Founders put “natural-born citizen” into the Constitution and “indigènes” was only translated as “natural-born citizen” years after that, how can the latter (re-)define the former?
    How can there be any probability, let alone certainty, that the Founders magically knew that Vattel’s “indigènes” would be translated to “natural-born citizen” years later?
    Or are you now claiming that Vattel’s translator is the proper authority to decide what a term in the US Constitution is supposed to mean?
    (In fact, this is why the birthers have to claim that the Constitution means Vattel’s book when it talks about “law of nations” – because there is no other way to argue that a translation of Vattel’s term retroactively determined the meaning of a term in the Constitution backwards in time.)

    Let me give you an analogy of this idiocy:
    Suppose there was a Swiss bagpipe orchestra called “Le Monstre de Loch Ness”. 10 years after the Constitution was written, this group toured the US under the name “Congress” and published an album called “Rule of Naturalization”. Now you are claiming that the Constitution refers to this Swiss bagpipe orchestra whenever it talks about “Congress” and your proof is that the Constitution clearly refers to “Rule of Naturalization” and that George Washington said many times that he was a big fan of the band.

  213. Lupin says:
    February 22, 2011 at 5:28 am  (Quote)

    nc1: “..The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. ”

    This “translation” is riddled with debatable choices and a few errors as well. Please provide the original French text and I’ll be happy to enlighten you, word by word.

    This is a BAD translation.

  214. Lupin says:
    February 22, 2011 at 6:18 am  (Quote)

    For argument’s sake and to save everyone some time here is my annotated translation of that famous Book 1, XIX. Art. 212 of Vattel which the birthers rely on:

    212. Citizens are members of a civil society (1) and are linked to said society by certain duties and since they subject to its authorities, they enjoy some of its rewards. Natives or indigenes (2) are those born in that country from blood relatives (3) who are already citizens. (4) A society being only able to survive and perpetuate itself through the children of its citizens, said children inherit the status of their parents and all their rights and obligations. (5) A society is supposed to want this as a consequence of its own desire for self-perpetuation and one shall assume that each citizen who becomes a member of said society will by right bequeath that same status to his or her own children. (6) It follows that the homeland (7) of the parents (8) will therefore also be that of their children, and they become citizens in turn by simple tacit consent. We shall see later if, when they reach their majority, they can renounce their rights and what then they owe to the society in which they were born. I say that to belong to a homeland, one must be born of parents who are citizens. (9) For if you are born of a foreigner, then that country is your place of birth without being your homeland.(10)

    (1) Note Vattel does not say country (pays) when he could have. So an assumption must be made here.
    (2) At no point does Vattel equate them with “citizens” despite the last sentence of the paragraph, so there is ambiguity here; there is also no reason to assume this means “natural-born” when English has words like “Natives” and “Indigenes” which are closer literal translations.
    (3) in French, “parents”
    (4) Taken literally this means everyone who is a native is indeed a citizen, hence the distinction between “nbc” and just citizen is wrong.
    (5) This reaffirms the point made in (4). This is simple jus sanguinis with no further distinctions being made.
    (6) Ditto.
    (7) Vattel uses the word “patrie” (homeland) and not “pays” (country); it is a mistake to just equate one with the other, especially when Vattel could have used the other word.
    (8) This is when Vattel first uses the word “père” (father) in French in the first edition, but as pointed out, this was footnoted to invclude mothers in the second edition; thus as a translator’s prerogative I am at least justified in using the gender-neutral “parent” here.
    (9) Ditto. This of course depending on one’s interpretation contradicts the beginning of this paragraph.
    (10) This is where the difference between “country” and “homeland” comes to play, to the effect that (as was the case with Ancient Greece, esp. Athens; I refer you to what I wrote here on that topic several months ago) one might be a citizen of a country, and still not be a son or daughter of the homeland. We are now veering into distinctions of citizenship which are not elucidated further by Vattel and frankly contradict his opening paragraph.

    Ultimately the point is: there is not and indeed CANNOT BE a uniformly acceptable translation of Vattel, because certain assumptions may vary, and they do matter a lot in a case like this. The most charitable thing I can say (being kind) in that the “version” used by Apuzzo and Donofrio is, say, 75% heavily loaded against, and 25% actually incorrect.

    The best and most objective thing one can say with any degree of certitude is that there is no “smoking gun” here to “torpedo” Obama’s legitimacy.

    Note that in Art. 214, Vattel concludes: “And then there are other states such as England in which the mere birth in that country is enough to make the children of a foreigner a citizen,” removing any doubts as to his acceptance of jus soli.

  215. The Magic M says:
    February 22, 2011 at 10:18 am  (Quote)

    > This is when Vattel first uses the word “père” (father) in French in the first edition, but as pointed out, this was footnoted to invclude mothers in the second edition; thus as a translator’s prerogative I am at least justified in using the gender-neutral “parent” here.

    True, but then the proper translation would be

    “I say that to belong to a homeland, one must be born of a parent who is a citizen.”

    It’s evident that “parens” was not meant as “two parents” because the initial version had “de parens citoyens” and then “d’un père citoyen”. So if a citizen father was enough, he couldn’t have meant “two citizen parents” in the other place. (So this is proven without resorting to reasoning what he “possibly” meant; it’s undebatable.)

    So if one citizen parent is enough, the pseudo de Vattelists fall flat with their argument even if, arguendo, Vattel was authoritative, because Obama had one citizen parent.

    Of course birthers will claim that even that isn’t “certain” unless they get their million and one records from Hawaii…

  216. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 22, 2011 at 10:59 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: > This is when Vattel first uses the word “père” (father) in French in the first edition, but as pointed out, this was footnoted to invclude mothers in the second edition; thus as a translator’s prerogative I am at least justified in using the gender-neutral “parent” here.True, but then the proper translation would be “I say that to belong to a homeland, one must be born of a parent who is a citizen.”It’s evident that “parens” was not meant as “two parents” because the initial version had “de parens citoyens” and then “d’un père citoyen”. So if a citizen father was enough, he couldn’t have meant “two citizen parents” in the other place. (So this is proven without resorting to reasoning what he “possibly” meant; it’s undebatable.)So if one citizen parent is enough, the pseudo de Vattelists fall flat with their argument even if, arguendo, Vattel was authoritative, because Obama had one citizen parent.Of course birthers will claim that even that isn’t “certain” unless they get their million and one records from Hawaii…

    Vattel is always just a fallback position for birthers. Once you defeat the Vattel excuse they will fall back on the long form. When you defeat the long form excuse they will fall back on the school records claiming some foreign scholarship all based off an april fools day article.

  217. Black Lion says:
    February 22, 2011 at 11:00 am  (Quote)

    Being An ‘Eligibility Activist’ = Sending Money to WND
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    A Feb. 20 WorldNetDaily article details how WND’s Joseph Farah has “devised a 10-point program for eligibility activism.” Of those 10, eight require sending money to Farah and WND.

    Farah wants you to donate to his birther billboard campaign, buy his factually flawed birther video, stock up on birther signs, T-shirts, postcards and bumper stickers, “Donate any amount to the investigative reporting fund to find out the truth about Barack Obama,” and buy the new book by Jerome Corsi, the same guy who also apparently believes that Obama is having gay sex.

    Of the remaining two steps, one gives you the option of sending money to WND by buying a “paperback version” of WND’s downloadable “Obama eligibility primer” — which is littered with factual errors too. The final, non-costly item is signing petitions (which, of course, are hosted by WND).

    Media Matters’ Jamison Foser has computed that being the “eligibility activist” Farah wants you to be means sending Farah and WND a minimum of $96.83.

    Need any more evidence that Farah is in this for the money? You just got it.

  218. Black Lion says:
    February 22, 2011 at 11:01 am  (Quote)

    Corsi Mines The Darkest Corners Of Obama Derangement
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    Jerome Corsi unleashes a fit of high-grade Obama derangement in a Feb. 17 WorldNetDaily column that purports to be a review of WND columnist Jack Cashill’s new WND-published book “Deconstucting Obama.”

    Unsurprisingly, Corsi loves Cashill’s book, which he claims “has established a solid case that Weather Underground radical bomber Bill Ayers, not Barack Obama, is the author of the president’s autobiography, ‘Dreams from My Father.'” He goes on to declare what the “truth” is that “Ayers tries to mask with the soaring prose of ‘Dreams from My Father'”:

    Obama is a relatively inexperienced Chicago-style corrupt political hack who was trained by communists, including his mentor Frank Marshall Davis;
    in his formative years, Obama read angry black revolutionary authors and proceeded through two colleges with mediocre grades at best, submerged in a haze of marijuana smoke peppered by cocaine use; and
    Obama, with the active promotion of an uncritical mainstream media, emerged to be president of the United States, even though he cannot yet seem to locate his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate.
    From there, Corsi shifts into full-blown Obama derangement:

    Cashill’s book is required reading for anyone who wants to understand how far myth-making propagandists such as Obama advisers David Axelrod and David Plouffe have gone to advance principles of political propaganda first developed by Edward Bernays into techniques capable of transforming relatively pedestrian political hacks into the legendary stuff of rap-lyric rhapsodized “Yes, we can” chimeras.

    […]

    As Cashill argues convincingly, beyond the Obama myth-making there is a disappointing Obama reality.

    Barack Hussein Obama (or is it Barry Soetoro?) was selected by Ayers, Axelrod and Plouffe to preside over a post-modern era in which the United States slides into second place behind China.

    Corsi also goes on a weird digression of gay-bashing intertwined with his hatred of Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright:

    Ayers, Axelrod and Plouffe would go to any length, including lying, to hide the reality that Black Liberation Theology is a Marxist-derived revolutionary religion predicated on racist prejudices.

    The reader could never know that Rev. Wright and Trinity United Church of Christ championed Muslims like Louis Farrakhan and welcomed into its ranks homosexuals such as choirmaster David Young.

    Equally toxic was the mystery that Young was one of three Trinity United Church openly professed homosexuals brutally killed in yet-unsolved murders that occurred within a 40-day time span between November and December 2007, as Obama’s handlers were preparing to take his presidential campaign to the national stage.

    What Corsi appears to be alluding to is the fringe claim promoted by the likes of the discredited Wayne Madsen that Obama had an affair with Young — echoing the claims made by the discredited Larry Sinclair. If you’ll recall, WND wallowed in Sinclair’s claim, happily reporting it while making no effort to verify it, eventually abandoning it when it wouldn’t gain traction (that and the fact that Sinclair has proven to be utterly untrustworthy).

    Corsi apparently believe this fringe claim, even though he won’t come right out and say it. That makes Corsi a gutless swine. If he truly believes Obama has been operating on the down-low, he should say so instead of dropping dark, homophobic hints.

    Of course, Corsi has been more than willing to demonstrate his desperateness to take down Obama by any means necessary, including telling lies and peddling bogus documents. Why wouldn’t he treat each and every Obama smear at face value?

  220. misha says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:31 am  (Quote)

    Sef: Shawna Forde to get needled (some day).

    I might add, the two people she killed were birthright US citizens. To her and her cronies, the wrong kind.

  221. misha says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:39 am  (Quote)

    It finally happened:

    “A federal judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit claiming that President Barack Obama’s requirement that all Americans have health insurance violates the religious freedom of those who rely on God to protect them.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/22/obama-health-care-lawsuit-dismissed_n_826875.html

  223. Black Lion says:
    February 23, 2011 at 10:05 am  (Quote)

    Racism at The Post & Email

    What I consider to be the leading Birther propaganda agent, web publication The Post & Email, has dipped its toe into the ugly part of the anti Pres. Obama movement.

    The P&E offers its donors the opportunity to make “political placards,” which are graphics that are displayed in a slider at about the middle of the site’s home page.

    Or, as the P&E puts it:

    This is a way for Donors to make a statement and communicate their political thoughts, opinions and grievances in a unique manner, to other readers of the e-Newspaper.

    For as little as $1, a person can create an image and have it displayed on the P&E’s web site.

    Oh, and note this:

    Those submissions which are judged to be inappropriate will be refunded; those which are purient or judged to be spam, or intended to offend the staff of this e-Newspaper or its readers, will not be published, and a fine of $1.00 will be imposed — thus no refund will be offered.

    So, the P&E will reject those placards deemed to be “inappropriate.” I guess that means anything saying “Obama is my president” never sees the light of day.

    So, you might ask, what kind of things are people creating?

    Well, there’s an example to the left of this opinion piece. Click on it to see it in all it’s glory.

    I’m going to direct your attention to the copy in the lower right corner of the picture:

    “If you liked the “The Harlem Shuffle,” you’ll love “The Kenyan jig.”

    Nice, huh? Tell me, Mrs. Rondeau, what part of the U.S. Constitution are you honoring by printing this filth?

    We all know that “jig” is a pejorative used against blacks, a ready substitute for what is euphemistically known as the “N” word.

    And apparently, going by their own policy, this type of racist crap is just fine and dandy with Sharon Rondeau and her friends at the P&E. It’s OK by them to refer to the President of the United States as a “jig.”

    Sharon Rondeau, you are disgusting. Only a racist pig would allow this kind of tripe to be publlished on a web site. And sister, that’s not defamation of character, that’s definition of character.

    Keep the faith.

    http://www.examiner.com/birther-movement-in-national/racism-at-the-post-email

  224. Lupin says:
    February 23, 2011 at 10:10 am  (Quote)

    A propos of nothing at all, the village where I live has come up with its own website (wonders never cease) and I thought you folks might enjoy a whiff of southern France.

    http://www.chalabre.fr/

    As was revealed during an interview on Canal-plus a while ago, Obama while a student visited Southern France (not our region, more eastward: Aix-en-Provence, Marseille, etc.) (under a US passport, may I add) and reportedly and by his own admission had a great time.

  225. Black Lion says:
    February 23, 2011 at 10:27 am  (Quote)

    More fiction from the fake “White Hat” Insider…..

    “We now have an acting President, an illegal immigrant, who carried a Foreign Student Visa, and acquired his own American passport by a false declaration. There is only proof of his ineligibility to serve as the US President by Law. The fraudulent vetting and security to validate his citizenship has been alarming. Bush Sr. has lost no opportunity to enforce his will for Obama to acquiesce to Bush family demands, against which Obama now is visibly enriching himself conspiring with the Bush’s and the collective associates, using his Chicago rules to silence dissent, and maximize the asset stripping of the country. Indeed, this low caliber Manchurian Candidate was well selected and groomed for just that purpose.

    Congress must speed up and announce a wide and sweeping corruption inquiry, which can cross encompass the Bush, Clinton and Obama regimes, and request a global search for all such illegal proceeds of crime stolen under their stewardship in office. Congress must demand an answer from the Supreme Court relating to the clear judgment on this illegal fraudster. Let the Political establishment effect the solution based on the rule of law. ”

    http://tdarkcabal.blogspot.com/2011/02/white-hat-report-11-february-13-2011.html

  226. Black Lion says:
    February 23, 2011 at 11:35 am  (Quote)

    Known anti Semite Andy Martin is still trying to get his 15 minutes off President Obama…

    First 2012 Ad Coming: Obama’s Credentials; “The Ad Will Explode the Myth Propagated by Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, Karl Rove and Dick Morris…”
    ObamaRelease YourRecords on 9:25 PM

    Republican Party Presidential Candidate and conservative columnist Andy Martin holds a Manchester, New Hampshire news conference Wednesday February 23rd to preview his new presidential campaign ad. The ad features Obama authors Martin and Jerome Corsi. “This is an explosive ad,” Martin says. “I intend to defeat Barack Obama and I am well on the way to doing so. I suspect over 100 million Americans are going to ‘endorse’ this ad. It’s here. It’s clear. It’s nu-clear.

    For the first time, Barack Obama will have to defend against a genuine anti-Obama campaign ad

    Andy Martin says his anti-Obama ad is a “game changer” in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina
    ………………..

    “Wednesday we are going to release an advertisement that I believe is going to be a ‘game changer’ in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. Yes, both parties. The ad is going to initiate a process of undermining and delegitimizing Barack Obama that could possibly bring Hillary Clinton back into presidential politics.

    “I think the ad is that good. Many think it is the most ‘Reaganesque’ ad they have seen since The Gipper’s own commercials. The ad certainly will not hurt my claim that I am the candidate who is most capable of duplicating the Reagan Revolution. That’s why I call my campaign the ‘New Ronald Reagan Revolution.’

    “Now all we need is the money to saturate the air waves.

    “We have versions of the ad ready for Iowa, South Carolina and national cable TV networks.

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/02/first-2012-ad-on-obamas-credentials.html

  227. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 11:40 am  (Quote)

    Lupin:
    A propos of nothing at all, the village where I live has come up with its own website (wonders never cease) and I thought you folks might enjoy a whiff of southern France.

    http://www.chalabre.fr/

    As was revealed during an interview on Canal-plus a while ago, Obama while a student visited Southern France (not our region, more eastward: Aix-en-Provence, Marseille, etc.) (under a US passport, may I add) and reportedly and by his own admission had a great time.

    What a bleak and desolate place you live in, Lupin (that’s an example of birther ‘thinking’…) 😛

    By the way, a couple of days ago (and on a different thread) you said that no US presidents had dual citizenship – aren’t you forgetting Thomas Jefferson? (He may not have value as a precedent against the birthers due to the grandfather clause, but he was a dual citizen… I don’t know if he ever held a French passport, though).

  228. Black Lion says:
    February 23, 2011 at 11:54 am  (Quote)

    From the usual Post and Fail nonsense….A letter to Bill O’Reilly….

    “First, we are not “birthers” as you and others want the rest of the world to believe. Unlike you, we want to know the truth. We do not accept an announcement or two that could be placed by anyone or a COLB (wonder if you know what that is?) as proof that a candidate is a natural born Citizen, as stated in Article II, Section I, paragraph 5 of the U. S. Constitution, qualified to be President of my country.

    Your pontification with Megyn Kelly the other night leads me and others to suspect that you are as much a part of what is wrong with America as the 100+ years of progressive rule. You should pay more attention to Glenn Beck, who always says, “Question with impunity.” Your lack of integrity is apparent on this subject.

    As so-called journalists, maybe the question you and others should be asking is “Why has Obama spent millions of dollars on hiding his past when he could have resolved the issue with a simple authorization to release his records, even his official birth certificate, which really is not the issue, as his father was a citizen of Kenya under British rule? Wasn’t he also adopted by an Indonesian citizen, and where is the documentation of repatriation if he was born in the United States? Or do you retain American citizenship when you become a citizen of another country? I don’t know that this is what happens in that situation.

    Maybe you should be asking how he obtained the funds to attend the most prestigious schools in America? Another question which “We the People” or “birthers,” as you like to call us, do not yet have an answer for is, “How did he travel to a country (Pakistan) when it was not a country American Citizens could legally travel to?” Maybe it is of no concern to you why Obama has several social security numbers in an age of increasing identity fraud?

    Finally, why does this so-called President allow a decorated military officer to lose everything obtained over an 18-year career for asking the question of his Commander-in-Chief (Are you constitutionally qualified to be POTUS?) and be incarcerated in Ft. Leavenworth? Like the founders of this great nation, Lt. Col. Lakin did more to “Protect and Preserve” the Constitution than any politician or judge since.”

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/22/mr-oreilly-we-just-want-the-truth/comment-page-1/#comments

  229. Sef says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:13 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: For the first time, Barack Obama will have to defend against a genuine anti-Obama campaign ad

    LOL! President Obama will not need to defend anything. The media, etc, can just point out what a load of bull this silly “theory” is. Previously, Andy was “under the radar”, but things like this will just point out to everyone how loony he really is.

  230. Lupin says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:14 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast: By the way, a couple of days ago (and on a different thread) you said that no US presidents had dual citizenship – aren’t you forgetting Thomas Jefferson? (He may not have value as a precedent against the birthers due to the grandfather clause, but he was a dual citizen… I don’t know if he ever held a French passport, though).

    Is that actually correct? I never heard of it on this side of the pond. I know Thomas Paine was made a French citizen (in 1792), but Jefferson? Do you have a source for this?

  231. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:16 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: From the usual Post and Fail nonsense….A letter to Bill O’Reilly….

    That’s an awful lot of lies packed into a very small space – I’m waiting for the P&E to reach some sort of critical density and explode… I counted 17 lies, errors of fact, and mistaken assumptions (plus a bit of bigotry…).

  232. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:20 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: Is that actually correct? I never heard of it on this side of the pond. I know Thomas Paine was made a French citizen (in 1792), but Jefferson? Do you have a source for this?

    Anything you might have to add would be welcome.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=kf48AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA713&dq=nathan+dane+jefferson+citizen+france&lr=&num=100&as_brr=0&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

    and

    http://books.google.com/books?id=AWI8fmyhN5IC&pg=PA175&dq=french+citizenship+thomas+jefferson&cd=1#v=onepage&q=french%20citizenship%20thomas%20jefferson&f=false

  233. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:23 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Known anti Semite Andy Martin is still trying to get his 15 minutes off President Obama…First 2012 Ad Coming: Obama’s Credentials; “The Ad Will Explode the Myth Propagated by Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, Karl Rove and Dick Morris…”ObamaRelease YourRecords on 9:25 PM Republican Party Presidential Candidate and conservative columnist Andy Martin holds a Manchester, New Hampshire news conference Wednesday February 23rd to preview his new presidential campaign ad. The ad features Obama authors Martin and Jerome Corsi. “This is an explosive ad,” Martin says. “I intend to defeat Barack Obama and I am well on the way to doing so. I suspect over 100 million Americans are going to endorse’ this ad. It’s here. It’s clear. It’s nu-clear.For the first time, Barack Obama will have to defend against a genuine anti-Obama campaign adAndy Martin says his anti-Obama ad is a “game changer” in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina………………..“Wednesday we are going to release an advertisement that I believe is going to be a ‘game changer’ in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. Yes, both parties. The ad is going to initiate a process of undermining and delegitimizing Barack Obama that could possibly bring Hillary Clinton back into presidential politics.“I think the ad is that good. Many think it is the most Reaganesque’ ad they have seen since The Gipper’s own commercials. The ad certainly will not hurt my claim that I am the candidate who is most capable of duplicating the Reagan Revolution. That’s why I call my campaign the New Ronald Reagan Revolution.’“Now all we need is the money to saturate the air waves.“We have versions of the ad ready for Iowa, South Carolina and national cable TV networks.http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/02/first-2012-ad-on-obamas-credentials.html

    Well Andy Martin has one Reaganesque thing going for him, he has that whole southern strategy down.

  234. The Magic M says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:24 pm  (Quote)

    > an advertisement that I believe is going to be a ‘game changer’ […] I think the ad is that good […]
    Now all we need is the money to saturate the air waves

    Ah, I was expecting that. “We now have the miracle cure for cancer, we just need another $100,000 to roll it out to you people.” I sense another snake oil warning coming up…

  235. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:25 pm  (Quote)

    Wow that post and email letter is full of pretty much almost every discredited claim about Obama. It makes me wonder what type of person allows themselves to be so easily brainwashed.

  236. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:37 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Anything you might have to add would be welcome.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=kf48AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA713&dq=nathan+dane+jefferson+citizen+france&lr=&num=100&as_brr=0&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

    and

    http://books.google.com/books?id=AWI8fmyhN5IC&pg=PA175&dq=french+citizenship+thomas+jefferson&cd=1#v=onepage&q=french%20citizenship%20thomas%20jefferson&f=false

    I don’t have anything to add – it was just something I’ve known from early childhood (as my high school calculus teacher would say). Thanks for finding references for me Doc!

    A quote I liked from your second link:

    France, [Jefferson] said, was the Americans’ “true mother country, since she has assured to them their liberty and independence.”

    Lupin,

    Out of curiosity, is the American citizenship of Lafayette and his heirs a well-known fact in France?

  237. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:39 pm  (Quote)

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):
    Wow that post and email letter is full of pretty much almost every discredited claim about Obama.It makes me wonder what type of person allows themselves to be so easily brainwashed.

    Birthers, I guess… 😉

  238. G says:
    February 23, 2011 at 12:43 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion quoting The P&E: Like the founders of this great nation, Lt. Col. Lakin did more to “Protect and Preserve” the Constitution than any politician or judge since.”

    LOL! SERIOUSLY??? Wow…the delusional hyperbolic mind never ceases to overdo itself!

    BL – Between The P&E’s post & Andy Martin’s “Reganesque” Ad that will bring back HRC or whatever ….

    ….wow…just…wow…what a double dose of super-ego crazy!

  239. Black Lion says:
    February 23, 2011 at 2:41 pm  (Quote)

    G: LOL! SERIOUSLY??? Wow…the delusional hyperbolic mind never ceases to overdo itself!BL – Between The P&E’s post & Andy Martin’s “Reganesque” Ad that will bring back HRC or whatever ….….wow…just…wow…what a double dose of super-ego crazy!

    G, when the birhters happenings are slow, all we need to remind us of how insane the birthers really are is to read either the Post and Fail, Dr. Kate, or Lame Cherry and not only will we be reminded of how insane they are, but get a good laugh out of their hatred and bigotry….Andy martin is just icing on the cake….

  240. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 2:54 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: G, when the birhters happenings are slow, all we need to remind us of how insane the birthers really are is to read either the Post and Fail, Dr. Kate, or Lame Cherry and not only will we be reminded of how insane they are, but get a good laugh out of their hatred and bigotry….Andy martin is just icing on the cake….

    Speaking of Dr. Kate, has anyone checked out her new ‘protected’ (I’m not sure who she thinks she’s keeping out…) page ‘The Patriot’s Ark’?

    http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/the-patriots-ark-2/

    The password is: “revolution” (no quotes, all lowercase). But don’t tell anyone, it’s a secret…

    Be sure to peruse her latest offering on Chemtrails as well:

    http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/chemtrails-attack-north-american-weather/

  241. Bovril says:
    February 23, 2011 at 2:59 pm  (Quote)

    Alas,

    It seems that Dr K(H)ate has realized that the Sooper Seekrit Squeereel password protected “Special” area wasn’t really working…

    Bottom of the page

    “Comments are currently closed”

    I haz a sadz…… 8-(

  242. Slartibartfast says:
    February 23, 2011 at 3:09 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril:
    Alas,

    It seems that Dr K(H)ate has realized that the Sooper Seekrit Squeereel password protected “Special” area wasn’t really working…

    Bottom of the page

    “Comments are currently closed”

    I haz a sadz…… 8-(

    I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to tease you like that… I’m sure Dr. Kate is in her undisclosed location sitting on her throne of magic water cackling at us stupid obots right now…

    (I’m certain that she’s aware of everything that’s posted on the internet with her name on it – ‘you speak the devil’s name and (s)he appears…’, right?)

  243. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 23, 2011 at 3:41 pm  (Quote)

    Bovril:
    Alas,

    It seems that Dr K(H)ate has realized that the Sooper Seekrit Squeereel password protected “Special” area wasn’t really working…

    Bottom of the page

    “Comments are currently closed”

    I haz a sadz…… 8-(

    Hey, we have our own protected area, but the password is secret.

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/02/super-sekrit-area/

  244. FUTTHESHUCKUP says:
    February 23, 2011 at 5:19 pm  (Quote)

    FOR BLACK LION:

    I see the birther klan is arguing with you at the forum about the meaning of the word “jig.” “Jig” is derived from the word “jigaboo,” which is a disparaging word for an African American. It’s not a dance or a fishing lure when used in the context the P&E presented it in as the klan is saying there.

  245. misha says:
    February 23, 2011 at 9:58 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: A propos of nothing at all, the village where I live has come up with its own website

    I have bookmarked it. My wife and I want to visit, along with Angel. My addy is in my profile.

  246. misha says:
    February 23, 2011 at 10:08 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: I thought you folks might enjoy a whiff of southern France.

    I saw your village is near Andorra. I wrote this:

    “Andorra, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco Defense Pact

    MONTE CARLO – Lance Garibaldi, a spokesman for the Presidential Palace held a press conference here today, and announced the formation of LATO – the Leftovers Atlantic Treaty Organization.”

    http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s3i39831

  247. US Citizen says:
    February 24, 2011 at 12:06 am  (Quote)

    I don’t even remember my password. Not even sure I have one.
    I originally used the “US Citizen” screenname to be able to post on other WordPress blogs of birthers, but don’t recall ever being asked for a password then either.
    When I came here, I found the same screenname worked (without a password), so I joined.
    Now it’s ironic that Dr. Kate can access an area here that I can’t.
    Not even sure if it’s all a big joke or if there’s something of value there.

  248. Slartibartfast says:
    February 24, 2011 at 12:18 am  (Quote)

    US Citizen:
    I don’t even remember my password. Not even sure I have one.
    I originally used the “US Citizen” screenname to be able to post on other WordPress blogs of birthers, but don’t recall ever being asked for a password then either.
    When I came here, I found the same screenname worked (without a password), so I joined.
    Now it’s ironic that Dr. Kate can access an area here that I can’t.
    Not even sure if it’s all a big joke or if there’s something of value there.

    US citizen,

    It’s not your password, its Doc’s password – as he said, it’s secret. Dr. Kate doesn’t know it – she’s got her own password (it’s not secret, it’s ‘revolution’ – that’s why she has a problem and hence Borvil has a sadz… – if her password were secret things might be different). No one should come out and tell you what the password is – not because it wouldn’t be secret then, but because it’s more fun if fewer people know that it is secret. Can you figure out what secret is? 😉

  249. Slartibartfast says:
    February 24, 2011 at 12:31 am  (Quote)

    US Citizen: Not even sure if it’s all a big joke or if there’s something of value there.

    I assure you it is priceless…

  250. Lupin says:
    February 24, 2011 at 2:43 am  (Quote)

    misha: I have bookmarked it. My wife and I want to visit, along with Angel. My addy is in my profile.

    Let me know here or through DKos, and I’ll email you. We’ll be happy to take you to lunch .

  251. Lupin says:
    February 24, 2011 at 2:52 am  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast: Lupin,

    Out of curiosity, is the American citizenship of Lafayette and his heirs a well-known fact in France?

    I didn’t know about his heirs, but Lafayette himself, yes, I knew that. (Which may not constitute a “well-known” fact :-))

    Thomas Pane’s French citiozenship is — shall we say, reasonably known? The French love Thomas Payne.

    May I recommend a movie starring Thomas Paine: THE NIGHT IN VARENNES
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That_Night_in_Varennes

    Well worth seeing.

    Thomas Jefferson, I did not know. That must be rather obscure. But the Doc’s sources are unimpeachable.

    On the other hand I still could not find a French source on French google when I googled “Thomas Jefferson citoyen français” and “Thomas Jefferson citoyenneté française” This is rather odd.

  252. Paul Pieniezny says:
    February 24, 2011 at 3:58 am  (Quote)

    Lupin: Let me know here or through DKos, and I’ll email you. We’ll be happy to take you to lunch .

    Enamoured of Southern France. A Ghent dancing master used to have a gîte in the Cahors area. Village with 50 inhabitants. Went to Rocamadour. Discovered that Bergerac is not a Channel Island place.

    To get closer to your place, I seem to remember doing some rafting in the Carcassonne area. And we will be in Argelès in August for a fortnight.

    As for Thomas Jefferson, the French revolutionaries seem to have offered French citizenship to a lot of American politicians, even George Washington (which is indeed rather funny, since Washington was a descendant of Huguenots and therefore already entitled to French citizenship) – only Payne and Jefferson seem to have accepted it. I read somewhere that Hamilton too got an offer and refused.

    And congratulations on pointing out the difference between patrie (fatherland or mother country) and pays (country). I had missed that one. You may be interested to know that Vattel uses “parens” with the meaning relatives elsewhere in Le droit des Gens:

    “ou s’ils meurent sans tester, de laisser leurs proches parens héritiers (c) BODIN. Ibid). ”
    “A Athènes, la Loi permettoit aux parens de celui qui avoit été assassiné dans un pays étranger, de saisir jusqu’à trois personnes de ce pays-lÃ, & de les détenir, jusqu’Ã-ce que le meurtrier eût été puni ou livré (a) DEMOSTH. Orat. adv. Aristocrat.).”

    And that’s just Tome I, Livre II. I also found a 17th century jesuit grammarian (Strunk would get a heart attack) claiming that the use of “parens” meaning “father and mother” was informal and to be avoided. OED also claims that the use of parents meaning “relatives” is now obsolete in English, and occurred under the influence of Latin languages – blaming it more or less on careless translating, I guess.

    It would be funny if all thia ever made it into a US court, but Ankeny established Vattel’s Droit des Gens as merely a philosophical treatise from the 18th century (they forget to mention “predating the Constitution”).

  253. The Magic M says:
    February 24, 2011 at 5:15 am  (Quote)

    > It’s not a dance or a fishing lure when used in the context the P&E presented it

    Especially since there is no reasonable explanation why the person in the ad would be dancing an Irish (!) folk dance in Kenya…

  254. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 24, 2011 at 8:51 am  (Quote)

    US Citizen: Not even sure if it’s all a big joke or if there’s something of value there.

    Oh, it’s a joke, but the password remains secret.

  255. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 24, 2011 at 8:58 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: > It’s not a dance or a fishing lure when used in the context the P&E presented it Especially since there is no reasonable explanation why the person in the ad would be dancing an Irish (!) folk dance in Kenya…

    Unless the Obama family removed the original apostrophe from their name and were really the O’Bamas

  256. The Magic M says:
    February 24, 2011 at 9:24 am  (Quote)

    Don’t give the Irish Chapter of the birther foundation any ideas. 😉

  257. Black Lion says:
    February 24, 2011 at 10:29 am  (Quote)

    FUTTHESHUCKUP: FOR BLACK LION:I see the birther klan is arguing with you at the forum about the meaning of the word “jig.” “Jig” is derived from the word “jigaboo,” which is a disparaging word for an African American. It’s not a dance or a fishing lure when used in the context the P&E presented it in as the klan is saying there.

    Fut, and if you look at who had an issue with the word “jig”, it was our old friend and spammer Squeeks….As usual she was attempting to make it into some sort of issue….

  258. Black Lion says:
    February 24, 2011 at 7:59 pm  (Quote)

    More Obama fearmongering….Below is an email I received….

    NEW PETITION! Defend the Defense of Marriage Act, Marriage between One Man One Woman. Select, sign, WE WILL FAX your petition to 535 Congressmen/Senators now!

    Obama: Force Homosexual Marriage on all 50 States. Take Action!

    This week the Obama Administration ordered the Justice Department to stop defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] which prohibits homosexual “marriage” and defines traditional marriage between one man and one woman. All 50 states will soon be forced to welcome homosexual “marriage” in federal court, unless their individual members of Congress intervene. The Hill newspaper reports U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder left open the possibility that individual Congressmen would be permitted to defend DOMA law, if they choose to join lawsuits in place of the Obama Administration.

    Associated Press reports, “In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage. Attorney General Eric Holder said President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.”

    At a December news conference, Obama said his position on gay marriage is “constantly evolving.” [It’s not evolving. He wants gay marriage.] But Traditional Values Coalition Director Andrea Lafferty said, “This unprecedented power grab demands the immediate reaction of the United States House of Representatives, who must do everything possible to fight back against what can only be described as a despotic and alarming attack on the rule of law.”

    Congress has authority to defend traditional marriage DOMA lawsuits if the President won’t. Will your Congressman defend traditional marriage? Let’s ask them. Call 202-225-3121, and then let’s bury them all in fax paper.

    Please select here to SIGN NEW, URGENT PETITION to DEFEND MARRIAGE AND DOMA IN COURT, and STOP ENDORSING HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, and we will auto-fax your petition to all 535 Senators and Congressmen (saving you much time!)

    The Justice Department had defended the act in court until now. The move quickly drew praise from homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA)–> who told TPM news: “It’s great news…I got some indication they were thinking about their position and I urged them to go ahead with it. I thought there would be no political problem.” The move drew swift rebuke from Speaker John Boehner (R-OH)’s spokesman Michael Steel: “While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the president will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation.”

    But here’s the good news: The Hill newspaper reports AG Holder left open the possibility that individual Congressmen would be permitted to defend DOMA law. “While both the wisdom and the legality of Section 3 of DOMA will continue to be the subject of both extensive litigation and public debate, this administration will no longer assert its constitutionality in court,” Holder said. “I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option. The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.”

    But is your Congressman willing to defend DOMA in court? If not, then all 50 states will be forced to embrace homosexual “marriage” by President Obama’s failure to defend the law in courts everywhere, nationwide. Let’s take action…

    Please select here to SIGN NEW, URGENT PETITION to DEFEND MARRIAGE, DOMA, AND STOP ENDORSING HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, and we will automatically fax your petition to all 535 Senators and Congressmen (saving you much time!)

    Friends, our nation will soon endorse homosexual “marriage” in all 50 states, if your Congressman doesn’t take a stand to defend DOMA in court, since Obama won’t. Let’s take a stand today, and demand Congress defend the 1996 DOMA law in court.

    God Bless you, in Jesus’ name,

    Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

  259. misha says:
    February 24, 2011 at 8:41 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Friends, our nation will soon endorse homosexual “marriage” in all 50 states, if your Congressman doesn’t take a stand to defend DOMA in court, since Obama won’t. Let’s take a stand today, and demand Congress defend the 1996 DOMA law in court.
    God Bless you, in Jesus’ name,
    Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

    A German last name – figures. Why are fascists usually Christian? Don’t forget how Ted Haggard and his coterie harassed Wiccans in Colorado Springs, forcing at least ten to sell their homes, and move away:

    http://jeffsharlet.com/content/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/soldiers_of_christ.pdf

  260. misha says:
    February 24, 2011 at 8:48 pm  (Quote)

    Here’s more from WackoNutDaily:

    “A U.S. Navy chaplain who prayed “in Jesus’ name” as his conscience dictated is being ejected from the military service “in retaliation” for his victorious battle to change Navy policy that required religious rites be “non-sectarian.” My career is over, my family is now homeless, we’ve lost a million dollar pension…”

    Sounds like Lakin.

    http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=39655

  261. Sef says:
    February 24, 2011 at 9:06 pm  (Quote)

    misha:
    Here’s more from WackoNutDaily:

    “A U.S. Navy chaplain who prayed “in Jesus’ name” as his conscience dictated is being ejected from the military service “in retaliation” for his victorious battle to change Navy policy that required religious rites be “non-sectarian.” My career is over, my family is now homeless, we’ve lost a million dollar pension…”

    Sounds like Lakin.

    http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=39655

    I can’t find “Klingenschmitt” on CAAFlog.

  262. BatGuano says:
    February 24, 2011 at 9:28 pm  (Quote)

    Sef: I can’t find “Klingenschmitt” on CAAFlog.

    here’s a washington post article from 2006 on klingenschmitt…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/09/AR2006010901812.html

    sounds like he got kicked out for wearing his uniform during a political protest.

  263. misha says:
    February 25, 2011 at 1:06 am  (Quote)

    “At a town hall in Athens, Georgia hosted by Republican Rep. Paul Broun, the first person to ask a question asked, “Who’s going to shoot Obama?” According to the Athens Banner-Herald, “It got a big laugh.”

    http://gawker.com/#!5769920/worst-town-hall-question-ever-whos-going-to-shoot-obama

    Tom Lehrer: I Wanna Go Back to Dixie

    http://www.metrolyrics.com/i-wanna-go-back-to-dixie-lyrics-tom-lehrer.html

    I wanna go back to dixie
    I wanna talk with southern gentlemen
    And put my white sheet on again,
    I ain’t seen one good lynchin’ in years.
    The land of the boll weevil,
    Where the laws are medieval

  264. misha says:
    February 25, 2011 at 1:24 am  (Quote)

    I’ve been saying all along Glenn Beck is an anti-semite:

    “Glenn Beck apologized for comparing Reform Judaism to “radicalized Islam,”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/24/glenn-beck-apologizes-reform-judaism_n_827777.html

  265. misha says:
    February 25, 2011 at 1:28 am  (Quote)

    misha: “Glenn Beck apologized for comparing Reform Judaism to “radicalized Islam,”

    I will not apologize for accusing Glenn Beck of a crime:

    http://didglennbeckrapeandmurderagirl.blogspot.com/

  266. misha says:
    February 25, 2011 at 5:16 am  (Quote)

    misha: “At a town hall in Athens, Georgia hosted by Republican Rep. Paul Broun, the first person to ask a question asked, “Who’s going to shoot Obama?” According to the Athens Banner-Herald, “It got a big laugh.”
    http://gawker.com/#!5769920/worst-town-hall-question-ever-whos-going-to-shoot-obama

    Here’s Broun’s reply:

    “The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president. We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/25/paul-broun-town-hall-who-is-going-to-shoot-obama_n_828047.html

    Who’s going to shoot Obama?

    Who is going to give Broun the Tucson Treatment?

  267. The Magic M says:
    February 25, 2011 at 11:12 am  (Quote)

    nc1:
    Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a “natural born citizen.” Anyone whose citizenship is acquired after birth as a result of naturalization is not a natural born citizen.

    I see that you like to take the first sentence and take the inverse of it and state “anyone not born on US soil to citizen parents is not a natural born citizen.”

    The funny thing is I could do the same with the second sentence.
    Because, strictly logically speaking, these sentences are not simply the inverse of each other.
    The second sentence reversed would be “anyone who is born a citizen is a natural born citizen” – no “two citizen parents” there.

    Now it would be severe confirmation bias to do #1 and ignore #2.

    The point is that such an interpretation would make the same birther mistake as in interpreting Perkins vs. Elg and others:
    Stating “people who are X are Y” does not mean that X and Y are the same. It only says that X is a subset of Y. It does not exclude the possibility that it is a proper subset of Y.

    Isn’t it strange that practically every such formulation that the birthers refer to reads “people who are born on US soil to two citizen parents are NBC”, but none ever reads “NBC are those people born on US soil to two citizen parents”? Because the former leaves the possibility that it refers to a proper subset (sufficient but not necessary condition) while the latter doesn’t.
    English language is not mathematics, alas! 🙂

  268. BatGuano says:
    February 25, 2011 at 11:29 am  (Quote)

    nc1: A law prefessor and a former Harward Law Review Editor questioned McCain’s eligibility and wrote the following:

    mccain’s situation was very unique. in 1936 congress specifically identified births in the canal zone as “US nationals” and not “US citizens”. in 1937 congress switched this and considered the canal babies ” US citizens “. mccain became a citizen ( instead of a national ) a year after his birth.

    obama was a citizen at birth regardless of his parents nationality. no naturalization needed. so by your own link nc1………. obama is a NBC.

  269. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 11:57 am  (Quote)

    More disgusting trashing of the President’s mother from the American stinker….

    “What else can we deduce about Stanley Ann? There’s conjecture that Stanley Ann was raised in a radical family with Communist leanings. She spent her adolescence on progressive Mercer Island; the left-leaning Unitarian Church they attended there was known as the Little Red Church, while the school board’s chairman was a self-identified communist. Of course, the family’s connection with Frank Marshall Davis lends credence to the theory of a radical childhood.

    As the official story goes, Stanley Ann met Obama Sr. at college, and their relationship produced Barack. However, American Thinker’s Jack Cashill has highlighted doubts about Obama’s paternity, including the possibility that Frank Marshall Davis may be the father.

    If Obama Sr. were Obama’s father, this is a troubling scenario since Senior was a married man, seven years older, with an apparent alcohol problem. But even more disturbing is the prospect of Frank Marshall Davis being Obama’s father. Davis was decades older than Stanley Ann, and a purported pedophile. Davis penned a thinly veiled memoir celebrating his and his wife’s sexual relationship with a 13 year old girl.[i]

    It was highly unusual for girls in the 1950’s to have interracial relationships, much less babies, with a man of a difference race. During this time, however, the Communist Party of the United States encouraged women members to use their feminine wiles to entice men, especially black men, into the movement, as well as to reward the ones who joined up. Did Communist brainwashing play some role in Stanley Ann’s choice of partners and her subsequent pregnancy?

    Davis himself boasted, “The number of white babes interested in at least one meeting with a Negro male has been far more than I can handle.” If Frank Marshall Davis were truly Obama’s father, was Stanley Ann one of his many conquests?”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/stanley_ann_dunham_and_the_lef.html

  270. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 12:12 pm  (Quote)

    More pretend knowledge by old buddy Kerchner….

    cfkerchner said…[Reply]
    @anonymous 10:13 a.m.

    Have you not been keeping up with Obama’s multiple citizenship discrepancy issues? It is not necessary to even ask Obama the “similar” inquiry on the Citizenship status of Obama’s father when Obama was born because we all know that Obama’s father was NOT a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born. In fact Obama’s father was never a U.S. Citizen, not even an immigrant to the USA, nor even a permanent resident. Obama’s father was a foreign national sojourning in the USA going to college. This is all admitted by Obama but has been pretty much ignored by the main stream media.

    Obama’s U.S. citizenship issues include the following:
    1. Father was not a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born.
    2. Place of birth not conclusively proven to a controlling legal authority such as a Congressional inquiry or court of law with strict rules of evidence in place. Internet images posted on the internet by the campaign and allied websites of an alleged short-form COLB birth record document not sufficient. Only certified copies of the original birth registration records and any amendments to the birth records in Hawaii since submitted to the controlling legal authority in paper form and which were issued by the state of Hawaii directly to that authority would be accepted. Obama’s birth was apparently registered in Hawaii by his family using the very lax laws in Hawaii in 1961 but there is no independent evidence (name of birthing doctor or mid-wife or hospital or paramedics called to a home, etc., or pre-natal or post-natal medical records) that would go to proving that he was actually physically born there in Hawaii and not just falsely registered as being born there after the fact.
    3. Obama’s possible adoption at age 5 or less and his acquiring Indonesian Citizenship from his new step-father.
    4. Possible reaffirming his Kenyan citizenship rights obtained from his father during his visits to Kenyan as a young adult.
    5. Potential loss of U.S. Citizenship by Obama traveling as an adult under a foreign passport and/or applying for student aide in college claiming himself to be a foreign national.

    See this Catalog of Evidence and Concerns about Obama’s nativity story:
    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-concerned-americans.html

    All these issues and charges Obama refuses to address and provide the related original documents from his birth, adoption, education, passport, and travel records to clarify these questions and matters.

    CDR Kerchner (Ret)

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/02/truth-matters-is-andy-martin-natural.html?showComment=1298583208985#c596693746451008440

    I would like to ask Kerchner a couple of questions. Has any birther been able to tell us what exact scholarships were available only to foreign students that Obama would be eligible for that somehow would be easier to get than American scholarships? Specifics? And what exactly were these lax laws in HI in 1961?

  271. Lupin says:
    February 25, 2011 at 12:20 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: More disgusting trashing of the President’s mother from the American stinker….

    Ah yes, by the infamous “Robin of Berkley,” the Pam Atlas of the West Coast, a self-described “recovering liberal,” raised a jew, converted to christianity, passes herself as a “psychotherapist”, with the IQ of a goldfish… One could fill an entire seminar discussing with what’s wrong with that person.

  272. Majority Will says:
    February 25, 2011 at 2:26 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: with the IQ of a goldfish

    Spit take and laugh out loud funny!

    😀

  273. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 2:32 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: Ah yes, by the infamous “Robin of Berkley,” the Pam Atlas of the West Coast, a self-described “recovering liberal,” raised a jew, converted to christianity, passes herself as a “psychotherapist”, with the IQ of a goldfish… One could fill an entire seminar discussing with what’s wrong with that person.

    Lupin, that may be an insult to all of the goldfish out there….They might have a higher IQ…This woman it seems hates Blacks because she may have been mugged by someone of color earlier in life….

  274. Majority Will says:
    February 25, 2011 at 3:09 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: I would like to ask Kerchner a couple of questions.

    A birther who spews multiple birther conspiracy myths (if not eligible because of this, then I have this, that and some others anyway) makes his motivation of hatred, fear and bigotry perfectly apparent. He is seething, fear mongering, and bitter with hatred. Like Von Brunn and Fitzpatrick.

  275. Majority Will says:
    February 25, 2011 at 3:14 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Kerchner: “All these issues and charges Obama refuses to address . . . “

    Note the sense of entitlement and arrogance that pervades the birther mentality.

    “He owes ME an explanation.” “He hasn’t proven he’s a natural born citizen to ME.”
    “He could put this to rest if he did [insert irrelevant birther demand here] this to show ME what I need to know.”

  276. JoZeppy says:
    February 25, 2011 at 3:24 pm  (Quote)

    3. Obama’s possible adoption at age 5 or less and his acquiring Indonesian Citizenship from his new step-father.
    4. Possible reaffirming his Kenyan citizenship rights obtained from his father during his visits to Kenyan as a young adult.
    5. Potential loss of U.S. Citizenship by Obama traveling as an adult under a foreign passport and/or applying for student aide in college claiming himself to be a foreign national.

    I find 3-5 particularly amusing.

    3 because it is impossible.

    4 really had me going. Now we’re not even going to pretend like we need any factual support for our allegations. Now, if they can dream it, the President need to disprove it. Well, I could claim that any president before Obama had renounced his citizenship, and claim that it is an “issue.” It is afterall possible that GW Bush renounced his US citizenship because he planned to move abroad and avoid US taxes. I have no evidence whatsoever that this is the case, but hey, according to Kerchner, I guess we don’t have to.

    5 is interesting in what it doesn’t say. It doesn’t mention the long debunked Pakistani travel ban, or the April fool’s day “foreign student Fullbright.” So it seems Kerchner is admitting that claims are false. But he seems to feel that removing the factual premise of a claim somehow doesn’t mean he still can’t make the claim. So despite there now being no reason why President Obama would have ever traveled on anything but a US passport, or there being not even any allegation the the President received any scholarships as a foreign student, like 4 above, if he can dream it, he can claim it.

  277. Majority Will says:
    February 25, 2011 at 3:32 pm  (Quote)

    JoZeppy: 5 is interesting in what it doesn’t say. It doesn’t mention the long debunked Pakistani travel ban, or the April fool’s day “foreign student Fullbright.” So it seems Kerchner is admitting that claims are false. But he seems to feel that removing the factual premise of a claim somehow doesn’t mean he still can’t make the claim. So despite there now being no reason why President Obama would have ever traveled on anything but a US passport, or there being not even any allegation the the President received any scholarships as a foreign student, like 4 above, if he can dream it, he can claim it.

    In the Birther Handbook, this is formally known as the Apuzzo Axiom.

  278. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 3:40 pm  (Quote)

    JoZeppy: 3. Obama’s possible adoption at age 5 or less and his acquiring Indonesian Citizenship from his new step-father.4. Possible reaffirming his Kenyan citizenship rights obtained from his father during his visits to Kenyan as a young adult.5. Potential loss of U.S. Citizenship by Obama traveling as an adult under a foreign passport and/or applying for student aide in college claiming himself to be a foreign national.I find 3-5 particularly amusing. 3 because it is impossible. 4 really had me going. Now we’re not even going to pretend like we need any factual support for our allegations. Now, if they can dream it, the President need to disprove it. Well, I could claim that any president before Obama had renounced his citizenship, and claim that it is an “issue.” It is afterall possible that GW Bush renounced his US citizenship because he planned to move abroad and avoid US taxes. I have no evidence whatsoever that this is the case, but hey, according to Kerchner, I guess we don’t have to.5 is interesting in what it doesn’t say. It doesn’t mention the long debunked Pakistani travel ban, or the April fool’s day “foreign student Fullbright.” So it seems Kerchner is admitting that claims are false. But he seems to feel that removing the factual premise of a claim somehow doesn’t mean he still can’t make the claim. So despite there now being no reason why President Obama would have ever traveled on anything but a US passport, or there being not even any allegation the the President received any scholarships as a foreign student, like 4 above, if he can dream it, he can claim it.

    JoZeppy, good points….Of course you are rational and legally educated so you are way ahead of Kerchner so to you and most of us his so called points make no sense. For instance he is implying at the Pakistan travel ban without actually mentioning it…The bottom line in birther world, if I can dream up a scenario, then Obama needs to prove himself innocent…

  279. misha says:
    February 25, 2011 at 4:01 pm  (Quote)

    Attention Shrub:

    Gates Warns Against Any More Wars Like Iraq or Afghanistan

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/world/26gates.html

  281. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 4:20 pm  (Quote)

    Lucas Smith is attempting to keep himself relevant….

    02.23.2011. Lucas Daniel Smith calls Congressman Trent Franks. Answers given are beyond belief.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2QzdfyD6No&feature=player_embedded

    This call was placed live, on air, on Tony Venuti’s blogtalk Ex-CONservative Radio Show at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/tony-ven… .

    Each of Arizona’s US Congressional representatives were called, excluding the office of Gabrielle Giffords. I, Lucas Smith, crafted a letter to US Congress on the 4th of July 2010. I sent the letter to every member of Congress, including non-voting members. A total of 539 letters sent. Each letter individually notarized at US Bank, each letter individually addressed, each envelope was hand addressed. Each letter was sent via USPS Certified Mail. I also created a near 4,000 page PDF which contains a scan of each page of each individually addressed letter, each hand addressed envelope, each hand addressed USPS Certified Mail Receipt. The PDF can be viewed at my scribd account which is http://www.scribd.com/Patriot1980. Do you know of anyone else that has completed such a monumental letter to Congress? Do you know how many man hours it for this project to be completed? Do you how many thousands of dollars it took? And do you know how many replies that I received from you Congress? To data I have received 3 postal letters, 2 phone calls, and 3 or 4 emails. I am now attempting to reach Congress members via telephone. Congress members don’t typically takes calls and I am forced to deal with their staff.

  282. Black Lion says:
    February 25, 2011 at 4:36 pm  (Quote)

    WND’s Alan Keyes Likens Gay Marriage To “Granting Plantation Owners The Right To Own Slaves”
    February 25, 2011 9:05 am ET by Media Matters staff

    From Alan Keyes’ February 25 WorldNetDaily column:

    After a little feigned deliberation, Obama has announced his “decision” to withdraw the U.S. government from participation in cases arguing in support of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), legislation passed when Bill Clinton was in the White House. I’ve received e-mails from several well-known conservative organizations with breathless subject lines like the one that speaks of Obama’s “betrayal of the American people.” Another announces “Obama comes out of the closet on marriage.”

    These subject lines make about as much sense as the Obama faction’s contention that his decision has something to do with the fact that some federal judges have concluded that the DOMA is unconstitutional. Obama has little or no inclination to respect the Constitution. He has little or no inclination to respect the unalienable right involved in the defense of the natural family. Just as he promotes the physical elimination of the child’s life through abortion, he tacitly promotes eliminating the prospect of the child’s life from the definition of marriage. That’s what’s involved in the assertion that as such, homosexual couples can lawfully marry without eviscerating the natural basis for the definition of marriage.

    Government doesn’t endow people with the ability to procreate the species. The Creator takes care of that. Like all unalienable rights, those associated with the natural family exist in consequence of this endowment. A couple that cannot, by nature, procreate has no claim to those rights. Nor can government grant them a semblance of it without impairing the claims of one or both of the parents biologically implicated in the physical conception of the child. The DOMA simply makes more explicit the government’s obligation to secure the Creator-endowed unalienable rights of the natural family. This obligation precludes government from fabricating other rights that impair them. In this respect, granting homosexuals the right to marry is like granting plantation owners the right to own slaves.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102250011

  283. Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:
    February 25, 2011 at 4:54 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: WND’s Alan Keyes Likens Gay Marriage To “Granting Plantation Owners The Right To Own Slaves”February 25, 2011 9:05 am ET by Media Matters staffFrom Alan Keyes’ February 25 WorldNetDaily column:After a little feigned deliberation, Obama has announced his “decision” to withdraw the U.S. government from participation in cases arguing in support of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), legislation passed when Bill Clinton was in the White House. I’ve received e-mails from several well-known conservative organizations with breathless subject lines like the one that speaks of Obama’s “betrayal of the American people.” Another announces “Obama comes out of the closet on marriage.” These subject lines make about as much sense as the Obama faction’s contention that his decision has something to do with the fact that some federal judges have concluded that the DOMA is unconstitutional. Obama has little or no inclination to respect the Constitution. He has little or no inclination to respect the unalienable right involved in the defense of the natural family. Just as he promotes the physical elimination of the child’s life through abortion, he tacitly promotes eliminating the prospect of the child’s life from the definition of marriage. That’s what’s involved in the assertion that as such, homosexual couples can lawfully marry without eviscerating the natural basis for the definition of marriage. Government doesn’t endow people with the ability to procreate the species. The Creator takes care of that. Like all unalienable rights, those associated with the natural family exist in consequence of this endowment. A couple that cannot, by nature, procreate has no claim to those rights. Nor can government grant them a semblance of it without impairing the claims of one or both of the parents biologically implicated in the physical conception of the child. The DOMA simply makes more explicit the government’s obligation to secure the Creator-endowed unalienable rights of the natural family. This obligation precludes government from fabricating other rights that impair them. In this respect, granting homosexuals the right to marry is like granting plantation owners the right to own slaves. http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102250011

    Keyes has no credibility on the subject. He disowned his own gay daughter

  284. Majority Will says:
    February 25, 2011 at 5:31 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Lucas: I am forced to deal with their staff.

    Again with the birther hubris and sense of entitlement. Boo-frickin’-hoo.

  285. Expelliarmus says:
    February 25, 2011 at 6:44 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Congress members don’t typically takes calls and I am forced to deal with their staff.

    Congressional staff are generally instructed to respond only to mail from their own constituents — individuals whose address is within their district. They may deliver mail that arrives from outside their district to the appropriate congressional office for that district — so perhaps Dave Loebsack (Dem, 2nd Dist Iowa) has received extra copies of Smith’s 500-page missive.

  286. The Magic M says:
    February 25, 2011 at 6:51 pm  (Quote)

    > A couple that cannot, by nature, procreate has no claim to those rights.

    Does that mean infertile heterosexual people will probably not vote for Keyes as he denounces their right to marry? Ah, these birther idols are real charmers with just as few brain cells as their followers…

    > Obama’s birth was apparently registered in Hawaii by his family using the very lax laws in Hawaii in 1961 but there is no independent evidence (name of birthing doctor or mid-wife or hospital or paramedics called to a home

    Hm, but these people would be long dead now. So what “independent evidence” is Kerchner calling for? I sense more moving goalposts ahead…

  287. US Citizen says:
    February 26, 2011 at 2:13 am  (Quote)

    Birthers truth table:

    1. Opinion, suggestion or possibility = Fact.

    2. When described by law, decree or constitution = Change interpretation.

    3. Actual facts, evidence, probability = Conspiracy (bribes, threats, favors, etc.)

  288. Lupin says:
    February 26, 2011 at 3:18 am  (Quote)

    Paul: If you’re in the region & want to have lunch, email us through my wife’s blog http://possumworld.com/
    or I’m a fairly frequent poster at DKos.

    When a new and usually utterly ridiculous piece if new “evidence” surfaces in the birthers’ world, it becomes immediately enshrined and gospel.

    However when that evidence turns out to debunk one of their myths then you can point it out until you’re blue in the face and they never ever acknowledge it, which is only more evidence of their deep-seated racism/xenophobia.

    In addition to Paul’s and my own attempts to properly explain what Vattel actually wrote and what he might have meant, I’m reminded by Kerchner’s asinine comments that I have mentioned Obama’s trip to France as a student a zillion times, and still that doesn’t make a dent into their tiny rat brains.

  289. US Citizen says:
    February 26, 2011 at 9:08 am  (Quote)

    nc1: It is interesting that only McCain’s eligibility was questioned – no symposium about Obama’s case.

    That’s because there were no questions or doubts regarding Obama’s citizenship.
    He provided certified evidence that he was born in the US state of Hawaii.

  290. Lupin says:
    February 26, 2011 at 11:28 am  (Quote)

    nc1: It is interesting that only McCain’s eligibility was questioned

    If you weren’t so stupid, that would be what the FBI calls “a clue”.

  291. Black Lion says:
    February 26, 2011 at 11:36 am  (Quote)

    Jerome Corsi is back with more smears…

    Hawaii: Controversy Over Obama’s Birth Certificate Guardian
    Written by CAA National on February 25, 2011, 01:42 PM
    JEROME R. CORSI

    Hawaii’s Senate minority leader is accusing Gov. Neil Abercrombie of politicizing the state’s health department by firing his nominee to replace Chiyome Fukino, a woman best known to the nation as Barack Obama’s birth certificate guardian.

    Sen. Sam Slom, the sole Republican in Hawaii’s upper house, is denouncing Abercrombie’s handling of the nomination of Dr. Neal Palafox to be the successor to Fukino as director of the state’s health department. He said he is convinced Abercrombie asked Dr. Palafox to withdraw his nomination because the nominee fired two Hawaii health department employees who were politically connected.

    Fukino, who became the face of Hawaii’s claim that Obama’s original birth records remain on file in the state’s archives, resigned in December.

    “Palafox was determined to clean up the Hawaii Department of Health and he ran afoul of politics when the people he fired sought retribution,” Slom told [World Net Daily].

    Slom does not believe that Dr. Palafox was fired for refusing to allow Abercrombie to search for Obama birth records.

    “I have known Abercrombie for 50 years, back to when we were both undergraduate students at the University of Hawaii,” Slom said. “Abercrombie was pro-communist and I was pro-American.”

    But Slom adds he would be happy to use the Palafox case if it would permit him to open up to the public any birth records the Hawaii health department has.

    “If Palafox serves as a shoehorn to get for the public any Obama birth records the Hawaii Department of Health has, I am all for doing so,” he said. “I don’t understand why Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep all his records from the public — not just his Hawaii birth records, but his passport records and his school records. All Obama’s records should be public, including any Hawaii birth records that exist.”

    http://conservativeactionalerts.com/blog_post/show/2114

  292. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 26, 2011 at 3:01 pm  (Quote)

    PHOENIX – On Monday, Senate President Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, introduced SB1611, an immigration omnibus bill, which he says is basically a “clean-up” bill to Proposition 200, passed by voters in 2004, and various subsequent voter-approved statutes requiring people to demonstrate they are legally present in order to obtain public benefits.

    http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2011/110223/frontpage-Pearce.html

  294. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 26, 2011 at 3:04 pm  (Quote)

    Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and David Vitter of Louisiana have sought to amend the United States Constitution so that children born in America would need at least one parent to be citizen in order to be considered citizens themselves.

    http://www.crcconnection.com/news/campus-weighs-amendment-proposal-1.2018883

  295. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    February 26, 2011 at 3:07 pm  (Quote)

    Watching the Helena legislative session brings to mind the Bob Dylan line “the circus is in town.” But this time, all the jugglers and the clowns” are Republican legislators dressed in tattered Confederate gray and peddling threadbare secessionist, segregationist and “birther” doctrines like nullification, posse comitatus and other discredited states rights flimflam from the John Birch playbook.

    http://billingsgazette.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_acc3d4da-b937-5fa0-902d-01e2e5561c0c.html

  296. misha says:
    February 26, 2011 at 3:21 pm  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and David Vitter of Louisiana have sought to amend the United States Constitution

    Here’s a takedown of Rand Paul:
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2010/05/asshole-of-year.html

  298. Black Lion says:
    February 28, 2011 at 10:53 am  (Quote)

    WND’s Farah Childishly Insists He Won’t Call Obama President
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    We’ve previously noted how WorldNetDaily columnist Robert Ringer rather pettily refuses to acknowledge that Barack Obama is the president. He’s not the only one at WND engaging in such childish behavior — and it’s an attitude that comes straight from the top.

    In his Feb. 27 column, WND editor Joseph Farah sneering references “this president, if you want to call him that – which I refuse to do.”

    This raises an interesting question about Farah’s birther obsession. Is it all just a manifestation of a psychological block over his childish refusal to accept the fact that Obama was elected president?

    Most people would seek psychiatric help for such a disorder. Farah, meanwhile, runs a media outlet in which he can spew his petulant rage with impunity.

  299. misha says:
    February 28, 2011 at 11:05 am  (Quote)

    Black Lion: Is it all just a manifestation of a psychological block over his childish refusal to accept the fact that Obama was elected president?

    Farah has never denied that barnyard animals become skittish when he is near.

  300. Daniel says:
    February 28, 2011 at 12:29 pm  (Quote)

    Black Lion:
    WND’s Farah Childishly Insists He Won’t Call Obama President
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    We’ve previously noted how WorldNetDaily columnist Robert Ringer rather pettily refuses to acknowledge that Barack Obama is the president. He’s not the only one at WND engaging in such childish behavior — and it’s an attitude that comes straight from the top.

    In his Feb. 27 column, WND editor Joseph Farah sneering references “this president, if you want to call him that – which I refuse to do.”

    They won’t call him President, but they get real uptight at any suggestion that their “reporters” aren’t qualified to attend White House press conferences.

    So much hypocrisy, from so many directions.

  301. misha says:
    February 28, 2011 at 2:03 pm  (Quote)

    Daniel: they get real uptight at any suggestion that their “reporters” aren’t qualified to attend White House press conferences.

    Farah says he is a “human being,” but he has never proved to my satisfaction that he is not a ruminant.

    “Joseph Farah” features a simian creature called Molotov Mitchell, who bashes Wiccans with regularity – just like Ted Haggard and his coterie.

    Speaking of that coterie, did everyone catch Glenn Beck’s latest foray into anti-semitism:

    Glenn Beck Apologizes For Reform Judaism Comments: ‘I Didn’t Do Enough Homework’

    He said that his comments had been “ignorant,” and that, as soon as he made them, he knew that he had been wrong.

    “It was a nightmare,” he said.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/24/glenn-beck-apologizes-reform-judaism_n_827777.html

  302. Black Lion says:
    February 28, 2011 at 3:52 pm  (Quote)

    SPLC Names Pamela Geller A Hate Group

    In a long-needed move, the Southern Poverty Law Center has named Pamela Geller and her followers a hate group:

    Manhattan blogger Pamela Geller and her posse of anti-Islamic protesters have been branded a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

    Stop the Islamization of America was included in the civil rights organization’s annual roundup of extremist groups – a rogue’s gallery that includes everything from the Ku Klux Klan to white supremacists and Nazis.

    Geller’s group was one of the most vocal opponents of the proposed Islamic Center near Ground Zero.

    The group was also behind ads that were placed on city buses urging Muslims to leave “the falsity of Islam.”

    Geller, who runs a blog called Atlas Shrugs, dismissed the Law Center as an “uber left” group that has “failed to address the greatest threat to our national security.”

    “My group is a human rights group,” she said. “And these people are taken seriously? This is the morally inverted state of the world.”

    I love the irony of someone who co-opts a badly written treatise for sociopathic selfishness as the name of her website declaring that the Southern Poverty Law Center has an inverted sense of morality.

    Pamela Geller’s blind and wildly grasping hate for Muslims (inspiration for Hitler? Really?) is nothing less than a mental disorder. It’s about time that she was labeled for what she is.

    http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/splc-names-pamela-geller-hate-group

  303. Keith says:
    March 1, 2011 at 1:13 am  (Quote)

    misha: Farah says he is a “human being,” but he has never proved to my satisfaction that he is not a ruminant.

    Could be he is implying that he is a ‘sovereignist’. They claim to be ‘human beings’, not ‘persons’. Therefore since tax law only applied to persons it doesn’t apply to them.

  304. The Magic M says:
    March 1, 2011 at 5:38 am  (Quote)

    > Geller’s group was one of the most vocal opponents of the proposed Islamic Center near Ground Zero.

    As an aside, wasn’t it on WND too (or was it Post’n’Email) that I read someone claiming that 9/11 involved an underground nuclear bomb and his “proof” for that was the use of the term “ground zero” which, according to the writer, is only used for nuclear detonation sites? *facepalm*

  305. Bovril says:
    March 1, 2011 at 6:00 am  (Quote)

    IIRC, it was over at Dr K(H)ates brain trust….2 x 150 Kiliton sub surface blasts were used to bring the towers down.

    Apparently nuclear demolition of high rises was the only viable method and de-rigeur in the 60’s and 70’s….who knew..?

  306. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    March 1, 2011 at 9:41 am  (Quote)

    Bovril: Apparently nuclear demolition of high rises was the only viable method and de-rigeur in the 60′s and 70′s….who knew..?

    Is that those suit case bombs they have down at Walmart on aisle 47?

  307. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    March 1, 2011 at 10:22 am  (Quote)

    Bovril: it was over at Dr K(H)ates brain trust

    I left this at Dr. Kates blog (now added ad a Bad link down below) on her article about ways to remove Obama from office. Let’s see if it stays visible.

    It’s good to see that the writer is looking at constitutional ways of removing the President rather than an armed revolt. Looking at the legal precedents, Congress has pretty broad discretion in defining impeachable offenses. If Obama were tried publicly (and it would be on C-SPAN for sure) and reasonably found to be ineligible, I do not think there would be any great rioting in the streets if he were convicted by the Senate–bitter disappointment for some, but not the end of the world.

    Of course, it is beyond possibility that Congress would vote unanimously to confirm Obama’s election and then (even with the addition of some more conservative members) turn around and vote in a super majority that they made a colossal blunder (since the nationality of Obama’s father was well known). On the other hand if Obama were impeached on the rumors of a Kenyan birth, it would be seen as the witch hunt it is.

    While it’s clear that no angry mob is going to storm the White House, drag Obama out in chains an lynch him, one always worries about a lon[e] gunman inspired by violent rhetoric.

    http://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/constitutional-options-for-removing-obama/comment-page-2/#comment-24466

  309. Greg says:
    March 1, 2011 at 10:29 am  (Quote)

    If Obama were “reasonably” found ineligible, monkeys would fly out of my butt. Perhaps out of everyone’s butt. I think the shock of mass monkey-butt might cause rioting in the streets. Certainly, the shock of finding ourselves in an alternate universe where Obama could be “reasonably” be found ineligible would run the risk of street rioting!

  310. Bovril says:
    March 1, 2011 at 10:34 am  (Quote)

    Doc,

    My opinion, feel free to treat as such but the continuing outright screaming for “Second Amendment solutions” to not just the POTUS but everyone who dares to not agree puts Dr K(H)ates firmly in the Ugly section.

  311. Bovril says:
    March 1, 2011 at 10:42 am  (Quote)

    ps Dr C, I have a post in moderation, probably due to the number of links from Dr K(H)ates… 😎

  312. Slartibartfast says:
    March 1, 2011 at 11:35 am  (Quote)

    Bovril:
    IIRC, it was over at Dr K(H)ates brain trust….2 x 150 Kiliton sub surface blasts were used to bring the towers down.

    Apparently nuclear demolition of high rises was the only viable method and de-rigeur in the 60′s and 70′s….who knew..?

    What fascinates me is how subsurface nuclear blasts were able to collapse the towers starting at the impact zones and proceeding downward (and upward)…

    Bovril:
    Doc,

    My opinion, feel free to treat as such but the continuing outright screaming for “Second Amendment solutions” to not just the POTUS but everyone who dares to not agree puts Dr K(H)ates firmly in the Ugly section.

    I agree with Borvil – and I just saw you made the switch – thanks Doc!

  313. Black Lion says:
    March 1, 2011 at 11:38 am  (Quote)

    Broun: When Criticism Becomes Something More Sinister

    As a Saudi national was about to be arrested for an alleged plot in Texas to assassinate former President Bush, and weeks after the horrible shooting spree that left 6 dead and a congresswoman seriously wounded, Georgia Congressman Paul Broun reportedly chuckled after a constituent asked, “Who’s going to shoot Obama.” He then stated:

    The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president. We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

    Only after a national firestorm and Secret Service attention to his constituent, did Broun’s office state what the Congressman should have said at the time:

    I deeply regret that this incident happened at all. Furthermore, I condemn all statements – made in sincerity or jest – that threaten or suggest the use of violence against the President of the United States or any other public official. Such rhetoric cannot and will not be tolerated.

    Congressman Broun’s initial mishandling of the event needs to be examined in context. He is not merely a harsh critic of the President. He is something more (or in this case less)–someone who demonizes and deligitimizes the democratically elected head of state, as someone who deserves not just disagreement, but suspicion or contempt, if not downright aggression.

    On November 10, 2008 Broun had this to say about the President-elect’s national service corps–an idea shared by President Bush:

    That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did. When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.

    Broun also stated. “I don’t know” when asked whether or not President Obama was an American citizen or a Christian, but did opine that he is a Socialist. He also talked about how the President’s policies would kill old people.

    The Christian Science Monitor counted six incidents in the last year (I excluded Congresswoman Giffords attack by a deranged gunman) where politics turned into bona fide violence or threats. Broun apparently belongs to a political subgroup on the right (and there were those like it on the left against President Bush) that stoke the fires against the President not just on the merits or deficits of his policies, but rather on sheer demonization as well. Many conservatives, including Karl Rove, Rudy Guilliani and John McCain reject such tactics (See videos below). But other’s like Broun embrace it. Broun only backtracks once he is exposed and the immediate political costs outweigh the benefits.

    The problem is that when political leaders who should know better embrace exhortations to violence, “sucession,” guns at town halls, “Second Amendment remedies,” or bizarre tactical falsehoods like those of 9/11 truthers or birther conspiracists, they not only connect with their base, they green light extremists who see our elected officials and the institutions they inhabit as legitimate targets for contempt or even aggression. To be sure we must protect free speech, as the Supreme Court held in Terminiello v. Chicago, 373 U.S. 1 (1949), “a function of free speech under our system is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger.” Even at a time of great national division, when almost one in five folks say that both President Bush and Obama are, or could be the anti-Christ, elected officials should still responsibly stir constituents to action–even anger as part of an effort to make positive change. To be sure Conservatives have many important arguments that strike a chord with millions of Americans and those positions need to be fully examined in the marketplace of ideas. However, a Congressman who seemingly tolerates with a chuckle the assassination of our sitting head of state, does something else and should be condemned for it across the political spectrum.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-levin-jd/broun-when-criticism-beco_b_828422.html

  314. Slartibartfast says:
    March 1, 2011 at 11:42 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: I left this at Dr. Kates blog (now added ad a Bad link down below) on her article about ways to remove Obama from office. Let’s see if it stays visible.

    My experience at Dr. Kate’s (both observational and experiential) is that she will leave your post up, but ban you while she and her minions mock you for your perceived irrationality… I posted a defense of ACORN on her site once… ONCE. It seemed like I was banned within milliseconds, but the post is still there….

  315. Slartibartfast says:
    March 1, 2011 at 11:51 am  (Quote)

    Doc,

    You post must have been deemed more toxic (that calm, reasonable tone of yours, probably) than mine (or Dr. K(h)ate’s just gotten loonier – which, come to think of it, is clearly true…) because your post is gone. She left the later post about a Tesla v. Edison video game, though…

  316. Slartibartfast says:
    March 1, 2011 at 11:52 am  (Quote)

    Doc,

    I’m also guessing that you have been banned from the home of the harridan of hate…

  317. Lupin says:
    March 1, 2011 at 12:11 pm  (Quote)

    Slartibartfast: My experience at Dr. Kate’s (both observational and experiential) is that she will leave your post up, but ban you while she and her minions mock you for your perceived irrationality… I posted a defense of ACORN on her site once… ONCE. It seemed like I was banned within milliseconds, but the post is still there….

    OTOH I once posted a post about the correct translation of some of Vattel’s terms, making it clear that I was in no way speculating about Obama’s legitimacy and it was still deleted within the hour..

  318. Slartibartfast says:
    March 1, 2011 at 12:44 pm  (Quote)

    Lupin: OTOH I once posted a post about the correct translation of some of Vattel’s terms, making it clear that I was in no way speculating about Obama’s legitimacy and it was still deleted within the hour..

    Most likely my post remains because it does not attack a brither meme directly and effectively like yours or the Doc’s. There’s no way that she can find evidence that you are wrong about the translation of Vattel (assuming that you are really the Frenchman and lawyer you say you are… ;-)) and responding to Doc’s comments would have laid bare the sedition she’s been brewing since her days as a guest poster at TexasDarlin (Mmmm, treasony…). She can’t have that, now, can she? All I did was state some facts about ACORN that had been widely misreported – most of the people there barely had to adjust their confirmation biases in order to dismiss my comments. You and the Doc said some things that would subconsciously irritate everyone (because it would call their prejudices into doubt, even if they couldn’t consciously admit it) if left uncensored – it had to go.

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.