The occasional open thread: naughty and nice edition

Posted on December 21, 2011 by Dr. Conspiracy

Place your comments here that don’t fit the current articles. Comments will close in two weeks.

image

About Dr. Conspiracy

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

124 Responses to The occasional open thread: naughty and nice edition

  1. JPotter says:
    December 21, 2011 at 12:05 am  (Quote)

    A bundle of rods, Doc? Are those …. fasces?

    Wait, no axe blade. Whew! I’ll take it as a symbol of unity. Or simpler … bundled driftwood spotted on your trip?

  2. Fazil Iskander says:
    December 21, 2011 at 6:40 am  (Quote)

    In the section on Judicial review, El Diablo Negro wrote:

    “El Diablo Negro December 20, 2011 at 10:09 am (Quote) #

    Somehow, I do not think every birther believe what they are saying. For some, If they can keep this alive as long as possible, they can reap monetary gain, and they will cry all the way to the bank. And if they oppose Obama, it’s a bonus to just keep alive a negative rumor about him.”

    I’ve been thinking about this for a while now and it strikes me as odd. Do birthers believe what they’re saying? I’d have to guess that most of them do believe what they say. There are, no doubt, tiers of birtherism, though. And the tiers are interesting, where “belief” is concerned.

    Some “birthers” profit by birtherism (Joseph Farah/Jerome Corsi) and are likely uninterested in whether or not what they advance is, strictu sensu, true. I imagine that at the base of Farah or Corsi’s thinking – if you can call it that – is a political dislike of Barack Obama, a dislike that will hold on to any bit of information that discredits him. (It needn’t be racism that animates them. Corsi, for instance, has been telling lies about Democrats for some time. He’s a bitter and somewhat loopy “Republican” who would likely have tried to discover some flaw in Obama regardless of Obama’s race.) If I’ve got them right, Corsi and Farah may not believe every particular they advance – or the particulars advanced by other birthers – but they do believe there is something “wrong” with Obama. At the base of their attacks there is strong belief. However deluded Corsi is, I find it hard to believe a man would devote himself to the years it takes to write books against Obama unless he were animated by by a serious belief of some kind. In this case, with birthers like these, there is likely a tendency to say “yes” first, whenever confronted by any anti-Obama speculation. These are people with world views – strange ones, admittedly – that allow certain bits of information in and ignore others. They have a sort of world-picture that they believe in and actively promote. Hatred of Obama is only one corner of the picture.

    Someone like Orly Taitz, on the other hand, strikes me as different. I don’t think she starts with a world-view at all. I think she starts with a rabid hatred of Barack Obama. She believes Barack Obama is demonic. Birtherism is as good a way as any to get at her version of the devil. Her arguments are confused when they’re not ridiculous, ridiculous when they’re not deluded. Does she “believe” what she says? It was interesting watching her stand before a judge and assert in court that the birth certificate released by Obama is an obvious forgery that could have been better done by one of her own children. Could anyone do this without actually believing what they say? Yes, certainly, but only if they were deeply cynical and Taitz just strikes me as deluded, completely kerfuffled by her hatred of Obama. I don’t believe for a second that she is animated by love or regard for the constitution, though of course she insists she cares ONLY about the constitution. If she cared about the constitution, the judiciary’s right to interpret the constitution would be meaningful to her. The judiciary having ruled in Obama’s favour, she is willing to demonize the judicary, one of the cornerstones of American democracy. In a way, I think she is less cynical than Corsi or Farah, if only because she seems incapable of the kind of distance cynicism requires.

    Donald Trump … now there’s a different kind of “birther” entirely. I don’t know what he believes. He’s like a snake that has charmed itself by staring in a mirror. He believes in Donald Trump above all. There isn’t room in his psyche for belief in anything other than himself, apparently. So, one day, the idea of birtherism was communicated to him and he thought it the kind of bauble he could use. I think it would surprise no one if, tomorrow, Trump announced that birtherism is a joke that he – the Great Trump – has disproved. Though Obama didn’t refer to Trump by name, it seems pretty clear Trump IS a carnival barker. He’s unique, though, in that the carnival itself is also called Donald Trump. One wonders if he actually knows what he believes.

    My (somewhat labored) point is really that … although I kind of agree with El Diablo Negro’s remark, I think you could create a taxonomy of belief where birthers are concerned. They all seem to believe in something, but that “something” isn’t always the same thing …

  3. Northland10 says:
    December 21, 2011 at 8:00 am  (Quote)

    Congratulations to the birthers, as they picked up an award (sort of 2 with mention of Sheriff Joe) in Hatewatch’s 5th Annual Smackdown Awards.

    9. We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Evidence Award

    http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/12/20/the-last-word-hatewatchs-5th-annual-smackdown-awards/

  4. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    December 21, 2011 at 8:09 am  (Quote)

    It’s a bundle of switches, my boy. Switches (or a lump of coal) is the traditional Christmas gift for naughty children.

    Try Google images for “bundle of switches” and about all you get is networking hardware 😉

    For your further amusement:

    http://www.theweedpatchstore.com/images/P/9981M.jpg
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A8re_Fouettard

    JPotter: A bundle of rods, Doc?

  5. Vince Treacy says:
    December 21, 2011 at 8:21 am  (Quote)

    This is a good time to look into the wayback machine. Return with us now to those thrilling days of yesteryear….February 28, 2009:

    “I firmly predict that even after the original or vault or whatever copy it is that they want is made public, the doubters will still raise new doubts, charge new forgeries, float more ill-founded legal theories, on to infinity.”

    http://jonathanturley.org/2009/02/24/active-soldier-joins-lawsuit-challenging-obamas-right-to-serve-as-president/#comment-41437

  6. Vince Treacy says:
    December 21, 2011 at 8:39 am  (Quote)

    While the Constitution was being drafted, there were many public suggestions that the struggling republic needed royal, noble, or foreign military leadership. The names of children of King George, European nobles, and foreign military leaders were being bruited about. The founders feared that a foreign leader might persuade Congress to naturalize him by legislation and make him eligible for the Presidency.

    John Jay wrote to Washington to “hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

    So there is written evidence that the framers wanted to prevent foreign leaders with proven international ambition from taking power in the United States. The framers inserted a provision to prevent the Congress from granting citizenship to such a foreign leader, barring any naturalized foreigner from taking power.

    They worried about the admission of grown-up, adult foreigners into the administration of the government. If they were concerned about the children of non-citizens, they certainly disguised that fear effectively.

    This is why they excluded foreign naturalized citizens from the Presidency. There is no evidence that any founder ever wanted to bar any children born in the United States from the Presidency.

    The idea that citizens born in the United States come in two varieties, one born to two citizens and the other to one or two alien parents, might appeal to Corsi and his adherents, but there is no textual evidence in the Constitution that supports the inference, and no evidence that any framer or founder ever supported such an idea.

    In sum, John Jay expressly warned of the admission of “foreigners” into our government. There is nothing in the word “foreigner” that implies that a child born in the United States is a foreigner.

    In the over 220 years until 2008, there had never been a suggestion that citizens born in the United States must be sorted into two categories based on parentage. The courts have been adamant that only naturalized citizens are excluded from the Presidency. In all other respects, all citizens are equal in the dignity of their citizenship and in all their rights and privileges under the Constitution.

  7. J. Potter says:
    December 21, 2011 at 9:30 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: It’s a bundle of switches, my boy. Switches (or a lump of coal) is the traditional Christmas gift for naughty children.For your further amusement…

    Amusing, indeed! Pretty hefty switches …. getting spanked at Dr. C’s house is not a good idea.

  8. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    December 21, 2011 at 9:52 am  (Quote)

    I’ve replaced my sticks with a better image of Père Fouettard.

    J. Potter: Amusing, indeed! Pretty hefty switches …. getting spanked at Dr. C’s house is not a good idea.

  10. AnotherBird says:
    December 21, 2011 at 10:05 am  (Quote)

    From birtherdumb as sourced to WND.

    Obama’s Mother Lied To US Government

    President Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, told the U.S. government she would homeschool her son using U.S.-approved textbooks during the period she moved the family to Indonesia. Dunham, however, broke her pledge. She enrolled the future president in Indonesian schools, where he was registered as a Muslim going by the
    name “Barry Soetoro.” Dunham’s pledge to homeschool Obama was part of an ongoing
    attempt to secure an immigration department waiver so her second husband, Indonesian citizen Lolo Soetoro, could return to the U.S. after his visa had expired. Since Obama’s mother’s first husband was married already (as per Associated Press-view here) when he married Ms. Dunham, he was not legally Barack Husein Obama Jr. Since Obama is not the child of US citizens, he is disqualified from office as our Founders stipulated that only natural born citizens of US citizens can be VP or President.

    With the great journalistic investigative skills that WND seems to have it would be expected that they would be able to find something more substantial to finally prove their unsubstantiated claims. However, they just don’t care they are more interested in keeping this birther nonsense alive.

  11. Majority Will says:
    December 21, 2011 at 11:16 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: Try Google images for “bundle of switches” and about all you get is networking hardware

    Which from my experience, can be far more frightening, painful and the subject of repeat nightmares.

  12. Steve says:
    December 21, 2011 at 11:31 am  (Quote)

    AnotherBird: From birtherdumb as sourced to WND.With the great journalistic investigative skills that WND seems to have it would be expected that they would be able to find something more substantial to finally prove their unsubstantiated claims. However, they just don’t care they are more interested in keeping this birther nonsense alive.

    Just curious, why would she even have needed to tell the U.S. government her plans for educating her son when she was in Indonesia?

  13. Majority Will says:
    December 21, 2011 at 11:35 am  (Quote)

    Fmr. City Council Candidate in Hot Water for Obama Threat

    (excerpt) CARSON, Calif. (KTLA) — The Secret Service is investigating a former local city council candidate accused of making threats against President Barack Obama.

    Authorities say 48-year-old Jules Manson, a 2011 Carson City Council candidate, threatened the president on his Facebook page when he wrote: “Assassinate the f—— n—– and his monkey children.”

    (source: http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-carson-candidate-obama-threats,0,6861058.story)

  14. Bob says:
    December 21, 2011 at 12:11 pm  (Quote)

    Playing Both Sides Of The Birther Charade

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201112210006

  15. El Diablo Negro says:
    December 21, 2011 at 12:12 pm  (Quote)

    Ahh, good ol’ Facebook and insane rants. My question is…why say I want to assassinate you and your children if you mean no harm? There are plenty of other ways to voice displeasure with a non-aggressive tone. A typical case of speaking before thinking…to the world. No one want’s a visit from the Secret Service, how do you explain that to the wife and kids?

    Majority Will: Fmr. City Council Candidate in Hot Water for Obama Threat

    (excerpt) CARSON, Calif. (KTLA) — The Secret Service is investigating a former local city council candidate accused of making threats against President Barack Obama.

    Authorities say 48-year-old Jules Manson, a 2011 Carson City Council candidate, threatened the president on his Facebook page when he wrote: “Assassinate the f—— n—– and his monkey children.”

  16. Thrifty says:
    December 21, 2011 at 1:14 pm  (Quote)

    A YouTube video by a birther has been rattling around in my brain for the past few days and I’d kinda like to view it again. Unfortunately I have no idea who posted it. Can the folks here help me locate it if I give some clues?

    It wasn’t anything fancy, just the standard Vlog style “guy talking into a webcam” video.

    The birther was particularly angry. I *think* (but am not sure) it was the same guy who said he was gonna drive to Washington DC to arrest President Obama.

    One of the points he hit on, which I find most memorable, was his belief that if Ron Paul just says that he thinks the Birthers (though the video author didn’t use that word since I believe Birthers find it deragatory) have merit in their arguments, he would sweep the 2012 election and get to be President.

    Anyone know what I’m talking about and have a link handy?

  17. Daniel says:
    December 21, 2011 at 3:04 pm  (Quote)

    Daryn Moran is the guy I think you’re referring to, Thrifty

    Haven’t heard a peep from him in months since his ridiculous and doomed to failure attempt to arrest the President back in September.

    Anyone else heard anything new?

  18. Daniel says:
    December 21, 2011 at 3:40 pm  (Quote)

    There was a few posts on Evolution over in the “New poll results: most Iowa Republicans are idiots” thread which were somewhat off-topic, so I decided to post my point here.

    The following is an essay I wrote some time ago as a response to the anti-evolution crowd that insists that they are not animals or apes or primates, etc. The document can be found at https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ac57A_vx4PKPYWpoZ2dkbTU0NjQ2XzE1Znh4NW5zZGQ feel free to use or alter. I apologize in advance for the length.
    ____________________________________________

    I’mthinking wrote: “If I say my gradfather was a monkey or an ape then I am part ape. If my great grand father was a monkey then i am part monkey… if my great great great etc. grand mother was an ape and they had ape kids then Im an ape even if I say that i didn’t say i was an ape. A true evolutionist would stand up and beat his chest and roar out that he was an ape and proud of it.”

    Although I really am hesitant to try to explain this to someone who cannot be bothered to do the work to become informed first, I will try. Please bear with me.

    Are you part “ape”? Well yes you are. Here is why.

    You are a living organism. You are not a Bacterium, but you do share a significant number of genes with bacteria, including a significant number of unexpressed, or “extra” genes you don’t use, but that bacteria do. Since genes are passed along from your parents, why would you have these genes that you don’t even use, unless your parents and ancestors gave them to you? Apparently the bacteria got them from the same source you did. Now keep that in mind as we use genotype to climb the phylogenetic tree.

    You are a Eukaryote. You are not an Archea, but you do share a significant number of genes with archea, more so than with bacteria, therefore you are more closely related. Just as you are more closely related to your mother than to your aunt, because your mother and your aunt diverged before you came along.

    You are a metazoan. You are not a protist, but you do share a significant number of genes with protists, more so than with archea, Therefore you are more closely related to protists than you are with archea.

    You are a bilaterian. You are not a cniderian, but you do share a significant number of genes with cniderians, more so than with protists,

    You are a deutorostome. You are not a locotrophozoan, but you do share a significant number of genes with locotrophozoa, more so than with cniderians,

    You are a chordate. You are not a hemichordate, but you do share a significant number of genes with hemichordata, more so than with locotrophozoa,

    You are a craniatan. You are not a cephalochordate, but you do share a significant number of genes with cephnalochordata, more so than with hemichordata,

    You are a vertebrate. You are not a hyperotretian, but you do share a significant number of genes with hyperotreti, more so than with cephalochordates,

    You are a gnathostome. You are not a osteostracian, but you do share a significant number of genes with osteostraci, more so than with hyperotreti,

    You are a deutorostome. You are not a locotrophozoan, but you do share a significant number of genes with locotrophozoa, more so than with cniderians,

    Does anyone mind if I skip ahead a bit? – several subcladic levels snipped –

    You are a eutherian (a placental mammal) . You are not a marssupial, but you do share a significant number of genes with marsupia, more so than with anapsida (most reptiles, birds etc), You have hair, you feed your live born young with milk, and your genetic material by this time is almost identical with all other eutherians. Since genes can only come from ancestry, All eutherians had a common ancestor (yes, for some strange reason we do have the genes necessary to grow antlers, we just don’t use them).

    You are a primate. You are not a cetacean, but you do share a significant number of genes with cetacea, more so than with marsupials, You both give live birth, and suckle your young.

    You are a catarhinni. You are not a tarsiian, but you do share a significant number of genes with tarsii, more so than with cetacea,

    You are a hominidae. You are not a hylobatidae, but you do share a significant number of genes with hylobatidae, more so than with tarsii,

    You are a homo. You are not a pan (chimpanzees), but you do share a significant number of genes with pan, more so than with hylobatidae,

    You are a homo sapiens. You are not a australopithecus, but you do share a significant number of genes with australopithecus, more so than with pan,

    Thus you see as we climb the phylogenetic tree, by tracing genes which can only come by way of ancestry, that you are indeed related by ancestry to apes, and to all other forms of animal life.

    A further example, if we take a look at the T50H difference between common chimpanzees and pygmy chimpanzees we see a difference of only about 0.73, which is what we’d expect since they are almost exactly the same, genetically

    The T50H difference between humans and chimpanzees is about 1.6. Almost exactly the same.

    The T50H difference between gorillas and chimpanzees is about 2.3. This shows unequivocably that we are more closely related to chimpanzees than even gorillas are.

    So yes, I’m thinking, you are an ape. Just as surely as you have your grandfathers nose and your great/great/great grandmothers eyes.

  19. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 4:46 pm  (Quote)

    Fazil, first of all, I wanted to tell you that I really enjoy your posts! This was another excellent one and I appreciated your full post and breakdown analysis of some of the “key players” in broaching the issue.

    I’ll focus on your summary statement, because that really hit the nail on the head. I agree completely with the taxonomy of belief points…an argument similar to what I’ve been trying to say as well, but I like how you succinctly described it better. Kudos!

    Fazil Iskander: My (somewhat labored) point is really that … although I kind of agree with El Diablo Negro’s remark, I think you could create a taxonomy of belief where birthers are concerned. They all seem to believe in something, but that “something” isn’t always the same thing …

  20. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 5:00 pm  (Quote)

    Thanks for the link! A good read!

    Northland10: Congratulations to the birthers, as they picked up an award (sort of 2 with mention of Sheriff Joe) in Hatewatch’s 5th Annual Smackdown Awards.http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/12/20/the-last-word-hatewatchs-5th-annual-smackdown-awards/

  21. Bran Mak Morn says:
    December 21, 2011 at 5:17 pm  (Quote)

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arizona-sheriff-20111220,0,7573562.story

    The Homeland Security Department says it will replace Maricopa County officers after revoking Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s authority to access agency systems.

  22. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 5:21 pm  (Quote)

    Kudos! Loved your entire post. I will read your full article link as well, as soon as I have time.

    Daniel: Thus you see as we climb the phylogenetic tree, by tracing genes which can only come by way of ancestry, that you are indeed related by ancestry to apes, and to all other forms of animal life.

  23. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 5:24 pm  (Quote)

    Thanks for the link & story update, MW!

    From the tv station interview footage, I’m actually hopeful that Mr. Manson may have finally learned his lesson and be more responsible with his emotional outbursts in the future. Quite a different reaction than his prior defensive poor excuses…

    Majority Will: Fmr. City Council Candidate in Hot Water for Obama Threat(excerpt) CARSON, Calif. (KTLA) — The Secret Service is investigating a former local city council candidate accused of making threats against President Barack Obama.Authorities say 48-year-old Jules Manson, a 2011 Carson City Council candidate, threatened the president on his Facebook page when he wrote: “Assassinate the f—— n—– and his monkey children.”(source: http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-carson-candidate-obama-threats,0,6861058.story)

  24. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 5:36 pm  (Quote)

    Thanks Bob!

    That article was spot on and really puts the RW tactic of causing problems and then trying to cry that they are the “victims”.

    I too am sick of that type of whiny hypocricy that they seem to use as cover for every problem they are involved with stoking in the first place. These are the slimy tactics that open the door way to the nonsense of false equivocation.

    The comments over there were excellent as well. In particular, “beDecent” added an excellent run-down of additional examples of this passive-aggressive classic bully tactic behavior on display.

    Bob: Playing Both Sides Of The Birther Charadehttp://mediamatters.org/blog/201112210006

  25. G says:
    December 21, 2011 at 6:06 pm  (Quote)

    LOL! Good news.

    On an unrelated side note: Going to that LA Times site link, I found another story that really excited my personal interests – in the upper left corner, there is a section titled “In the News”, which referenced “The Hobbit” and that story link contained the 1st Trailer release for the new movie!!!

    Now *that* really made my day!!!

    Bran Mak Morn: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arizona-sheriff-20111220,0,7573562.storyThe Homeland Security Department says it will replace Maricopa County officers after revoking Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s authority to access agency systems.

  26. The Magic M says:
    December 22, 2011 at 5:10 am  (Quote)

    Thrifty: One of the points he hit on, which I find most memorable, was his belief that if Ron Paul just says that he thinks the Birthers […] have merit in their arguments, he would sweep the 2012 election and get to be President.

    Over at the P&E, some posters dream of the opposite – that Paul secretly agrees with them and only keeps quiet in order to not be labelled crazy, and that once he’s elected, he’ll expose his true birther faith and throw the Obama people in jail… *sigh*

  27. Keith says:
    December 22, 2011 at 5:22 am  (Quote)

    Ron Paul being is being attacked for his racist newsletters.

    Please read the article for full details, I’m not here to bag Paul so much as to note the analysis of why the Paul organization delved into racism.

    So why were Ron Paul or his ghostwriters engaged in racism and conspiracy theories? And why did Ron Paul allow this?

    The first answer is simply that marginal causes attract marginal people.

    The Gold Standard and non-interventionism have long been pushed to the fringe of our politics, and ambitious people tend to dive into the mainstream. That means that some of the ‘talent’ that marginalized ideas attract will be odd and unstable.

    There are two strategies for dealing with this problem. You purge your movement of cranks to preserve credibility and risk alienating a chunk of supporters. Or you let everyone in your movement fly their freak flag and live with the consequences. Ron Paul, being a libertarian, has always done the latter.

    People like Perry and Arpaio (and Bachman too? )seem to be going with option 2 when it comes to birthers. But is anybody actually going whole hog into option 1? Are any of the GOP completely rejecting birther claims and purging birther cranks from their org?

  28. Keith says:
    December 22, 2011 at 5:23 am  (Quote)

    Keith: Ron Paul being is being attacked for his racist newsletters.

    Please read the article for full details

    I forgot the link. Sorry.

    The Atlantic: The Story Behind Ron Paul’s Racist Newsletters

  29. Jim F says:
    December 22, 2011 at 5:35 am  (Quote)

    You are all getting too serious I was over on Orlys site today and she continues to use up the worlds supply of punctuation marks at an alarming rate in particular she has cornered the market in commas so the rest of us have to get by with none I am also worried that there will be a shortage of fullstops so I am not using any here is there a federal law that can put a stop to this the EU has put an embargo in place to prevent any run on the comma but they think that it may be too late what can we do

  30. Majority Will says:
    December 22, 2011 at 7:19 am  (Quote)

    Anti-Birther’s Cove:
    http://whalertly.com/wordpress/anti-birthers-cove/

    “Ever since the 44th President was elected, thousands of citizens in America have believed that he was not eligible for office. They believe that President Obama was born in Kenya, or that his father keeps him ineligible, or that his constant moving about keeps him from being allowed to take over the office of President. It is for this reason that this page exists, to help dispel the myths about Obama’s birth.

    After handling arguments about Obama’s birth, my co-writer, Sage, and myself, decided that it was time to create a library of information on the subject. On this page, you will find information about various birther’ claims, and the proper responses to them. Everything from Constitutional law, to forged birth certificates, will be covered. We hope that you will start to use this page as a source in your debates against birthers.

    It is our goal to be the most comprehensive site on the internet for people arguing against birthers. Please check the below list and find the argument you are facing. Then click on it, and you will see one of several responses to that argument.”

  31. Scientist says:
    December 22, 2011 at 7:48 am  (Quote)

    Keith: Are any of the GOP completely rejecting birther claims and purging birther cranks from their org?

    I think Huntsman would have a hard time expressing doubts about Obama’s legitimacy and then explaining why he served in his Administration.

  32. Keith says:
    December 22, 2011 at 8:02 am  (Quote)

    Scientist: I think Huntsman would have a hard time expressing doubts about Obama’s legitimacy and then explaining why he served in his Administration.

    Ahhh, yes. Mr. Huntsman. I’m liking him more and more each day.

    Therefore he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell.

  33. Lupin says:
    December 22, 2011 at 10:04 am  (Quote)

    All too often, birthers who happen to troll here blithely assumed everyone here is a die-hard Obama supporter.

    Not so, of course.

    I just read this article by the former chief of staff to former Democratic Sen. Ted Kaufman, who chaired Senate oversight hearings on financial fraud prosecutions and which details Obama’s numerous statements and actions designed to shield Wall Street executives from prosecution very depressing:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-connaughton/obama-wall-street-laws_b_1157915.html

    Increasingly I reach the conclusion that your Republican party’s crazy shindigs, calling Obama a “Marxist”, etc. is but an elaborate kabuki to make you vote for the only sane alternative who happens to be in the pocket of Wall Street.

    No matter what you do, you’re f*ck*d.

  34. Sef says:
    December 22, 2011 at 10:10 am  (Quote)

    Scientist: I think Huntsman would have a hard time expressing doubts about Obama’s legitimacy and then explaining why he served in his Administration.

    I expect the birthers and probably hardcore reps would consider him a turncoat.

  35. The Magic M says:
    December 22, 2011 at 10:11 am  (Quote)

    More subpoena goodness from Orly:
    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=29459

    This time, she resurrects the Sunahara meme (that Obama allegedly stole his BC number from a Hawaiian girl born the same day and deceased the next).

    Well, at least it will keep her out of depression to live the dream that those downloaded pre-signed subpoena forms have any legal relevance in Hawaii. She’ll find out soon enough, but until then, expect her to file more of these (maybe the next one to the SSA or Kapiolani hospital?).

  36. The Magic M says:
    December 22, 2011 at 10:13 am  (Quote)

    Sef: I expect the birthers and probably hardcore reps would consider him a turncoat.

    I expect birthers would, as usual, not take any issue with obvious inconsistencies if they would hurt their cause.

  37. sfjeff says:
    December 22, 2011 at 12:47 pm  (Quote)

    Keith: Ahhh, yes. Mr. Huntsman. I’m liking him more and more each day. Therefore he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell.

    Exactly- he is the moderate the independents and disaffected Democratic voters might vote for. Which is why he will never be considered a real Republican.

    I do not understand the thinking that an independent who voted for Obama, but no longer supports Obama, would be likely to support a Gingrich or a Bachmann.

  38. Joey says:
    December 22, 2011 at 12:59 pm  (Quote)

    Huntsman’s kiss of death in the Republican Party is that he worked for the “communist” Obama as Obama’s ambassador to “Communist” People’s Republic of China.
    The kiss of death for Mitt Romney is Romneycare in Massachusetts.

  39. Northland10 says:
    December 22, 2011 at 1:42 pm  (Quote)

    The Ninth Circuit is giving coal to the birthers this year. Dismissal affirmed and Orly’s recent motion for a writ, denied.

    http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000011948

  40. Sef says:
    December 22, 2011 at 1:51 pm  (Quote)

    Does anyone know what El Fitzo might be facing for his latest prank? Since it appears his ill-gotten gains were sent interstate might the Feds find a new BFF for him to bunk with for awhile? Does TN have a 3 strikes law? What is Sharon’s criminality in all this? It would be just loverly to discover that there was a conspiracy amongst some of our “friends” for him to do this.

  41. Reality Check says:
    December 22, 2011 at 2:02 pm  (Quote)

    Check out the footnote on page 6. The court references WKA as a rebuttal to the claim that Obama is not an NBC. This is great.

  42. El Diablo Negro says:
    December 22, 2011 at 2:06 pm  (Quote)

    Northland10:
    The Ninth Circuit is giving coal to the birthers this year.Dismissal affirmed and Orly’s recent motion for a writ, denied.

    http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000011948

    This sums it all up nice and tidy

    “Plaintiffs did not show anything but a “generalized grievance” insufficient to
    establish standing.” pg. 14

  43. El Diablo Negro says:
    December 22, 2011 at 2:07 pm  (Quote)

    correction…pg. 15

  44. G says:
    December 22, 2011 at 3:05 pm  (Quote)

    Kudos to them! As they build their compilations, they can save some time by simply providing credited reference citations to sites such as this one, where many of these same answers have already been addressed and compiled.

    Majority Will: Anti-Birther’s Cove:http://whalertly.com/wordpress/anti-birthers-cove/“Ever since the 44th President was elected, thousands of citizens in America have believed that he was not eligible for office. They believe that President Obama was born in Kenya, or that his father keeps him ineligible, or that his constant moving about keeps him from being allowed to take over the office of President. It is for this reason that this page exists, to help dispel the myths about Obama’s birth.After handling arguments about Obama’s birth, my co-writer, Sage, and myself, decided that it was time to create a library of information on the subject. On this page, you will find information about various birther’ claims, and the proper responses to them. Everything from Constitutional law, to forged birth certificates, will be covered. We hope that you will start to use this page as a source in your debates against birthers.It is our goal to be the most comprehensive site on the internet for people arguing against birthers. Please check the below list and find the argument you are facing. Then click on it, and you will see one of several responses to that argument.”

  45. G says:
    December 22, 2011 at 3:41 pm  (Quote)

    KABOOM! This long awaited (and entirely predictable outcome) ruling on the endless soap opera of Drake v. Obama is worthy of coverage in an entire blog article of its own by Dr. C.

    I just had the chance to read it in its entirety. A very solid and thorough legal smack down of all of Orly’s & Kreep’s arguments and attempts on this matter.

    I get quite a chuckle of seeing how the Birther’s frivolous filings succeed in only one thing – serving as precedent against them to bite them in the @ss the next time one of them tries to pull the same lame argument. That was on display here as well as page 16 notes:

    The harm he alleges is therefore too generalized to confer standing. See Berg v. Obama

    Also, I got quite a kick out of the seeing that the only place this court disagreed with the prior ruling, was essentially saying that the prior court was too lenient to entertaining one of the plaintiff’s arguments in the first place and didn’t even need to “go there”, because the plaintiff’s point could have been solidly dismissed without getting that far in hypethetical scenario play. In other words, they simply pointed out that the prior court didn’t even need to “go there” in the first place. The plaintiff’s argument was already moot:

    The District Court was mistaken in assuming, however, that the political
    candidates still had an interest in a fair competition at the time the complaint was
    filed. The original complaint was filed on January 20, 2009, at 3:26 p.m. Pacific
    Standard Time, after President Obama was officially sworn in as President. The
    First Amended Complaint was filed on July 14, 2009. Whichever complaint is
    considered, the 2008 general election was over when it was filed. Once the 2008
    election was over and the President sworn in, Keyes, Drake, and Lightfoot were no
    longer “candidates” for the 2008 general election. Moreover, they have not alleged
    any interest in running against President Obama in the future. Therefore, none of
    the plaintiffs could claim that they would be injured by the “potential loss of an
    election.” Owen, 640 F.2d at 1132. Plaintiffs’ competitive interest in running
    against a qualified candidate had lapsed.4 Similarly, Robinson’s interest as an
    elector—derived from the competitive interest of his preferred candidates—was
    extinguished by the time the complaint was filed.

    That can be found on pages 19 & 20 of the report. See also footnotes #3 & #4 on those pages, which expand upon driving this point home…

    Northland10: The Ninth Circuit is giving coal to the birthers this year. Dismissal affirmed and Orly’s recent motion for a writ, denied.http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000011948

  46. Whatever4 says:
    December 22, 2011 at 3:51 pm  (Quote)

    Majority Will:
    Anti-Birther’s Cove:
    http://whalertly.com/wordpress/anti-birthers-cove/

    “Ever since the 44th President was elected, thousands of citizens in America have believed that he was not eligible for office. They believe that President Obama was born in Kenya, or that his father keeps him ineligible, or that his constant moving about keeps him from being allowed to take over the office of President. It is for this reason that this page exists, to help dispel the myths about Obama’s birth.

    After handling arguments about Obama’s birth, my co-writer, Sage, and myself, decided that it was time to create a library of information on the subject. On this page, you will find information about various birther’ claims, and the proper responses to them. Everything from Constitutional law, to forged birth certificates, will be covered. We hope that you will start to use this page as a source in your debates against birthers.

    It is our goal to be the most comprehensive site on the internet for people arguing against birthers. Please check the below list and find the argument you are facing. Then click on it, and you will see one of several responses to that argument.”

    Seems like more duplicated effort. Between Doc C, The Fogbow, NBC, and the Birther Wiki — is there any more information that hasn’t been presented? It’s not like birthers wil listen anyway.

  47. Rickey says:
    December 22, 2011 at 6:02 pm  (Quote)

    AnotherBird:
    From birtherdumb as sourced to WND.

    “Since Obama’s mother’s first husband was married already (as per Associated Press-view here) when he married Ms. Dunham, he was not legally Barack Husein Obama Jr.”

    That is serious stupidity from WND. Obama is not legally “Obama Jr.” because his father was a bigamist? Since when does a child’s parents have to be legally married before the child can take his father’s name?

    They just pull this stuff out of their collective asses.

  48. Majority Will says:
    December 22, 2011 at 6:13 pm  (Quote)

    Whatever4: Seems like more duplicated effort.

    Nothing wrong with that. The more sanity, the merrier.

  49. Arthur says:
    December 22, 2011 at 8:16 pm  (Quote)

    For you amusement: here’s a comment from The Post and Email. It was a response to an article about Orly’s hunger strike.

    “In these evil times wherein a Muslim practicing taqqiya has usurped the office of the president of the United States of America and is employing Marxist methods in order to institute Socialist policies that he may advance the multi-faceted Islamic strategy of dhimmitude thereby furthering the Islamic agenda of world domination and can even get away with presenting forged documents to our elected representatives in order to cover-up his high crime against the highest law of this land, the Constitution of the United States of America – we need the empowerment of the Holy Pneuma now more than ever. God is in control; Jesus is the answer…and Ron Paul is the best chance we have of getting this country back to the biblical standards of righteousness that – to the degree that we adhered to them – made this country great. To the degree that we have deviated from the teaching of Scripture: such as slavery, abortion, toleration of the depraved homosexuals, etcetera…, etc…, we have reaped the whirlwind.’”

  50. Northland10 says:
    December 22, 2011 at 11:20 pm  (Quote)

    It was only a little over a month ago that Scientist was noting that things were slowing down here. Squeeks would stop in to relate her battles with Mario, but other there was far less action. Trolls were down and we were left discussing some Pizza guy (who was that?).

    I agreed with Scientist. However, as seems to happen with the birthers, we hit a slow and boring period only to have it pick up and go all wet and wild. I wouldn’t mind some new, creative legal theories but, that well may be long dried up.

  51. Sef says:
    December 23, 2011 at 9:46 pm  (Quote)

    Over at NBC’s site there is a report { http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/12/23/is-trump-going-to-play-the-card/ } that The Donald has switched his party registration to “Independent”. 2 points: In NY State there is no “Independent” party. There is an Independence Party and one can register without any party affiliation. The second is that a party switch only becomes valid after the next General Election, which will be 11/2012. So, until next November Trump is still a Rep.

  52. Lucas D. Smith says:
    December 24, 2011 at 10:01 am  (Quote)

    Merry Christmas to all including Obotopians and birther debunkers!

    Tomorrow (Christmas Day 2011) the proud and patriotic inspectorsmith youtube forum of approximately 2.5 years moves to its new home, the “InspectorSmith Forum“, at http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/InspectorSmith/

    I have published a meaningful and momentous new blog report at the WOBIK Blog which explains more about our new forum and the move.

    “Dynamic new InspectorSmith Forum opens on December 25th Christmas Day, 2011.”

    http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/dynamic-new-inspectorsmith-forum-opens-on-december-25th-christmas-day-2011/

    Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within this blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so!

    Thank you immensely and Merry Christmas!

    Lucas D. Smith
    319-804-0440

  53. G says:
    December 24, 2011 at 12:25 pm  (Quote)

    Merry Christmas Lucas!

    Yes, Rudolph the Rednose Reindeer is an excellent classic! I love all those great animated Christmas movies of yore!

    Lucas D. Smith: Merry Christmas to all including Obotopians and birther debunkers!Tomorrow (Christmas Day 2011) the proud and patriotic inspectorsmith youtube forum of approximately 2.5 years moves to its new home, the “InspectorSmith Forum“, at http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/InspectorSmith/I have published a meaningful and momentous new blog report at the WOBIK Blog which explains more about our new forum and the move.“Dynamic new InspectorSmith Forum opens on December 25th Christmas Day, 2011.”http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/dynamic-new-inspectorsmith-forum-opens-on-december-25th-christmas-day-2011/Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within this blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so!Thank you immensely and Merry Christmas!Lucas D. Smith319-804-0440

  54. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    December 24, 2011 at 2:05 pm  (Quote)

    I may not make it to the blog on Christmas Day. I have church in the morning and the grand kids are arriving for the afternoon.

    However, I did write a little Christmas article that will auto-publish at midnight Eastern Time tonight.

    Peace and Joy to all.

    — Dr. Conspiracy

  55. Lucas D. Smith says:
    December 24, 2011 at 2:48 pm  (Quote)

    G:
    Merry Christmas Lucas!

    Yes, Rudolph the Rednose Reindeer is an excellent classic!I love all those great animated Christmas movies of yore!

    Thank you G and a Merry Christmas to you too!

  56. G says:
    December 24, 2011 at 2:51 pm  (Quote)

    Merry Christmas to you & your family Dr C.! And Merry Christmas to everyone else out there too!

    Dr. Conspiracy: I may not make it to the blog on Christmas Day. I have church in the morning and the grand kids are arriving for the afternoon.However, I did write a little Christmas article that will auto-publish at midnight Eastern Time tonight.Peace and Joy to all.– Dr. Conspiracy

  57. Keith says:
    December 25, 2011 at 12:18 am  (Quote)

    Interesting article in the NY Times.

    The Big Lie

    Its about Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac and their relationship to the housing bubble and the GFC, but doesn’t the strategy sound familiar? Tobacco contributes to cancer? Human contribution to climate change and its affects?

    Anybody else notice the attempts that the anti-Obama movement has made trying to use this technique vis-a-vis the ‘birther’ meme and its abject failure to gain any traction?

    That’s because birthers fail at the first hurdle: you need a “certain surface plausibility” before you try to get started on The Big Lie.

    So this is how the Big Lie works.

    You begin with a hypothesis that has a certain surface plausibility. You find an ally whose background suggests that he’s an “expert”; out of thin air, he devises “data.” You write articles in sympathetic publications, repeating the data endlessly; in time, some of these publications make your cause their own. Like-minded congressmen pick up your mantra and invite you to testify at hearings.

    You’re chosen for an investigative panel related to your topic. When other panel members, after inspecting your evidence, reject your thesis, you claim that they did so for ideological reasons. This, too, is repeated by your allies. Soon, the echo chamber you created drowns out dissenting views; even presidential candidates begin repeating the Big Lie.

  58. Reality Check says:
    December 25, 2011 at 8:00 am  (Quote)

    Lucas D. Smith: Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within this blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so!

    On your blog you said:

    Lucas D. Smith: Approximately 2.5 years ago a forum began formation, autonomously, at the InspectorSmith youtube channel. Today that forum contains nearly 18,000 comments. In the early days (the first year or so) the forum served as a battle ground where Patriots sought to expose Kenyan born Barack Obama as ineligible for Office of President of the United States of America and where Obotopians attempted to combat these facts and truths with deception and disinformation. As time passed Obots were weeded out with extensive due process. The forum was freed up from continual day to day battle and university style debate became more of the norm. Today that forum consists nearly exclusively of a band of zealous and earnest Patriots, with broad readership and audience, who on a daily basis post eligibility related news, thoughts, questions, ideas, and plans.

    I am not optimistic about the “free speech” part nor the “extensive due process”.

    Merry Christmas.

  59. Lucas D. Smith says:
    December 25, 2011 at 3:45 pm  (Quote)

    Merry Christmas birther debunkers!

    I have published a provocative and engaging new blog report at the WOBIK Blog!

    “Kidney: A Memoir Written in Third-Person. By Lucas Daniel Smith. (Time to set the facts straight. Lucas Smith saved the lives of two men in critical need of kidneys.)”

    http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/kidney-a-memoir-written-in-third-person-by-lucas-daniel-smith-time-to-set-the-facts-straight-lucas-smith-saved-the-lives-of-two-men-in-critical-need-of-kidneys/

    Please exercise your free speech in the comments section below. Speak your mind, give us your thoughts, both objective and subjective. Share your ideas, hunches, inklings or your expertise. Please provide recommendation and corrections if you spot errors in fact within this blog report. Lastly, remember that posting a comment is much like casting a vote, so please do so!

    Thank you gratefully and Merry Christmas!

    Lucas D. Smith
    319-804-0440

  60. Majority Will says:
    December 26, 2011 at 3:52 pm  (Quote)

    How Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories May Pose a Genuine Threat to Humanity

    (12/25/11)

    (excerpt) The paranoia infecting a broad swath of the American right-wing can be comical at times — think about Orly Taitz and her fellow Birthers. But we laugh at our own peril, because what Richard Hofstadter famously characterized as “the paranoid style in American politics” poses a serious threat to our future: the right’s snowballing conspiracy
    theories could ultimately lead to disaster.

    . . . Today, oil and gas corporations are still funding a bunch of crank climate change deniers in order to avoid regulations that might slow their “short-term interests” in extracting as much wealth as they can from traditional hydrocarbons. And here we have Tea Partiers — a “movement” nurtured by business-friendly Republican operatives and backed by the Koch brothers’ dirty energy money — being whipped into a frenzy by the likes of Glenn Beck and shouting down local planners trying to do something about rising water levels. They’re freaking out about energy-efficient lightbulbs and bike-sharing programs, the very sorts of things we need in order to stave off disaster.

    So the next time you hear a wingnut spewing feverish nonsense about “climategate” or the “globalist agenda,” remember that this is not just fodder for late-night TV monologues, but the kind of stuff that has in the past brought societies faced with changing environments to their ultimate end.

    (source: http://www.alternet.org/story/153554/how_right-wing_conspiracy_theories_may_pose_a_genuine_threat_to_humanity?page=entire)

  61. Majority Will says:
    December 26, 2011 at 7:00 pm  (Quote)

    More Reviews for Orly’s Little Dental Shop of Horrors

    Serena J.
    Mission Viejo, CA

    One Star Rating out of Five – 9/8/2010

    “Dirty office.

    Unpleasant staff.

    Crazy dentist who can’t stop talking about her quest to bring down Obama for his “failure” to turn in his birth certificates.

    I only got a consult, which was ridiculous. I’m just glad to have escaped with all my teeth and no germs from that filthy office.”

    (http://www.yelp.com/biz/taitz-orly-dds-mission-viejo)
    ___________________________________________________________

    Stay Away

    by jameskw at Citysearch

    One Star Rating out of Five – August 03, 2009

    “I think she is overcharging based on her rates but who knows, and smells awful when up close.

    She’s an uncaring doctor in my opinion and just not very personable.”

    (http://www.insiderpages.com/doctors/Orly-N-Taitz-DDS-Mission-Viejo)
    ___________________________________________________________

    Jim in Fayetteville, NC

    One Star Rating out of Five – September 10, 2011

    “I’d stay away if I were you”

    “Rude staff and a very loud woman with a hard to understand accent runs this business. When visiting family, I had a cap come lose and fall off. This place was the only place that could get me in right away and I’m fairly sure it was because they don’t get much business. The place had a dirty feeling to it and the people, especially the large blonde haired woman, smell bad. Way too much perfume! It almost made me sick to have her work on me. The cap also came back off and I had to return to my own dentist once I came back home.”

    (http://www.merchantcircle.com/business/Appealing.Dentistry.949-586-8110)

    (Special thanks to David H. on Orly’s World on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/225611107468288/)

  62. Majority Will says:
    December 27, 2011 at 6:04 am  (Quote)

    “Birther Dee Dee Benkie A Fount Of Falsehoods And Fear Mongering About Voter Fraud” (12/27/11)

    (an all too familiar lesson about birthers making accusations without credible evidence)

    (excerpt) “Republican strategist” Dee Dee Benkie took part in the Great American Panel segment on Hannity Monday night (12/26/11) where she spewed falsehoods about “rampant” voter fraud in this country and made unsubstantiated accusations about Democrats trying to steal elections. Although voter fraud has been shown to be very rare, guest host Mark Steyn accepted her comments without challenge. He did not even ask her to back up her outrageous claims that Democrats are deliberately trying to steal elections.

    Benkie’s credibility had already been compromised during a previous appearance on Hannity when she ignored the mountain of evidence proving otherwise and questioned why President Obama hadn’t produced his birth certificate.

    (source: http://www.newshounds.us/20111227_birther_dee_dee_benkie_a_fount_of_falsehoods_and_fear_mongering_about_voter_fraud)

  63. J. Potter says:
    December 27, 2011 at 10:12 am  (Quote)

    Discussion of the 14th amendment today on the Diane Rehm Show:

    http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-12-27/constitution-today-14th-amendment-rebroadcast

    It’s a repeat, but what the heck. Oddly, not a birther in site. I didn’t hear the episode’s initial airing, not sure if our favorite topic is mentioned … believe it to be a discussion of history, development, and interpretation over time.

  64. Arthur says:
    December 27, 2011 at 2:15 pm  (Quote)

    Victoria Jackson, the painfully unfunny former member of SNL, has an important message: the United States is being overtaken by radical Muslims bent on bringing the nation under Sharia law.

    “I just went to a briefing in Washington DC, across the street from the Capitol, at the Longworth building at 8:30 am two days ago and it changed my life,” Jackson said last week on her web show, “Politichicks.” “For six hours, I saw pictures and names and dates and facts and Islamic law books and Korans, Surahs for six hours and they proved to me… that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated our highest positions in government and this is serious.”

    Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/27/victoria-jackson-muslim-brotherhood-fbi_n_1170790.html

  65. J. Potter says:
    December 27, 2011 at 4:26 pm  (Quote)

    What is with the meme that the Muslim Brotherhood is taking over the US gov’t from within? What was the seed? I mean, if one looks over the events of the past decade, a case could be made that we have been doing the Muslim Brotherhood’s bidding by undermining dictators and strongmen we had previously tolerated/supported as checks against Communism thus giving radical Islamic movements a chance to take over … so of course the Muslim Brotherhood was behind those moves! Quo vadis, right? And applying a label—one that sounds right, lifted conveniently from the nightly (Faux)news—to the boogeyman, greatly simplifies the process of recognizing and understanding the perceived (actual?) threat?

    But is there more to it than that? Too lazy to dig theough the paranoia files today. If anyone has a short version, I’d appreciate it. No doubt, Obama is secretly a chosen son of the Mooslim Bruddahood.

  66. Arthur says:
    December 27, 2011 at 5:18 pm  (Quote)

    J.Potter:

    I took Jackson’s sentence, “Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated our highest positions in government and this is serious,” and replaced “Muslim” with “Communists” and did a Google search. Got plenty of hits; here are three:

    1.) “During the 1960’s I recall reading a book entitled None Dare Call it Treason, the premise being that during the Cold War between the Western democracies and the Soviet Union dominated bloc of nations, featuring undercover spies and high tech espionage, the governments of the USA and Great Britain were infiltrated at the highest levels by secretive communist agents. Then, those loyal citizens who spoke out against the infiltration of communists, were accused of conducting witch hunts. Many, who were only trying to do their patriotic duty, were considered radicals and crazies. Much like today when one speaks out about the dangers of radical Islam he is accused of being a “racist” or an insensitive “religious zealot”. I remember during that time, the name “Joe McCarthy” was a joke, and the term “McCarthyism” became synonymous with wild intolerance and reckless accusations.” http://www.awcf.org/content/view/39/69/

    2.) “But the reality is that the Russian “perestroika,” was a masquerade designed to fool America and Europe into believing they gave up their plans for a “World Communist Government,” through revolution, war and violence. All during “perestroika,” Russia was sending spies into the U.S. to steal our military secrets. The Communists have successfully infiltrated the highest levels of government, science, the military, education and the church. http://americanholocaustcoming.blogspot.com/2011/12/iran-nuclear-strikes-on-american-soil.html

    3.) “While it was a May Day rally, some have been shocked to see the photos of America haters holding signs like “From Wisconsin to Libya – Workers Unite for communism!” Not surprising the other America haters, the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) thugs are walking side by side with the communists. It’s always been part of ‘The Plan’ implemented by the Communist International Party to infiltrate America’s unions and the plan has been very effective because too many union members are ignorant of the forces working to bring down this country.” http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd514.htm

    It appears that the “Muslim Conspiracy” is just a different take on the “Communist Conspiracy” You could probably use a variety of words, “illegal immigrants,” “Catholics,” “Jews,” etc. and get similar results.

    I’m sure that there’s a fancy way of explaining this, but I’ll go with this simple aphorism: “Haters gonna hate.”

  67. J. Potter says:
    December 27, 2011 at 6:06 pm  (Quote)

    sure, sure, so much of it all reads the same, conspiracy after conspiracy in which the name of the accused is used as a pronoun. There was a really funny one about a list of the “goals of the communist conspiracy” that first surfaced in the early 1960s and has been rehashed ever since. Like horoscopes, written so generic as to readily apply to anything! I was wondering if there was a particular germ, any unique flavor, needed a good laugh. I guess I’ll ask a nut and get an earful.

  68. Northland10 says:
    December 27, 2011 at 7:34 pm  (Quote)

    There is a new ballot access lawsuit. This one is using the 14th amendment as a defense:

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/rick-perry-sues-virginia-republicans-over-ballot-access.php

    Is that the 14th amendment before Texas secedes? I am so confused.

    (note: I realize that this is not as much on topic but, given that it has to do with ballot access, I thought I should mention it.)

  69. G says:
    December 27, 2011 at 7:43 pm  (Quote)

    Good find & read. Thanks for sharing! Yeah, unscrupulous machiavellian manipulative scumbags like Rove and Dee Dee Benkie are a major part of the problem. Their cynical and Orwellian ginned up non-controversies are nothing but brainwashing propaganda serving to not only divide Americans, but more ominously to distract from real issues ever getting addressed and fixed.

    In the article, this citing from the Brennan Center Report, struck me as one of the most important take aways in summing up the problem:

    These inflated claims are not harmless. Crying “wolf” when the allegations are unsubstantiated distracts attention from real problems that need real solutions. If we can move beyond the fixation on voter fraud, we will be able to focus on the real changes our elections need, from universal registration all the way down to sufficient parking at the poll site. Moreover, these claims of voter fraud are frequently used to justify policies that do not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters. Overly restrictive identification requirements for voters at the polls — which address a sort of voter fraud more rare than death by lightning — is only the most prominent example.

    I only wish I had more faith in our overall population to wake up to how they are being manipulated…

    Majority Will: “Birther Dee Dee Benkie A Fount Of Falsehoods And Fear Mongering About Voter Fraud” (12/27/11)(an all too familiar lesson about birthers making accusations without credible evidence)(excerpt) “Republican strategist” Dee Dee Benkie took part in the Great American Panel segment on Hannity Monday night (12/26/11) where she spewed falsehoods about “rampant” voter fraud in this country and made unsubstantiated accusations about Democrats trying to steal elections. Although voter fraud has been shown to be very rare, guest host Mark Steyn accepted her comments without challenge. He did not even ask her to back up her outrageous claims that Democrats are deliberately trying to steal elections.Benkie’s credibility had already been compromised during a previous appearance on Hannity when she ignored the mountain of evidence proving otherwise and questioned why President Obama hadn’t produced his birth certificate.(source: http://www.newshounds.us/20111227_birther_dee_dee_benkie_a_fount_of_falsehoods_and_fear_mongering_about_voter_fraud)

  70. G says:
    December 27, 2011 at 7:55 pm  (Quote)

    Yeah, that is my take away of all this too. Paranoid pants-wetters need a constant all powerful conspiracy bogeyman in order to feed and explain the constant fear they live in, simply because the real world is too vast and complex for them to either comprehend or control.

    It is so telling that they will intermingle words like Nazi, Commie, Socialist and Muslim. Because those were all prevailing threats at different periods in the past century…so even though they are utterly unrelated, they “feel” the same to them, because it is the mere “paranoia of fear” they are latching onto and nothing more.

    Such extreme paranoia definitely rots the brain. Many of these folks, such as squeeky dimwit Victoria Jackson, have completely snapped to full on nutter. They are no longer sane by any meaningful definition of the term and I highly doubt they will ever recover.

    Arthur: It appears that the “Muslim Conspiracy” is just a different take on the “Communist Conspiracy” You could probably use a variety of words, “illegal immigrants,” “Catholics,” “Jews,” etc. and get similar results.
    I’m sure that there’s a fancy way of explaining this, but I’ll go with this simple aphorism: “Haters gonna hate.”

  71. G says:
    December 27, 2011 at 7:59 pm  (Quote)

    Yeah, both he & Newt are now pursuing “legal” strategies, because their campaigns were both too incompetent to get their acts together and simply get 10,000 valid signatures by the deadline in VA.

    I find this latest “legal” tactic by them to be particularly ironic, considering how much time they spend wailing against the federal government and touting 10th Amendment “states rights” arguments. (Especially Rick Perry).

    What a bunch of incompetent and hypocritical clowns! LMAO!

    Northland10: There is a new ballot access lawsuit. This one is using the 14th amendment as a defense:http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/rick-perry-sues-virginia-republicans-over-ballot-access.phpIs that the 14th amendment before Texas secedes? I am so confused.(note: I realize that this is not as much on topic but, given that it has to do with ballot access, I thought I should mention it.)

  72. JPotter says:
    December 27, 2011 at 8:31 pm  (Quote)

    I heard that Perry and Gingrich weren’t the only chuckleheads short in VA … that only Romney and Paul had managed to satisfy VA requirements … requirements posted on 7/16/11! And after some searching, finally some confirmation …

    http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2011/12/five-gop-candidates-fail-to-qualify-for-virginia-primary-ballot/

    Nothing clear and to the point on the VA Red Party’s own site. They note prominently that Perry and Gingrich blew it, but nothing about Bachmann, Santorum, or Huntsman.

    A comparison of state requirements would be enlightening. Lots of info out there, but I haven’t seen such a comparison yet. The Green Papers looks like a good starting point…

    Oh, there’s already calls for VA to water it down, after these notable failures! Nice. Seriously? Shouldn’t a candidate demonstrate statewide interest before being able to make an attempt on the delegates?

  73. JPotter says:
    December 27, 2011 at 8:47 pm  (Quote)

    Oh, and a PS, also heard a sound bite claiming Newt would puch for a write-in campaign …. and—doh!—no write-ins allowed …. and yes, plenty of confirmation for that too. Here’s some.

    Where, oh where, are the real candidates?

  74. G says:
    December 27, 2011 at 8:56 pm  (Quote)

    You are correct. I too have found it odd that the media has mostly focused on only Newt and Perry’s failures here.

    I mean, at least both of their campaigns got as far as submitting over 10K signatures by the deadline. Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum failed to turn in *anything* at all by the deadline! Quite frankly, I’d consider those 3 campaigns to be even bigger embarassing failures in this situation.

    Really, Newt and Perry are only guilty of not doing enough to vet their own ballot signatures in advance and in not being smart enough to hedge by submitting much higher margins of extra signatures, as is standard practice. Sure, it is still a massively embarrasing expression of basic campaign incompetence, but those that entirely missed the deadline for submission completely have failed even worse!

    Oh and yes, I too highly recommend The Green Papers! A great resource and one of the key one’s that I’ve been relying on for following ballots and elections for years! It really is one of the best places for being able to find info on ballots and election results within ALL 50 states all under one roof! They are also really good at keeping it current and updated…particularly during election times. The amount of effort required to accomplish that maintenance feat can not be overstated, so I’ve got huge respect for the dedicated folks that update that site!

    JPotter: I heard that Perry and Gingrich weren’t the only chuckleheads short in VA … that only Romney and Paul had managed to satisfy VA requirements … requirements posted on 7/16/11! And after some searching, finally some confirmation …http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2011/12/five-gop-candidates-fail-to-qualify-for-virginia-primary-ballot/Nothing clear and to the point on the VA Red Party’s own site. They note prominently that Perry and Gingrich blew it, but nothing about Bachmann, Santorum, or Huntsman.A comparison of state requirements would be enlightening. Lots of info out there, but I haven’t seen such a comparison yet. The Green Papers looks like a good starting point…Oh, there’s already calls for VA to water it down, after these notable failures! Nice. Seriously? Shouldn’t a candidate demonstrate statewide interest before being able to make an attempt on the delegates?

  75. Keith says:
    December 28, 2011 at 6:49 am  (Quote)

    A bit of fairly free association ramblings…

    I ran across the term “Barnum Statement” and looked it up. A Barnum statement is one that seems to be applicable to you and you alone, but in reality is a general statement that could apply to anyone. The study of these statements was begun by Bertran R, Forer, and are called “Barnum Statements” presumably because of P.T. Barnum’s statement that “we have something for everyone”.

    Forgive the Wikipedia reference, but it is after all the most effective summary: Forer Effect. That wikiarticle gives an example questionnaire from Forer’s study and notes that he collected the assertions in that questionnaire from various horoscopes.

    This reference led to a descripion of Cold Reading and a whole list of Cognitive Biases.

    What I found relevant to this forum, beyond just the interesting information itself, is the obvious, to me at least, interplay between these various biases and effects. Much has been made here about the “Confirmation Bias”, but equally in play, I think, are many of the cognitive bias listed, for example:

    Backfire Effect – Evidence disconfirming our beliefs only strengthens them.
    Focusing effect– the tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event; causes error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcome
    Hostile media effect – the tendency to see a media report as being biased due to one’s own strong partisan views.
    Information bias – the tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action
    Irrational escalation – the phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong.
    Negativity bias – the tendency to pay more attention and give more weight to negative than positive experiences or other kinds of information.
    Neglect of probability – the tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty
    Subjective validation – perception that something is true if a subject’s belief demands it to be true. Also assigns perceived connections between coincidences.
    False consensus effect – the tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them
    Egocentric bias – recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g., remembering one’s exam grades as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as being bigger than it was
    False memory – a form of misattribution where imagination is mistaken for a memory.

    Clearly Birther’s exhibit many of these biases and effects, but we Obots demonstrate, at times, some of these as well as others I haven’t listed. The human psyche is a wondrous thing.

  76. G says:
    December 28, 2011 at 5:01 pm  (Quote)

    Excellent post! A good catalog of logical breakdowns in the human psyche, all of which seem to be on display amidst the Birtheristani…

    The Backfire Effect and Irrational Escalation seem to work hand in hand, producing what can simply be called “Doubling Down”… something the Birthers and similar groups predictably tend to do all too often…

    Keith: A bit of fairly free association ramblings…I ran across the term “Barnum Statement” and looked it up. A Barnum statement is one that seems to be applicable to you and you alone, but in reality is a general statement that could apply to anyone. The study of these statements was begun by Bertran R, Forer, and are called “Barnum Statements” presumably because of P.T. Barnum’s statement that “we have something for everyone”. Forgive the Wikipedia reference, but it is after all the most effective summary: Forer Effect. That wikiarticle gives an example questionnaire from Forer’s study and notes that he collected the assertions in that questionnaire from various horoscopes.This reference led to a descripion of Cold Reading and a whole list of Cognitive Biases.What I found relevant to this forum, beyond just the interesting information itself, is the obvious, to me at least, interplay between these various biases and effects. Much has been made here about the “Confirmation Bias”, but equally in play, I think, are many of the cognitive bias listed, for example: Backfire Effect – Evidence disconfirming our beliefs only strengthens them.Focusing effect– the tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event; causes error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcomeHostile media effect – the tendency to see a media report as being biased due to one’s own strong partisan views.Information bias – the tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect actionIrrational escalation – the phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong.Negativity bias – the tendency to pay more attention and give more weight to negative than positive experiences or other kinds of information.Neglect of probability – the tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertaintySubjective validation – perception that something is true if a subject’s belief demands it to be true. Also assigns perceived connections between coincidences.False consensus effect – the tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with themEgocentric bias – recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g., remembering one’s exam grades as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as being bigger than it wasFalse memory – a form of misattribution where imagination is mistaken for a memory.Clearly Birther’s exhibit many of these biases and effects, but we Obots demonstrate, at times, some of these as well as others I haven’t listed. The human psyche is a wondrous thing.

  77. Keith says:
    December 28, 2011 at 6:51 pm  (Quote)

    G: What a bunch of incompetent and hypocritical clowns! LMAO!

    Newt Gingrich Blames Virginia Ballot Failure On ‘One Guy’

    …But on Wednesday, Gingrich told a crowd gathered in an Iowa chocolate shop that the reason his campaign’s 11,100 signatures weren’t ruled admissable was because “we hired somebody who turned in false signatures. We turned in 11,100 — we needed 10,000 — 1,500 of them were by one guy who frankly committed fraud.”

    Truman’s mantra “The Buck Stops Here” comes to mind. Surely, Newt is finished.

    Gingrich isn’t the only candidate struggling to explain why he is not on Virginia’s primary ballot. On Tuesday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who also failed to amass the required 10,000 signatures, filed a lawsuit against the Republican Party of Virginia, claiming that precedents set in federal courts should override Virginia’s laws.

    That will go down well with his “State’s Rights” constituency, I would think.

    G: I mean, at least both of their campaigns got as far as submitting over 10K signatures by the deadline. Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum failed to turn in *anything* at all by the deadline! Quite frankly, I’d consider those 3 campaigns to be even bigger embarassing failures in this situation.

    Not sure about that. Perhaps they thought they had no chance to win in Virginia and chose to not waste money campaigning there. That happens all the time. I could be wrong though.

  78. G says:
    December 28, 2011 at 7:27 pm  (Quote)

    Wow… just… wow. I simply echo what you said about “The Buck Stops Here”…

    Gingrich has so many tragic flaws (in temperment, his political record, his own flip-flops & irresponsible statements) that in a “sane” world, he’d never be taken seriously as a Presidential candidate in the first place.

    Combine that with his disasterously pathetic ability to organize and run a campaign and common sense says that he should be utterly finished and out of this race and have no shot to get back in it…yet again!

    However…this is such a weak field and bizarre set of dynamics at play that I can’t rule anything out. Honestly, I expect him to underperform in Iowa for various reasons…but I’m not dealing with a rational electorate that will actually decide these matters. He still could do well and even win there (I doubt it, but won’t rule it out) and could still bounce back (or just obstinately stick it out) for quite a while longer in this race…

    Bottom line, he’s an unstable and ticking time bomb as a candidate…but he’s also competing in an enivironment where he can implode several times and still be taken seriously by a certain part of the GOP Primary populace…. There is simply no way for me to confidently predict when his final epitaph in this race will be written…

    Keith: Newt Gingrich Blames Virginia Ballot Failure On One Guy’
    …But on Wednesday, Gingrich told a crowd gathered in an Iowa chocolate shop that the reason his campaign’s 11,100 signatures weren’t ruled admissable was because “we hired somebody who turned in false signatures. We turned in 11,100 — we needed 10,000 — 1,500 of them were by one guy who frankly committed fraud.”
    Truman’s mantra “The Buck Stops Here” comes to mind. Surely, Newt is finished.

    I agree! Ah, blatant hypocricy in action by a GOP Presidential candidate… must be a day of the week ending in y…. 😉 The whole concept of “practice what they preach” seems to be foreign to them, doesn’t it?

    Keith: On Tuesday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who also failed to amass the required 10,000 signatures, filed a lawsuit against the Republican Party of Virginia, claiming that precedents set in federal courts should override Virginia’s laws.
    That will go down well with his “State’s Rights” constituency, I would think.

    Perhaps I could see Huntsman making that calculation, but not Bachmann or Santorum. Until they actually “drop out” of the race, their campaigns would be utterly foolish to not compete in any Southern state ballot. Those states GOP electorate are more inline with what Bachmann & Santorum are trying to “sell” than with Huntsman or Romney.

    Their inability to file there is simply reflective of both their organizational weakness and severely limited campaign funding. It is a major sign that they are ill prepared to contend for the role. In light of how they’ve been treated “seriously” and have had a consistent platform and place by the national media throughout this race, it *is* a major failure and utter embarassment for them not to be on this ballot and is quite atypical.

    Keith: Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum failed to turn in *anything* at all by the deadline! Quite frankly, I’d consider those 3 campaigns to be even bigger embarassing failures in this situation.
    Not sure about that.

    Perhaps they thought they had no chance to win in Virginia and chose to not waste money campaigning there. That happens all the time. I could be wrong though.

  79. JPotter says:
    December 28, 2011 at 9:23 pm  (Quote)

    Perry’s lawsuit cracks me up …. he’s alleging the requirements to appear on a political party’s primary ballot are unconstitutional. Unconstitutional? Political parties aren’t governmental institutions! I’m certainly no election lawyer, but what constitutional recourse would anyone have regarding a party function? This is a contest to represent that party, to enter he must make that party happy. He hasn’t been barred from the election itself, just from competing in the election as a representative of the Republican party. He can certainly register as an independent in VA. What simpleton has confused states with parties?

    As for the non-filings of other candidates not being covered, I decided that, since nothing was filed, the RPV made no announcement to that effect (I didn’t file either, they haven’t announced that either…dang them) …. no press release, no story. Maybe this is the media version of being polite.

    Yeah, right.

  80. G says:
    December 28, 2011 at 9:36 pm  (Quote)

    There really is no polite way of putting it. Perry is simply an idiot.

    While I understand a desperate political “spin” scramble for campaigns to try to stave off the kind of negative perception of “viability” such embarassing news can cause… particularly when it comes just a week before the all important “first contest” of the Primary season, such pathetic and public stunts by Perry & Newt are only doing themselves further damage instead of helping.

    Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman have really lucked out in terms of getting a “pass” and barely a mention for also failing to qualify in VA. However, they have also been smart enough to just “lay low” and not join in these stunts and hope the news blows over instead…

    JPotter: Perry’s lawsuit cracks me up …. he’s alleging the requirements to appear on a political party’s primary ballot are unconstitutional. Unconstitutional? Political parties aren’t governmental institutions! I’m certainly no election lawyer, but what constitutional recourse would anyone have regarding a party function? This is a contest to represent that party, to enter he must make that party happy. He hasn’t been barred from the election itself, just from competing in the election as a representative of the Republican party. He can certainly register as an independent in VA. What simpleton has confused states with parties?As for the non-filings of other candidates not being covered, I decided that, since nothing was filed, the RPV made no announcement to that effect (I didn’t file either, they haven’t announced that either…dang them) …. no press release, no story. Maybe this is the media version of being polite.Yeah, right.

  81. JPotter says:
    December 28, 2011 at 10:20 pm  (Quote)

    Are birthers this creepy? Or anti-birthers this generous?

    When I first stumbled across birtherism back in May, PDF Madness was just flowering, with its various component obsessions, one of which was the Misrememberance of Type. This was the strain of birther babble that was essentially saying: “The purportedly typewritten characters on the LFBC appear to be far too imperfect to have been created on an analog, mechanical device, and therefore must be computer-generated imitations of imperfect characters generated by an analog, mechanical device.” Having been spoiled / confused by a decade of computing, they declared, vociferously, “This typing appears too authentically typewritten to have been authentically typewritten!”

    And, oh, how I made fun of them. Rubbing their noses in their foolishness long and loud.

    2 weeks ago, I received a package. A beat-up, ludicrously over-taped box with no return address. It was oily, generating heat, or making noise, so I opened it.

    Inside was a Smith-Corona Sterling manual typewriter, olive shell with cream keys, in its original case, with key and original warranty card. Serial #5A-988769. Purchased from the HC Prange Co. In Appleton, WI, on 12/14/62.

    Can’t make this stuff up!

    Well, since it was (apparently) sold new in Dec ’62 Wisconsin, it obviously wasn’t used to type up any Hay-wy-yun BCs in Aug ’61 Honolulu. The Holy Grail of Office Machines it is not.

    Anyone out there missing a typewriter?

  82. JPotter says:
    December 28, 2011 at 10:39 pm  (Quote)

    This is 3 weeks old but still funny, a note about the merchandising side of this campaign. Selling themselves in more ways than one. The culture of celebrity has run away with the Reds. Understand that, and all (well, most) of the stupid falls into place. Yes, some of this occurs on the Blue side as well, but not nearly as pervasively or successfully.

    As a bonus, there are some typically conspirac-ish, anti-Obama comments.

  83. Keith says:
    December 28, 2011 at 10:45 pm  (Quote)

    JPotter: Anyone out there missing a typewriter?

    You’ve just crossed over…

  84. misha says:
    December 28, 2011 at 11:51 pm  (Quote)

    JPotter: Anyone out there missing a typewriter?

    Just checked. Nope. I still have my mother’s Underwood.

    Smith-Corona typewriters were made in Cortland, NY.

  86. John Reilly says:
    December 28, 2011 at 11:56 pm  (Quote)

    I believe the case of Smith v. Allwright, argued in the 1940s by Thurgood Marshall, established a Federal constitutional interest in party primaries. That was a case, if I recall correctly, where the Democratic Party of Texas excluded African-Americans (not called that then) from the primary election on a claim that the Democratis Party was a private club.

    The question of whether the voters of Virginia ought to get to pick from the whole spectrum of Republican candidates is a different question of whether someone wants to put in the White House with his hands on the nuclear button a candidate who cannot navigate simple state election laws. I view the failure of some of the candidates to apply, and the failure of others to make an appropriate effort, a cautionary tale. Just showing up is not 90% of being the President.

  87. JPotter says:
    December 29, 2011 at 12:01 am  (Quote)

    Keith: You’ve just crossed over…

    Thanks, Keith! Best show ever!

    I’m sure there’s a logical explanation for the random delivery of a well-preserved antique, and this is simply a really bizarre coincidence.

    I plan to put it to good use. Maybe start my own blog with it. Heh.

  88. misha says:
    December 29, 2011 at 12:44 am  (Quote)

    John Reilly: Just showing up is not 90% of being the President.

    Eighty percent of success is showing up. – Woody Allen

    http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Woody_Allen

  89. G says:
    December 29, 2011 at 2:41 am  (Quote)

    Well said!

    John Reilly: The question of whether the voters of Virginia ought to get to pick from the whole spectrum of Republican candidates is a different question of whether someone wants to put in the White House with his hands on the nuclear button a candidate who cannot navigate simple state election laws. I view the failure of some of the candidates to apply, and the failure of others to make an appropriate effort, a cautionary tale. Just showing up is not 90% of being the President.

  90. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    December 29, 2011 at 10:58 am  (Quote)

    I feel that’s right and I shudder at the thought of some if the 2012 Presidential candidates winning. On the other hand, I remember Ronald Reagan who probably said more dumb things than all the 2012 Republican contenders put together. While I think that some of the Reagan policies were ultimately bad for the country, I don’t think many would argue that he was an inept president.

    Reagan is quoted as having said in 1966, “Politics is like show business. You have a hell of an opening, coast for a while, and then have a hell of a close.”

    John Reilly: I view the failure of some of the candidates to apply, and the failure of others to make an appropriate effort, a cautionary tale. Just showing up is not 90% of being the President.

  91. G says:
    December 29, 2011 at 1:09 pm  (Quote)

    I think nearly everyone can agree that Reagan was very charismatic and good at conveying a sense of upbeat optimism. Those are key qualities to his success and legacy that should not be overlooked or dismissed.

    None of the current candidate crop comes anywhere close to his skills in this arena. Heck, all of their “charisma” added together doesn’t even come close…

    Dr. Conspiracy: I feel that’s right and I shudder at the thought of some if the 2012 Presidential candidates winning. On the other hand, I remember Ronald Reagan who probably said more dumb things than all the 2012 Republican contenders put together. While I think that some of the Reagan policies were ultimately bad for the country, I don’t think many would argue that he was an inept president.Reagan is quoted as having said in 1966, “Politics is like show business. You have a hell of an opening, coast for a while, and then have a hell of a close.”

  92. dunstvangeet says:
    December 30, 2011 at 2:10 am  (Quote)

    Dr. Conspiracy: While I think that some of the Reagan policies were ultimately bad for the country, I don’t think many would argue that he was an inept president.

    Um, didn’t Reagan essentially argue that he was an inept President who had an out-of-control executive branch to get blame off of him on the Iran-Contra scandal?

  93. misha says:
    December 30, 2011 at 2:22 am  (Quote)

    dunstvangeet: didn’t Reagan essentially argue that he was an inept President who had an out-of-control executive branch to get blame off of him on the Iran-Contra scandal?

    Poindexter took the fall for Reagan.

  94. G says:
    December 30, 2011 at 5:12 am  (Quote)

    And Oliver North.

    misha: Poindexter took the fall for Reagan.

  95. dunstvangeet says:
    December 30, 2011 at 2:52 pm  (Quote)

    misha: Poindexter took the fall for Reagan.

    Yep, but Reagan’s defense during this time was essentially that he had no idea what Poindexter and North were doing. His entire argument was basically that he had an out-of-control executive branch that were doing things that he knew nothing about, therefore making himself an inept President. It’s what became the Plausable Deniability approach. Argue that you’re incompentent and they can’t pin the crime on you.

  96. G says:
    December 30, 2011 at 3:47 pm  (Quote)

    That is certainly how it came across.

    dunstvangeet: Yep, but Reagan’s defense during this time was essentially that he had no idea what Poindexter and North were doing. His entire argument was basically that he had an out-of-control executive branch that were doing things that he knew nothing about, therefore making himself an inept President. It’s what became the Plausable Deniability approach. Argue that you’re incompentent and they can’t pin the crime on you.

  97. Bob J says:
    December 31, 2011 at 12:37 am  (Quote)

    I am looking forward to the upcoming year, and the upcoming election for many reasons, but the two biggest are; The train wreck of a Senate campaign run by Dr. Taitz( Gary Coleman and the porn chick had a better shot at office during the gov race a few years ago), and the complete meltdown of the various birther tribes.

    I meandered to a couple of other birther sites over the last few days and was stunned at the infighting. Actually, it was more a feeling of embarrassed amusement, but i digress.

    I really can’t wait for the “report” from the “posse”.I think it will divide the birthers even more than they are, and it will lead to a new strain of crazy. I just hope it does not lead to any actual violence.

    All in all, it should be a good year.

    A happy New Year to both sides of the aisle, and to those who occupy space on this really wonderful planet.

  98. Keith says:
    December 31, 2011 at 7:10 am  (Quote)

    Its 10:30 pm here in OZ, and I’m off to the beach to watch the fireworks over the city, so I won’t be here to kick off the celebration thread at midnight.

    We have been keeping nice tonight, but will be blowing it up tomorrow instead.

    Everybody have a fun, but safe, New Year.

    Special message to any Samo’ans out there: Welcome to the first celebrations this year. You’ll never get December 30, 2011 back, but being in on the beginning of time will be worth it I’m sure.

  99. JPotter says:
    December 31, 2011 at 11:10 am  (Quote)

    Bob J: I really can’t wait for the “report” from the “posse”

    Wait, you think there will be a report? I’m pretty sure it’s yet another figment for the Birther Cedar Chest of (Empty) Promises. Which, even for an imaginary item, is getting really overcrowded!

    Is it wrong to collectively belittle a whole group for the empty promises made by individuals? Is there a clinical term for habitually making of such vacuous oaths? Incapableofadmittingerrorism?

  100. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    December 31, 2011 at 4:35 pm  (Quote)

    The Debunker’s Guide to Obama Conspiracy Theories now has a shortened URL:

    http://obamaconspiracy.org/debunk

    Don’t put a slash at the end.

    The old link still works.

  101. G says:
    December 31, 2011 at 11:06 pm  (Quote)

    Wishing everyone here a Happy New Year!

    I’m sure we’re all in for a lot of entertainment in 2012!

  102. bernadineayers says:
    January 2, 2012 at 4:12 pm  (Quote)

    doc is it possible that the nordykes were friends with stanley dunham ? have you heard anything like that ?

  103. NBC says:
    January 2, 2012 at 4:18 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers: doc is it possible that the nordykes were friends with stanley dunham ? have you heard anything like that ?

    Possible? Of course anything is possible. But plausible? Not given what is known so far. Do you have any facts?

  104. NBC says:
    January 2, 2012 at 4:19 pm  (Quote)

    Oops silly me, sorry Bernadine… forgot that you do not deal in facts. Ignore my question.

  105. Majority Will says:
    January 2, 2012 at 5:23 pm  (Quote)

    NBC: Possible? Of course anything is possible. But plausible? Not given what is known so far. Do you have any facts?

    Anecdotally of course, I’ve noticed the desperation among birthers increasing with more and more bizarre, paranoid fantasies and what if scenarios, b.s. and nonsense.

    Who knew the rabbit hole was so deep?

  106. gorefan says:
    January 2, 2012 at 5:35 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers:
    doc is it possible that the nordykes were friends with stanley dunham ? have you heard anything like that ?

    The Nordyke twins attended the same school (Punahou) as President Obama. Mrs. Nordyke said that she met Mrs. Dunham (President’s grandmother) on a cruise ship in the early 2000’s. There doesn’t appear to be a any other connection.

  107. bernadineayers says:
    January 2, 2012 at 6:37 pm  (Quote)

    NBC: Possible? Of course anything is possible. But plausible? Not given what is known so far. Do you have any facts?

    no ma’am

  108. bernadineayers says:
    January 2, 2012 at 6:39 pm  (Quote)

    gorefan: The Nordyke twins attended the same school (Punahou) as President Obama.Mrs. Nordyke said that she met Mrs. Dunham (President’s grandmother) on a cruise ship in the early 2000′s.There doesn’t appear to be a any other connection.

    was the nordyke father dr. nordyke ?? i really don’t know,, i jjst picked this up from the mark gillar radio interview with harrison, zebest and danniger.

  109. NBC says:
    January 2, 2012 at 7:02 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers: no ma’am

    No real surprise here.

  110. NBC says:
    January 2, 2012 at 7:03 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers: was the nordyke father dr. nordyke ?? i really don’t know,, i jjst picked this up from the mark gillar radio interview with harrison, zebest and danniger.

    Have you done any research yourself or do you let rumor and innuendo guide your day to day life?

  111. bernadineayers says:
    January 2, 2012 at 7:40 pm  (Quote)

    i’ll bet i know what nbc stands for…

  112. Majority Will says:
    January 2, 2012 at 7:49 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers:
    i’ll bet i know what nbc stands for…

    That’s terrific, lassie! Your basic English class must be finally paying off.

    Your sponsor must be so proud!

  113. nbc says:
    January 2, 2012 at 8:21 pm  (Quote)

    bernadineayers: i’ll bet i know what nbc stands for…

    Good for you… Did you finally do your homework?

  114. katahdin says:
    January 2, 2012 at 9:45 pm  (Quote)

    The Nordyke twins were classmates and friends with Barack Obama. They both said he was a nice guy. Shocking.

    bernadineayers:
    doc is it possible that the nordykes were friends with stanley dunham ? have you heard anything like that ?

  115. nbc says:
    January 2, 2012 at 10:07 pm  (Quote)

    katahdin: The Nordyke twins were classmates and friends with Barack Obama. They both said he was a nice guy. Shocking.

    Well, there you go, the conspiracy is clear now… Uh what exactly?… Even their certificate numbers have been explained. A minor mystery resolved.

    Now what Berna(r)dine

  116. Daniel says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:17 am  (Quote)

    bernadineayers:
    i’ll bet i know what nbc stands for…

    I’ll bet you don’t know what it means….

  117. nbc says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:21 am  (Quote)

    Daniel: I’ll bet you don’t know what it means….

    Safe bet…

  118. nbc says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:25 am  (Quote)

    As to Santorum

    See here the details surrounding the death of the baby

    Sounds very much like an abortion to me…

    One may wonder how Santorum feels about the topic…

  119. gorefan says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:43 am  (Quote)

    bernadineayers: was the nordyke father dr. nordyke ??

    On their BCs, the father’s occupation is listed as “private practice” which suggests he was a doctor.

  120. G says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:53 am  (Quote)

    Wow…I didn’t realize the details.

    So, his family was actually faced with that hard choice of a 2nd trimester abortion being necessary to save his wife’s life… I was unaware of that.

    Obviously, his family’s word parsing in those details show that they are in desperate mental denial to reconcile what actually took place, what they faced and what decision they took with the overly strict positions that they “preach”.

    I’m pretty sure that Rick Santorum has been one of the most hard-right on this particular issue, as he’s one of the most openly extreme-right due to religious justifications in his positions. I also know that he was reported to have quickly supported the various “personhood” measures being touted.

    So I strongly suspect that he preaches the most extreme anti-abortion position of wanting it outlawed in *all* circumstances, even when the mother’s life is at stake. …But I’m not sure and am really too tired right now to research it.

    …Which would be hypocritical to what seems to have taken place in his very own life story!

    If he pulls of the expected good performance in IA and is able to turn his momentum into a sustainable campaign of “viability”, then I have no doubt we’ll get quite a bit of clarity of his personal and policy positions on abortion as well as a closer scrutiny into his own life story.

    nbc:
    As to Santorum

    See here the details surrounding the death of the baby

    Sounds very much like an abortion to me…

    One may wonder how Santorum feels about the topic…

  121. nbc says:
    January 3, 2012 at 12:57 am  (Quote)

    Santorum is a fool. Let’s hope he wins IA…

  122. Keith says:
    January 3, 2012 at 1:38 am  (Quote)

    gorefan: On their BCs, the father’s occupation is listed as “private practice” which suggests he was a doctor.

    Or a lawyer. Or a psychologist. Or a masseuse. Or even a musician.

  123. gorefan says:
    January 3, 2012 at 2:09 am  (Quote)

    Keith: Or a lawyer. Or a psychologist. Or a masseuse. Or even a musician.

    Maybe, if it wasn’t a hospital form that he was filling out and for that context “private practice” appears to be more suited for a doctor.

  124. Rickey says:
    January 3, 2012 at 10:47 am  (Quote)

    gorefan: Maybe, if it wasn’t a hospital form that he was filling out and for that context “private practice” appears to be more suited for a doctor.

    Robert Nordyke, M.D. was an internal medicine specialist at Honolulu’s Straub Clinic. Mrs. Nordyke has said repeatedly that she did not know Obama’s mother.

    I think it was remarkable that they just so happened to be born within 24 hours of each other and grew up knowing each other,” Nordyke said.

    She did not know Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, while they were in labor together on Aug. 4, 1961, at the old Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.

    http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Dec/22/ln/hawaii812220320.html

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.