(June 22) Internet evangelist Bill Keller has offered Rachel Maddow $10,000 to produce Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate. Keller’s web site is LivePrayer.com. Hmmm. I wonder if that’s his money or the Lord’s money he’s offering?
Keller said [according to ChristianNewsWire], “I am not interested in the Certificate of Live Birth the President has produced, since anyone can get that with a phone call. Also, the newspaper birth announcements came from the ordering of the Certificate of Live Birth.
Keller is a bit confused. The “long form” is titled “Certificate of Live Birth.” But let’s see Keller’s Hawaiian certificate and newspaper announcement!
Here’s Keller’s Obama citizenship denial video. Includes Gary Kreep interview, and some very ominous music.
Operators are standing by to take your contribution.
I e-mailed Keller and challenged him to pick up his phone and order a COLB from Hawaii.
Imprisoned in the late 1980s after an insider trading conviction, Keller later committed his life to God, attended Liberty University in Virginia, and founded Bill Keller Ministries, according to his bio.
Besides being a forum for prayer requests, LivePrayer.com features the Birther infomercial and a “False Hope” program advertised with a picture of Obama crudely photoshopped next to Hitler. Keller has called Islam a “false religion that follows a false god that will lead them to eternal condemnation.”
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/as_seen_on_tv_birthermercial_asks_where_was_obama.php
misha, no way…you mean he’s yet another con artist, like so many other right wing nutcases?
Wow, I’m stunned!
NOT
Liberty University, founded by Falwell, is a fourth tier school, with a 96% acceptance rate.
Jerry Falwell: The anti-christ is walking among us, in the shape of a male Jew. In another speech at Liberty, Falwell called the 1st Amendment “a mistake,” and called for an amendment to nullify the 1st, “with the Jewish people declared a protected minority.”
Also, as I wrote before, when I was in Anchorage for the Iditarod, a minister in Palin’s church told me “Auschwitz was divine retribution because you people have refused to accept god’s only son.” A woman with him told me Jewish people “deserve to suffer.”
The Denialists are a bunch of bums.
Now that is funny. It is NOT a purely American phenomenon:
“All those present in the Netherlands are to be treated equally. Discrimination on account of religion, philosophy, politics, race, gender or any other criterion, is not allowed.” Article one of the Dutch constitution. Note it does not even say “evrty citizen of the Netherlands”. Who has been arguing for the abolition of it, apart from the small apologetic Christian parties (Christian Union and SGP)?
1) Pim Fortuyn, openly homosexual – assassinated by an animal rights activist for another part of his no-nonsense political agenda (global warning is a myth, animal rights should be subordinate to financial gain)
2) Ayaan Hirsi Ali, feminist, black, illegal immigrant (she forged her birth certificate and lied about her stay in … Kenya!), with a rather interesting sex life (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249095/The-history-man-fatwa-girl-How-David-Cameron-news-think-tank-guru-Niall-Ferguson-deserted-wife-Sue-Douglas-Somali-feminist.html – you also need to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_Man to understand the joke in the title)
3) Geert Wilders, not Jewish but a strong supporter of Israel (he used to work for free on an illegal moshav on the occupied West Bank and his film Fitna is partially based on and copied from the South African Israeli propaganda film Obsession), close internet friend of Pamela Geller (where have I heard that name before?), bottle blonde (he should read http://www.angrywhitefemale.net/exterminating.html)
These people do not understand that, after the Muslims and the Marxists, they would be next in line as victims of any change to that pivotal article. Interesting too, that there seem to be links with anti-environmentalism, and nostalgia for South African apartheid (that last one does not include Ayaan, obviously)
–
I knew a graduate of Liberty. She was a nice, sweet, not very bright girl, and she lasted six months at her job before her inadequate training tripped her up.
As for Jerry Falwell, I found him revolting from the day I first read “A Disciplined, Charging Army,” France FitzGerald’s magnificent profile of the cult he called a charge, when I was a teenager sneaking a look at my uncle’s New Yorker. I only hope that James Dobson and Pat Robertson soon join him in whatever hell is reserved for liars and exploiters of the poor.
I know two kids I grew up with who ended up going to liberty. I never really understood their parents as being very religious now I realize how crazy they were.
Well, religion is the perfect scam, because the con man is selling an invisible product. Is the victim going to sue his minister because he died and there was no afterlife?
Whenever I’m lectured about not going to heaven, because I’m not Christian, I always say: How do you know there’s a heaven? Did you ever get a postcard, ‘having a great time – wish you were here’?
You folks might be amused by my e-mail exchanges with Keller.
From: Rickey
To: bkeller@liveprayer.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 11:20 PM
Subject: Hawaii COLB
Dear Mr. Keller:
If, as you claim, anyone can obtain a Certification of Live Birth from Hawaii with just a phone call, why don’t you order one for yourself and see how far you get?
Please get back to me when you have your Hawaii COLB in hard,
From: Bill Keller
Sent: Jun 24, 2010 7:27 AM
To: Rickey
Subject: Re: Hawaii COLB
first..a COLB is NOT a birth certificate..and I was born in Ohio in 1958.,..called..and got a copy FedExd to me in 2 days..anyone who is born in the US can do the same for the state they are born in..oh..and Hawaii quit using a COLB YEARS AGO../since they realized it meant NOTHING…you would know that if you did your homework
Know that I am praying for you, be richly blessed,
Bill Keller
Founder, http://www.liveprayer.com
From: Rickey
To: Bill Keller
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Hawaii COLB
It appears that you are the one who needs to be educated.
The COLB which Obama produced is, in fact, the ONLY birth certificate which Hawaii issues.
http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html
Furthermore, Hawaii statute HRS §338-13(a) states “Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original.”
So your claim that the COLB means nothing is patently false. You are aware of the biblical prohibitions against bearing false witness, I presume.
From: Bill Keller
Sent: Jun 24, 2010 1:33 PM
To: Rickey
Subject: Re: Hawaii COLB
LOL..maybe you might want to watch some channel other than MSNBC..LOL…since the Director of Health services in Hawaii..has stated she saw his original..LONG FORM BC…funny…if she saw it..why can’t anyone else?..why has this tool of satan spent over $1m to keep anyone from seeing it..or any of his school records..or writings..what is he hiding….now back to Huffinginton Post…and the rest of your nonsense “news sources”..that make you look like an idiot..
Know that I am praying for you, be richly blessed,
Bill Keller
Founder, http://www.liveprayer.com
From: Rickey
To: Bill Keller
Subject: Re: Hawaii COLB
Date: Jun 24, 2010 3:50 PM
You can’t see his long-form birth certificate because it contains confidential medical information which is protected by state and Federal privacy laws. Have you ever heard of HIPAA? It is the same law which prohibits me from ordering a copy of your birth certificate.
You have evidence that Obama has spent more than $1 million to fight birther lawsuits? If you have evidence of that, I’d like to see it. Otherwise, act like the Christian you pretend to be and stop spreading lies. The fact of the matter is that Obama himself has been a defendant in only a handful of the birther lawsuits, and the attorneys representing him in those cases have done little more than make a few appearances and files Motions to Dismiss.
The truth of the matter is that a COLB issued by the Hawaii Department of Health has the same legal authority as the original “long form” birth certificate. It contains all of the information required to prove citizenship and obtain a U.S. passport. It is accepted by the State Department and by all of the other 49 states. Obama isn’t required to give you or anyone else anything else. In fact, he wasn’t even required to let people see his COLB. How do we know that George W. Bush was born in the United States? Were you present at his birth? Oh, wait, George W. Bush is white. Never mind.
By the way, I don’t ask for or need your prayers.
Here we have religious arguments that feature disrespect for the beliefs of others-from both sides of the spectrum. How alike they both are-the Christian right and the anti-religion left. My theory is to listen, talk, learn and accept that others are to be respected in their differences. I enjoy good conversation and debate but in this culture we depend on name calling and funny little comments. So sad for everyone.
Mary Brown:
An orthodox woman is still living with her parents, in Brooklyn. Her mother tells her to put an ad in the paper.
She puts a personal in the paper – Orthodox woman, 30, never married, wishes to meet like minded man for matrimony.
Every day she rushed home to the mailbox. Finally, she opens her mailbox and sees a letter forwarded. She rushes upstairs, and bursts into their apartment. She tears open the letter, and bursts into tears.
Her mother asks, “Darling, what’s wrong?”
“It’s from daddy.”
Mary Brown:
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/thelittlejew.htm
Well said and well done. Bravo.
Rickey , lying is ok if it supports your position, it’s often called “lying for Jesus”
Misha, you have just illustrated my point. If you are up to a meaningful, respectful discussion of our different views, fine. As it stands now you illustrate my point beautifully.
One of those pieces of conventional wisdom that gets repeated all the time is that conservatives are more pious than liberals, and that atheists are likely to be leftists. Conservatives are particularly fond of this idea. I wonder if there is any factual basis for this assertion.
“Conservatives are particularly fond of this idea”
That’s strange since Jesus, by his actions and words, was a liberal.
The kibbutzim are secular. And they are Marxist-Leninist. So yes, there is a basis. A devout Muslim at work asked me “do you beleive in God?” I replied, “where was God in Auschwitz? Where was God at slave auctions, when children were sold from their parents?”
I’m secular. I sometimes go to shul for Rosh Hashana, and Yom Kippur, and I go to seders, but that is mostly for the social aspect.
I object to your suggestion that the left is “anti-religion.” I am not anti-religion, but I am anti-hypocrisy and anti-hate, and it just happens that I see more hypocrisy and hatefulness on the religious right than anywhere on the left.
As an example, this is from the last e-mail I received from the right-wing ex-convict evangelist Bill Keller:
LOL..like I said..quit getting your info from the far left idiots that think killing babies is ok…men screwing men is a great thing..and global warming is real…LOL..
If mocking a hateful “religious” person like Keller is anti-religion, I suppose I have to plead guilty.
I STRONGLY object to the suggestion that “the left” is anti-religion. The Unitarians and the Quakers have been at the forefront of virtually every progressive social movement in American history – how dare anyone claim that James Reeb, who had his brains bashed in at Selma, was NOT religious? That Clara Barton’s faith did not influence her work with the Red Cross? That John Greenleaf Whittier was not a good Christian because he opposed slavery? That Bill Schult’s work with Amnesty is somehow not worthy because he’s a liberal?
The nerve!
Good point. When I was 16, I started hanging out at the Unitarian Church, which was the anti-war and anti-draft epicenter.
In college, Jesuits regularly used the Berigan Brothers as examples in lectures. There’s the Catholic peace movement, and SVdeP.
Also, don’t forget William Sloane Coffin.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/13/us/13coffin.html
I would have to agree. When people use their religion as a cover or excuse for their own sins or their own hate, they have made a mockery of their own faith and have not earned respect. We should all be mindful that there are many who hold beliefs different than our own, even those we may consider weird or hokey – but who are good people and try to practice what they preach and respect others.
However, I definitely don’t have a problem with mocking or slams when the enmity has been earned by shameful acts or words by those that proclaim themselves “holier than thou”. Such hypocrites earn every bit of skewering on their own petard that they invite.
Excellent points. I really am shocked and saddened by how many GOP and Conservatives think that they have an exclusive hold on religion or morals or quietly condone extremist fundamentalism as long as it is within a faith they consider “similar” to their own.
Global warning is real? Meaning to say that it is NOT, of course. He should talk to the leaders of one of the Dutch Apologetic parties I mentioned – the ChristenUnie. But then of course, because of their stance on the economy and social security, he would probably think they are dangerous Marxists anyway.
Oh, I do not know to what extent we are allowed to be personal here, but there is no way I am anti-religion. Last Sunday, I did a church service on my own. Mattins.
Religion != morals. Quite the contrary in most cases.
It drives me crazy, how the right has co-opted the mere idea of religion. Sorry for the rant.
Lisa Herdahl, a Lutheran, was the one who filed the original lawsuit that led to prohibition of prayer in public schools. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, at its last churchwide assembly, (belatedly) voted to accept non-celibate gay clergy.
Whilst there is IN THE USA a heavy tendency to see the more rabid right intimately linked with religion, in many if not most other countries that is nothing like as apparent.
Most places, 1st and 2nd World counties, religion is what you may do on Friday, Saturday or Sunday and has bugger all to do with your work day week or voting tendencies.
Most of the time here in the US, the Right wrap themselves in the trappings of religion whilst having damn all intent to follow the tenets, they’re just after votes and power over others.
In my case I was brought up High Episcopalian, full smells, bells and men in frocks, I personally see myself as “Classic” Protestant, no damn priest to intercede for me….8-) I am very liberal in most political views but a hard liner on the Constitution and support the Second Amendment AND want to see the P+I section of the 14th re-invigorated.
Guess what, anyone who sees themselves as one thing and one thing only is either ignorant, delusional or a sociopathic f*ing totalitarian in the making Left or Right.
“This opinion brought to you by the Internet……”
I’m an Episcopalian living in the south among a slew of conservative Bible Thumpers. (I am a reformed Southern Baptist). Down here – we’re considered worse than athiests because we “claim to be Christian” but support equal rights for all and have – God Forbid – ordained women and homosexuals!
Mike, I completely agree with you.
If you re-read my statement, you will see it clearly states “religion or morals.
I think it would be a fair statement to say that many religious folk tend to link morals to their particular religion, or even just to religion in general.
But then again, that is probably simply because people want to link their personal values & beliefs to what they feel is right or good.
I will tell you clearly that I view religion & morals as two separate & distinct entities. In other words, one does not have to have any type of religion whatsoever in order to have strong morals and values.
No need to apologize. I agree completely and it was your words that inspired my follow-up commentary.
Well, I think that statement is a bit harsh, although I understand the underlying sentiment behind what you are trying to say. If anything, there is a slight irony in that you are making a generalized conclusion to express your dislike of those that see themselves in generalistic binary terms.
For whatever reason – whether it is mere simplicity or an inability to think in textured terms, I’ve found that unfortunately, a large proportion of people tend to both speak and even think in very generalized and often binary black/white terms.
For one thing, making a generalized statement is very easy, so much so that even if you can see various shades of gray, it is easy to slip into a common pattern of speech that boils things down into simplistic generalizations to express your thoughts or frustrations. We all do it.
Many initial statements are also quick surface reactions or emotionally driven and do not truly involve any deeper examination of the issue.
At this level, there are a lot of people who probably honestly categorize themselves in a very simplistic or even binary way and don’t give it any more thought. I wouldn’t say that quite rises to the level of being ignorant or delusional at that point.
The key is how they react if that viewpoint is examined or challenged further and can they make further distinctions or see divergence between ideology and actions. I’d like to believe that many that seemed rigid in their thoughts can see and think in such distinctions if they actually put thought to it.
Once you get beyond glib statements that easily roll of the tongue and into actual discussion that requires reflective thought; then you can see whether true cognitive dissonance is actually taking place.
OK, fair enough. I can be a little hair trigger on that – I’ve seen too many religious people call me a monster for having the temerity not to believe in their gods for it not to be an issue…
“want to see the P+I section of the 14th re-invigorated.”
Could you elaborate- I am curious but ignorant.
G,
I used the phrasing deliberately not as parody.
No individual who has had any exposure to thoughts and values outside their immediate tribe/clan/family is ever singular.
They will inherently start to esposue and hold dear values that are at variance with others in their clade in some manner.
Only those whose viewpoint is so shackled and hampered by
Ignorance (not stupidity, the deliberate denial of freedom of inquiry and investigation)
Prejudice
Coercion
All the above
will be “unitary” in worldview.
Only by enforcing this viewpoint to the exclusion of all others and maintaining it with rigorous control mechanisms will this view be maintained pure and unsullied.
To recap
ignorant, delusional or a sociopathic f*ing totalitarian mindset
Example abound
Jim Jones
Nazi Germany
Cambodia
Rwanda
Stalin
Burma
etc
etc
The human condition means that the stigmatizing of “The Other” leads straight to the paths of violence, restriction of rights, the stripping of basic human values and….well we’ve all seen the news reels.
You’ve read the Birfer statements, every damn one of them leads drip by drip inexorably to the demands for sanctions, illegal actions, extra judicial punishment, violence in thought, action, word or deed.
The folks on the other side of the precipice of thought may castigate, belittle and verbally poke them but there is not the inevitable totalitarian mindset of the automatic refutation threats of acts against another.
I spent time in the military and at one point had to stand guard, with my men over mass graves in Bosnia. It bring the realities of what happens when the rule of law, as applied to “The Other”, is regarded as an optional extra
SFjeff,
14th Amendment, Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
In 1833 (Baron v Baltimore), the Supreme Court decided that The Bill of Rights didn’t ACTUALLY apply against the individual states and was not incorporated.
In 1857 we then had the truly foul Dredd Scott ruling decision that held black people were not, and could not become, citizens of the United States or enjoy any of the privileges and immunities of citizenship.
Along with the fun that was the Civil War we eventually arrived at 1868 and the Reconstruction Amendments including the 14th Amendment.
The original avowed intent of the 14th by it’s proponent John Bingham was that
Congress to be given power to “secure to the citizens of each State all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States in the several States,” and he added that, “The proposition pending before the House is simply a proposition to arm the Congress…with the power to enforce the bill of rights as it stands in the constitution today. It hath that extent—no more….If the State laws do not interfere, those immunities follow under the Constitution.”
So,
You’d think that the BoR would apply against the states, in its entirety, “cause that’s what it says………
Speed forward to 1873 and the Slaughterhouse Cases and BANG, bye-bye P+I and incorporation of the BoR against the states.
Since then mostly via Due Process most of the BoR has been incorporated.
One of the issues is that in effect a substantial part of a Constitutional Amendment was gutted as it wasn’t popular……8-0
Having P+I re-invigorated (strangely enough potentially by the ongoing McDonald V Chicago Second Amendment case…ruling this Monday) itself will have little immediate impact (gay marriage applicable against all states for example) but would re-inforce the “It’s the damn Constitution, not a buffet, you don’t get to pick and chose”
Bovril,
Thank you for the additional followup and clarifications.
I do agree with your conclusion about those that cling to being “unitary” in their worldview, as you’ve defined it and the dangers that result in how they will act towards what they perceive as “The Other”, if they are left unchecked.
I do also agree that most of the hard-core “birthers” fall into this category and are therefore a danger to themselves and others. I also fear that a good portion of other far right-wing groups and fundamentalist religious groups fall into this category as well.
I fully support strong vigilance against allowing such “unitary” worldviews to go unchallenged – they truly are the worst of humanity’s primitive tribal survival urges which we must constantly strive to stamp out.
In that vein, the only intolerance I support is that I think it is perfectly OK to be intolerant of the intolerant. I am against a lot of the false equivocation that goes on, particularly in the media.
When individuals make it clear that their intentions are based on trying to enable such “unitary” worldviews, they have already tossed away the ability for rational debate and they earn every bit of mocking, condemnation or shunning that results.
Personally, I believe that the total numbers of people that truly hold “unitary” worldviews is less than it appears at times. They are probably a very small minority of the total population.
However, it is when their ideas and actions go unchallenged that they can become dangerous and attract a bigger following – as there always appears to be much, much higher number of folks that identify with only portions of their worldview who will nonetheless overlook the more extreme ramifications and either cover for them – or worse, follow and support their causes. This is when they truly become dangerous and bad things are allowed to happen.
Therefore, I think it is very important to still reach those that are “reachable” and can be rational and not let them be swayed into either unintentionally nor intentionally supporting those extremist minorities.