Love those viral videos, including some about Mitt Romney’s aide suggesting that they would hit the reset button when the general election campaign started, erasing past positions, starting over the way one erases an Etch A Sketch®.
Sometimes birthers hit the reset button too, like this from Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s press conference on March 1 — can you believe we’ve been talking about this for 3 weeks? The following is from the March 1, Press Conference.
Mike Zullo: We have a retired government employee who had a conversation in the eighties with Barack Obama in the front yard of the home of the mother of Bill Ayers.
Shake the Etch A Sketch®
When I did Internet searches, I found many references to comparisons between the interview letter carrier Alan Hulton gave in 2009 and the current story. They all say that the two are identical except for the dates. However, the interviews also differ because in 2009 Hulton said the black man he met introduced himself as Barack Obama. Now he says it was a funny name and he can’t remember it. Maybe signing an affidavit made him a little nervous about being too specific.
Here’s a comparison of the various versions of the story from Hulton. I haven’t verified all of the references personally and I don’t know the source. In any case, this would be a good template for checking off differences found in the links at the end of the article.
Read more:
- Stephen Diamond 2009 interview with Hulton
- Free Republic text of first postman interview at American Thinker
- Thomas Lifson article at The American Thinker (May 1, 2010)
- Jerome Corsi article at WorldNetDaily (2/19/2012)
- WND video of Hulton interview
- Redacted Hulton Affidavit at WND
- Jack Cashill article at The American Thinker (March 19, 2012)
Here’s a link to a quote of Hulton’s original telling, as it appeared at AmericanThinker.com:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?page=802#802
These moron birthers can’t even keep their own story straight. Their story is that Obama was born in Kenya and brought to the US as an infant and raised in Hawaii. No one would refer to such a person as being “from Kenya”. As for the time he spent in Indonesia, my kids spent a few years in France as young children, but no one would ever refer to them as “from France”. It’s certainly not something they bring up with casual acquaintances as adults. Didn’t this postal genius wonder why this supposed “foreign student” spoke perfect American English?
When the birthers come up with a coherent narrative then maybe discussing documents might be fun. But until then, they need to focus on a making up a story that passes the smell test.
*yawn*
Trotting out the hollow Alinsky bogeyman now, are we? Yeah, too bad the only folks who ever seem to talk about this Alinksy person are the RWNJ out there. No one else cares about some obscure dude who wrote some book a long time ago and who has been dead for nearly 40 years.
As to the rest of your post, I see you’re personal obsession is still stuck on wasting time over irrelevant PDF issues. Yes, I said irrelevant. Arguing about online images is simply a fool’s errand and waste of time. All that matters is the physical document and the state of HI, which has repeatedly backed it. End of story right there.
Finally, your overblown sense of entitement is not going to get you any magical rainbow farting unicorns, no matter how hard your scream and stomp your feet. That means you are not personally intitled to Obama’s personal documents (or anyone else’s for that matter). That also means you are not entitled to get your own debate thread on this blog either. No matter how big a tantrum you try to throw.
You are free to visit Mr. Woodman at his blog and request a dialogue with him on the topic or create your own blog and invite Doc C. and Mr. Woodman to it.
Or better yet, there IS a public forum that would be open to moderate such a debate – provided you didn’t chicken out. Contact RC Radio and ask them politely to set it up:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rcr/2012/03/28/rc-radio
First, the majority of what I deleted were one-line snarking insults. I went back through and saw one comment that I considered substantive, and I retrieved it from the trash.
My argument was not a straw man argument, and I say this for a very specific reason.
You used the word “kerning.” Kerning is a process in mechanical typesetting and word processing/desktop publishing. By using such a word you yourself very specifically inserted word processing into the discussion.
Now, you say that you didn’t mean what you said, but rather you meant something different. We can discuss your new topic, but my responding specifically and precisely to what you said is not a straw man.
Old-style mechanical typewriters have type bars with a type face on the end of each. In practical use the bars can be hit together or too quickly resulting in a jam. The jam pushes the type bar to one side or another; it’s surprising how much force that can be required to clear a jam. Also on an older machine the segment slots that the bars rest in can become worn. As a result a particular letter may appear to the left or the right of its normal position consistently in the case of a bent key, and in a more or less random variation vertically. Since the letters can appear outside their normal positions they can appear to overlap. When someone says this is impossible, they are simply speaking without expertise.
I think that I will write a brief article at which you can ponder a kerning puzzle.
G:
Why do you always have to drag Jesus into this!?
😀
Thanks M.W. All I ever get at work is a Stormy Cloud sticker.
Ah, an ad hominem. Rather blunt-edged though. You should study Jack Cashill. He’s more subtle with such things. At least you had the sense to stop calling yourself “Emperor Garrett” before making this comment. ROFL.
Ah.. the story of my typewriter life. I so do not miss using the manual typewriter, though I still have one. Even a few years back, I actually had to use an electric typewriter from time to time to put something on a label, often with letters out of alignment and such. Much anger and some bad language would ensue.
“Mike Zullo: We have a retired government employee who had a conversation in the eighties with Barack Obama in the front yard of the home of the mother of Bill Ayers.”
True story: My building’s freight elevator operator said to me that the doorman told him there was an attempted carjacking around the corner, and it was stopped by a UPS deliveryman passing by. The deliveryman was then blessed by a Chasidic rabbi, who was walking down the street. I swear it’s true.
“Mitt Romney’s aide suggesting that they would hit the reset button when the general election campaign started, erasing past positions, starting over the way one erases an Etch A Sketch.”
I found my old Etch A Sketch, and immediately made a drawing of a dog tied to the roof of a car. I told my wife not to shake it, so I could show everyone.
Trivia time: http://www.triviaquestions.net/movie/et
6. What toy is used to help E.T. “phone home”?
A) Etch-a-Sketch
B) Speak & Spell
C) Both of the Above
D) None of the Above
B
Good heavens. Let me get this straight. The birthers are now saying that Obama was installed as president (when they say that he flatly stated that he would one day be president)?
And they’re saying that the entire Ayers family were part and parcel of this conspiracy, funding Obama’s education)? What happened to the Saudi Prince that they previously claimed was funding his studies?
And that the Ayers and Obama just couldn’t keep their evil plot to themselves, and blabbed it to the mailman?
Yeah, that never happened.
I like my mailman an awful lot, and I think the world of them generally. My mailman and I chat briefly about the weather, the mail, and Star Trek (he wears Star Trek insignia on his shirt sometimes). As much as I like him, we do not talk about personal finances, charitable giving (funding someone’s college costs). people visiting my home (or his), or much beyond general small talk.
So, apart from the obvious contradictions, this just doesn’t ring true or make a lick of sense.
The only thing I talk to my mailman about is Angel: “Does your dog bite?”
– “I thought you said your dog doesn’t bite.”
– “That’s not my dog.”
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Garrett sez: When someone uses the title doctor to make themselves appear as an expert, you should be cautious in trusting anything they say.
I have the same complaint, generally speaking. You can always tell the jerks of Academia by the fact insist on being called “Doctor” instead of Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss outside of their field of study.
But I’ve never seen Dr. Conspiracy lord anything over anyone or cop an attitude. Not once. Not ever.
I assume that he is a PhD, but not once has he claimed to be the be-all/end-all expert on matters because of any education or experience he may have. He tends to rely on reality’s old friend, logic.
But even if he did, in this case, since this has been his line of work, he’s certainly entitled to use his title.
Unlike all the so-called “I worked in a copy shop so I’m an expert at documents” experts the birthers like to try to foist off on the public. They have PhDs from correspondence schools and/or in unrelated fields, yet insist on being called Doctor.
Do you find it odd, by the way, that the birthers have never, not even once, gotten a certified forensic document examiner, you know, one who is qualified by a court of law, to testify under oath? Orly went out of her way NOT to qualify any experts in Georgia, for example.
Not even once. As in “never”.
Makes you wonder if they are afraid of the truth, doesn’t it? Or maybe all of the certified forensic document examiners are part of the vast conspiracy. I bet that’s it.
P.S. As a humourous aside and apropos of nothing in particular, Dr. Demento has a degree in ethnomusicology; he wrote his thesis on Wagnerian Operas. As such, he is rightly called “Doctor” when he plays records.
Yeah, but what happens when he plays records BACKWARDS?
You really shouldn’t make assumptions about things that are trivially simple to check:Visitor Guide: About Dr. Conspiracy
According to the Emperor Garrett, paying attention to who the messenger is as well as what the message is makes one an Alinskyite. So, if I receive an investment prospectus and I run the numbers and they look good, I shouldn’t care whether the person behind it is Warren Buffett or Bernie Madoff? An attorney shouldn’t question that a witness tells a different story on different occasions? I guess every competent attorney and still-solvent investor must be Alinskyites then, because their survival depends on paying attention to the message AND the messenger.
No, I don’t have a PhD, as Keith has pointed out in the link to my About page.
Originally I posted as “admin” but that sounded too impersonal. “Dr. Conspiracy” is a cartoon-like name, derived from the radio character “Dr. Science” who like me is not a real doctor, but has a master’s degree — in science! Also the guy at the pizza place called me “Dr.” “Dr. Conspiracy” was actually meant to be fun and that I not be taken too seriously — add to that the photo with the big cowboy hat to complete the picture.
The blog was never supposed to be about me, but about facts and references. I have an ego like everyone else but I try to keep it out of the way. My wife tells me that men, in general, try to sound authoritative on every subject whether they know what they’re talking about or not. We’ve had some fun with this concept, and it is a real phenomenon. I try not to do it.
Of course Orly wouldn’t know an expert if she saw one. Other than her administrative hearing, there have been no opportunities for any expert to testify.
Sorry about the PhD assumption. As you and Keith point out, I should have checked. The rest stands, though. You (Dr. Conspiracy) seem content to use logic and proof rather than titles and conjecture.
~
Regarding so-called “experts” in general:
While Orly and others have had only the official chance to use a qualified expert (and did not do so), she/they have had innumerable chances to dump the pseudo-experts and flat out liars. It is telling that this hasn’t happened. A cadre of qualified experts would go a very long way toward convincing both lawmakers and the public that there was something to this.
One must assume that since such individuals aren’t on board, birthers either have not or can not persuade qualified document experts to join their cause.
Both/either possibility speaks to the weakness of the “evidence”. Strong evidence would scream out for qualified document experts. Weak and/or manufactured evidence is best left to the fakes and charlatans who thrive on it.
Gladly appreciation else like comments here. Noted rather hardly upward good best aspirations total towards. Share perhaps syntax secrets through able contact not suppressed.
Dreary, grand muckiness.