or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Palin's Sailin'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Palin's Sailin' - Page 9

post #321 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Yes I guess I should have checked back a page! And yes Palin's a wealth of humor!

Also I think Shatner is a pretty funny ( and talented ) guy these days. He doesn't seem to take himself so seriously.

That commercial where he's coaching the husband on his cell phone and the husband is impersonating the Star Trek era Shatner is outstanding IMHO.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #322 of 594
I'm late to the party here. I'll say up front that I harbor no doubts about whether Obama is a citizen and eligable. To me the curious question is what information is on the long form that no one wants made known? To me this feels very much like the Palin accusation about her own child not being hers, the refutation of it requires an embarassing disclosure.

Clearly the long form exists. I have my own long form birth certificate. Regardless of news sources getting it wrong it is clear Obama's long form exists. The deeper question is to ask what information would be revealed on it, or what secondary information related to it might disprove aspects of Obama's self-described personally narrative/journey by some information on it.

Another example it feels a lot like is Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia. That story didn't really alter any basic facts about how Kerry served in the military. Instead it altered aspects of Kerry's personal narrative and how he was using it for political gain.

I suspect there is something related to the information that would be released in a long form that wouldn't at all change Obama's eligability with regard to president, but instead would reveal wrong with his personal narrative that he has shaped and controlled as an adult. The revelation of this information clearly won't affect partisans, but somehow will alter the perceptions of the middle. There is something about that middle ground that lends itself to personal narrative information and celebrity type coverage which so far Obama has managed well. It is the group that someone felt Bush's drunk driving release might effect, who might have had their minds changed by Clinton misremembering sniper fire in Bosnia.

There is something there and it isn't eligibility but it is something because that long form is staying carefully hidden away. The revealing of it would be the back breaking straw that could make "birthers" go away in an instant in worse still discredit their motivations which is what liberals just love to do anyway. The fact that it hasn't happened to me is really revealing.

In the meantime we can just sit back with the popcorn. The man isn't going to stop being president and whatever is there to be revealed will come out eventually. Like most things of this nature, controlling the timing probably would have been better and instead the timing of when it pops out will probably end up being very bad for him. I say too bad because when you promise transparency but don't deliver, you reap what you sow.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #323 of 594
Interesting insights, trumptman. While the main issue - for me, anyway - in wanting to know what information is on Obama's long form birth certificate is to verify his eligibility to hold the office of president, my desire does not stem from a "hope" that Obama will somehow be removed from office over it. Although if his removal from office resulted from it, I certainly would not object.

For me, the issues are compliance with the requirements set forth in the Constitution, and also Obama's "transparency" as you already alluded to.

If there is nothing to hide, why hide?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #324 of 594
I don't get all this?

1) Who Cares?

2) Why hasn't this been resolved already? And don't say it has because one moment we hear there are no more records after the move to electronic and then we get a letter saying there is a record. So why not just show the record? Someone is going to file an FOIA soon anyway.

3) See 1.
post #325 of 594
Oh and I've seen an example of the "long form" and there is nothing shocking on it. Unless the names are different or something?
post #326 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

1) Who Cares?

According to this petition, as of the time of this post 430,669 people care. There are likely more who care, but haven't signed that particular petition.

Quote:
2) Why hasn't this been resolved already? And don't say it has because one moment we hear there are no more records after the move to electronic and then we get a letter saying there is a record. So why not just show the record? Someone is going to file an FOIA soon anyway.

Curious, isn't it?

Quote:
3) See 1.

See my response to 1.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #327 of 594
I meant real people. Not nut cases like Truethers and Birthers.
post #328 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

I meant real people. Not nut cases like Truethers and Birthers.

You should have been more specific then, eh?

You should have asked: "Who cares besides the people who care?"

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #329 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm late to the party here. I'll say up front that I harbor no doubts about whether Obama is a citizen and eligable. To me the curious question is what information is on the long form that no one wants made known? To me this feels very much like the Palin accusation about her own child not being hers, the refutation of it requires an embarassing disclosure.

Clearly the long form exists. I have my own long form birth certificate. Regardless of news sources getting it wrong it is clear Obama's long form exists. The deeper question is to ask what information would be revealed on it, or what secondary information related to it might disprove aspects of Obama's self-described personally narrative/journey by some information on it.

Another example it feels a lot like is Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia. That story didn't really alter any basic facts about how Kerry served in the military. Instead it altered aspects of Kerry's personal narrative and how he was using it for political gain.

I suspect there is something related to the information that would be released in a long form that wouldn't at all change Obama's eligability with regard to president, but instead would reveal wrong with his personal narrative that he has shaped and controlled as an adult. The revelation of this information clearly won't affect partisans, but somehow will alter the perceptions of the middle. There is something about that middle ground that lends itself to personal narrative information and celebrity type coverage which so far Obama has managed well. It is the group that someone felt Bush's drunk driving release might effect, who might have had their minds changed by Clinton misremembering sniper fire in Bosnia.

There is something there and it isn't eligibility but it is something because that long form is staying carefully hidden away. The revealing of it would be the back breaking straw that could make "birthers" go away in an instant in worse still discredit their motivations which is what liberals just love to do anyway. The fact that it hasn't happened to me is really revealing.

In the meantime we can just sit back with the popcorn. The man isn't going to stop being president and whatever is there to be revealed will come out eventually. Like most things of this nature, controlling the timing probably would have been better and instead the timing of when it pops out will probably end up being very bad for him. I say too bad because when you promise transparency but don't deliver, you reap what you sow.

Please post this to your blog, and Free Republic, etceteras.

Truther pretzel logic meets Birther pretzel logic.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #330 of 594
Quote:
Thursday, July 30, 2009
WorldNetDaily Exclusive
Guess how many ways to get Hawaii 'birth certificate'
Some required nothing more than assertion from an adult

Posted: July 29, 2009
10:57 pm Eastern




By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily

An analysis of Hawaii's birth recording requirements around the time of Barack Obama's 1961 birth reveals several ways to generate a "Certificate of Birth," including some that require no documentation other than the assertion of a adult.
The word comes in a report by an investigator commissioned by a retired CIA officer. The report was posted online by the Western Center for Journalism, which withheld the officer's name.
"In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an 'original birth certificate' on record," the investigator says, including a report to the Department of Health from an attending physician or midwife.
(Story continues below)

But if the certificate was obtained through any of the other three options, "Obama would have a very good reason not to release the vault birth certificate," the investigator said.
"If the original certificate were the standard … type of birth certificate (documented by a physician or midwife), he would have allowed its release and brought the controversy to a quick end," the report said. The investigator said if the birth certificate was obtained by one of the other methods, then it contributes to the overall questions raised about Obama's eligibility.
Tell Obama you don't buy his state-run media coverup!
"And the fact that though there are many witnesses to Ann Dunham's presence on Oahu from Sept. 1960 to Feb. 1961, there are no witnesses to her being on Oahu from March 1961 to August 1962 when she returned from Seattle and the University of Washington. No Hawaiian physicians, nurses, or midwives have come forward with any recollection of Barack Obama's birth," the report said.
While it's clear that release of the original birth certificate would answer many questions about Obama's origins, it is far from the only document in dispute. WND has reported that documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and his adoption records.
WND also reported previously that the short-form "Certification of Live Birth" posted online presented by Obama as documentation of his reported Hawaiian birth doesn't alone "prove" his birth, according to government officials.
U.S. State Department officials say the law is "complicated," and Hawaii state officials said such documents are issued only when certain standards have been met.
But the investigator reported there are scenarios that don't involve a physician.
"In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before 'the local registrar of the district,'" the investigator said. He called this option BC2.
"It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent's signature to a form and mail it in. In addition, if a claim was made that 'neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate,'" the report said. "I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parent's claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver's license … and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the '60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii."
Another opportunity arises because of the law in force in 1961 in Hawaii that if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a 'Delayed Certificate' could be filed, which required that 'a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates,' which 'evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file,'" the report said of the option called BC3.
"In other words, this form of vault birth certificate, the Delayed Certificate, required no more than a statement before a government bureaucrat by one of the parents or (the law does not seem to me clear on this) one of Barack Obama’s grandparents. If the latter is true, Ann Dunham did not have to be present for this statement or even in the country," the investigator said.
Finally, a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth is available for those born in Hawaii without attendance and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed.
There actually was one further option, but it didn't become law until 1982, the report said. Under Act 182, "Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that the proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
"In this way 'state policies and procedures' accommodate even 'children born out of State,'" the report said, noting, "This is the actual language of Act 182.
"So it is even possible that the birth certificate referred to by [state Health Department chief] Dr. [Chiyome] Fukino is of the kind specified in Act 182. This possibility cannot be dismissed because such a certificate certainly satisfies Dr. Fukino's statement that, "I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
Such a statement could apply to any one of several of the birth certificate options in Hawaii, the report said.
"I only bring up this possibility to show how cleverly hedged and 'lawyered' and basically worthless Dr. Fukino's statement is," the investigator said.
"The fact that Obama refuses to release the vault birth certificate that would instantly clear up this matter almost certainly indicates that the vault birth certificate is probably a BC2 or possibly a BC3," the report said.
"It is also very strange that Dr. Fukino's statement in no way attested to (or even addressed the issue of) the authenticity of the 'Certification of Live Birth' (and the information that appears on it) that the Daily Kos blog and the Obama campaign posted on line," the investigator pondered.
The absence of a hospital name or physician on the vault certificate would mean Obama wasn't born in a hospital in Hawaii. A home birth also could be ruled because of other evidence, the report said.
"When someone has a home birth or is not born in a hospital, this becomes a part of his family's lore and is now and again spoken of by his parents. He and his siblings grow up knowing that he was born at home or his uncle's house, etc. The fact that someone in the campaign told a Washington Post reporter that he was born in Kapioliani hospital and his sister said he was born at Queens hospital indicates that there was not and is not any Obama/Dunham family memory of a home birth or non-hospital birth in Hawaii," the report said.
Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and postcards asking for the president's birth certificate documentation here.
The investigator said the "Certification of Live Birth" posted online by the campaign "proves nothing."
The investigator said the reason for a deception, given the probable of the origins of the birth certificate, are plain.
A young girl giving birth in a foreign country to a child whose father was not an American citizen did not have the right to pass along American citizenship, the report said.
"When enacted in 1952, section 301 [of federal immigration laws at the time] required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been physically present in the United States for 10 years, including five after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children. The 10-year transmission requirement remained in effect from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13, 1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period," the investigator said.
"Even if the law was retroactively changed to grant citizenship (but not 'natural-born' citizenship) to some of those who had at birth been denied it. If a person is not at the time of his birth an American citizen, he cannot be a natural-born citizen. Therefore, that person is ineligible under Article II, Section1 for the Office of President of the United States," the report concluded.
Here is the "Certification of Live Birth" presented by Obama:

Short-form "Certification of Live Birth"
And here is an image of an actual long-form Hawaiian birth certificate from the same hospital President Obama reports he was born at from the day after the president's birth:

Photostat of Susan Nordyke's 1961 Hawaii birth certificate (Courtesy Honolulu Advertiser)
The report warned of the possible ramifications, including invalid president orders and appointments.
"The only way out of the present constitutional crisis is for Obama to do as McCain did when he was confronted by far less pressing doubts about the circumstances of his birth. He must disclose his vault birth certificate. Since the document has been so suspiciously withheld for so long, it should be subjected to rigorous forensic tests," the report said.
But raising a red flag that cannot be ignored are several other circumstances, the investigator said. One is that one of Obama's top advisers, John O. Brennen, heads a firm that was cited for breaching State Department passport files belonging to Obama.
Further relevant information "may" be obtained from a Washington Times report that a key witness in the passport investigation was found dead.
The Times said Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who was cooperating with investigators, was found dead inside a car in front of a Washington church.
The report said, "City police said they do not know whether his death was a direct result of his cooperation with federal investigators."
Note: Members of the news media wishing to interview Jerome Corsi, Joseph Farah, Joe Kovacs, Chelsea Schilling,Les Kinsolving or Bob Unruh on this issue, please contact WND.

OMFG! Shocking revelations.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #331 of 594
trumptman:

Quote:
To me the curious question is what information is on the long form that no one wants made known?

The premise of this question is that the long form is being hidden because of information it contains.

This premise is flawed on two scores:
1 - No one has established that the long form is being hidden.
2 - No one has established that there is even anything that might be on it that would be worthy of hiding.

Quote:
The deeper question is to ask what information would be revealed on it, or what secondary information related to it might disprove aspects of Obama's self-described personally narrative/journey by some information on it.

That's not a "deeper question", it's a "fucking stupid question built on a faulty foundation".

Quote:
I suspect there is something related to the information that would be released in a long form that wouldn't at all change Obama's eligability with regard to president, but instead would reveal wrong with his personal narrative that he has shaped and controlled as an adult.

Like what?


jazzguru:

Quote:
If there is nothing to hide, why hide?

I don't know. Who is hiding anything?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #332 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

I don't know. Who is hiding anything?

I don't know, are you?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #333 of 594
Not as far as I know.

Are you only confident in peddling dimwitted conspiracy theories when you've got some backup and, when confronted, unable to directly address simple questions?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #334 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Not as far as I know.

Are you only confident in peddling dimwitted conspiracy theories when you've got some backup and, when confronted, unable to directly address simple questions?

Do you consider the lack of a response to be an admission of "defeat"?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #335 of 594
What defeat would there be?

You have no facts on your side, so there is no way for me to use facts to defeat your insipid, racist-dog-whistle conspiracy. It is a meritless belief you have, and there is no way to defeat a meritless belief except to fight its spread, much like fighting a communicable disease. The best I can do is mock and bash the conspiracy theory in a way that is clear enough to make sure that others who are reading are not tempted by the insane bullshit.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #336 of 594
I'm sorry guys but the whole birth certificate thing is dumb. Almost as dumb as the Obama's middle name thing. On the one hand you have people with too much time on their hands trying to make something out of what is obviously nothing. On the other you have desperate anti Obama factions trying to make something out of nothing.

Not even really worth conversation.

The items about Palin's incompetence issues are real. She's displayed them herself.

The fact that she ran for the office of Vice President ( and could be President someday ) makes them noteworthy.

Palin isn't the problem however she's a symptom of what's wrong with the republican party these days. The fact that they would make such an outragous choice illustrates something is wrong. This is why it's still important to discuss this ( humorous or otherwise ). This and the fact that they could make such a choice again. Someone like this coming this close to the Presidency is worth remembering and discussing.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #337 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What defeat would there be?

You have no facts on your side, so there is no way for me to use facts to defeat your insipid, racist-dog-whistle conspiracy. It is a meritless belief you have, and there is no way to defeat a meritless belief except to fight its spread, much like fighting a communicable disease. The best I can do is mock and bash the conspiracy theory in a way that is clear enough to make sure that others who are reading are not tempted by the insane bullshit.

Do you assume I believe Obama is not a natural-born U.S. Citizen?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #338 of 594
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Do you assume I believe Obama is not a natural-born U.S. Citizen?

Well, I do, based on the posts you've made on the subject.

Is there any other evidence I should know about that suggests otherwise?
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #339 of 594
Quote:
Do you assume I believe Obama is not a natural-born U.S. Citizen?

No, that would be a clear position to take and I would never assume you capable of that.

I think what you, and trumptman and many other right-wingers, are happy to blow this racist dog whistle despite your knowing that it is a load of shit because it suits your partisan desires.

Since you're asking me to evaluate your motivations and beliefs...
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #340 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm sorry guys but the whole birth certificate thing is dumb. Almost as dumb as the Obama's middle name thing. On the one hand you have people with too much time on their hands trying to make something out of what is obviously nothing. On the other you have desperate anti Obama factions trying to make something out of nothing.

Not even really worth conversation.

The items about Palin's incompetence are real. She's displayed them herself.

The fact that she ran for the office of Vice President ( and could be President someday ) makes them noteworthy.

Palin isn't the problem however she's a symptom of what's wrong with the republican party these days. The fact that they would make such an outragous choice illustrates something is wrong. This is why it's still important to discuss this ( humorous or otherwise ). This and the fact that they could make such a choice again. Someone like this coming this close to the Presidency is worth remembering and discussing.

Hey don't spoil it for the rest of me.

I'm working on multiple Birther tangents.

They need to be flushed out some more, but involve the following;

DNA, abortion, adoption, Castro, Mao, miscarrage, kidnapping, crack cocaine, orgies, multiple suicides, drug running, the KGB, Princess Diana, the moon landings, child pornography, satanic worship, breast implants, Bugs Bunny, Prince, DOJ, FEMA, NSA, FBI, DEA, CIA, UFO's, Tiny Tim, witch doctors, zombies, polar bears, leprechauns, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Jim Jones, Sasquatch, Martians, Jodie Foster, the baby Jebus, and a blue dress.

And that's just the short list.

When is someone going to build a Birther conspiracy generator anyway?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #341 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

No, that would be a clear position to take and I would never assume you capable of that.

I think what you, and trumptman and many other right-wingers, are happy to blow this racist dog whistle despite your knowing that it is a load of shit because it suits your partisan desires.

Since you're asking me to evaluate your motivations and beliefs...

You already have evaluated my motivations and beliefs. Your posts are laden with your assumptions about me. The focus of your attacks is me and my credibility.

Race has nothing to do with it, either. I don't know why you keep bringing that into the discussion.

Answer me this: if the short form certificate is sufficient, why has the Hawaiian government found it necessary to issue 2 separate statements informing everyone that they have the original records on file and that "everything checks out, trust us".

If the short form is sufficient, why didn't they just say "the short form is sufficient"?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #342 of 594
Race has everything to do with this. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no controversy. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no insidious implications about his birth as trumptman outlines.

This is what I mean by "dog whistle". It's a call to all the worst elements of racist politics while keeping your hands clean. As trumptman puts it, "In the meantime we can just sit back with the popcorn."[/i]

Set the xenophobic hounds loose and watch the show. Take no strong position and validate that there are "concerns" and "questions" without having any spine or backbone.

Quote:
If the short form is sufficient, why didn't they just say "the short form is sufficient"?

And this is where conspiracy theory nuttery comes full circle, when the performance of an act is proof of its malfeasance. First you complain that they aren't showing enough, now you complain that they show too much. As I've said repeatedly, no demonstrations of factual evidence can quiet a conspiracy that is not based on facts.

The short form is sufficient, that's what it says on the bottom of it.

Keep blowing that racist dog whistle, you should be proud.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #343 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Race has everything to do with this. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no controversy. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no insidious implications about his birth as trumptman outlines.

This is what I mean by "dog whistle". It's a call to all the worst elements of racist politics while keeping your hands clean. As trumptman puts it, "In the meantime we can just sit back with the popcorn."[/i]

Set the xenophobic hounds loose and watch the show. Take no strong position and validate that there are "concerns" and "questions" without having any spine or backbone.



And this is where conspiracy theory nuttery comes full circle, when the performance of an act is proof of its malfeasance. First you complain that they aren't showing enough, now you complain that they show too much. As I've said repeatedly, no demonstrations of factual evidence can quiet a conspiracy that is not based on facts.

The short form is sufficient, that's what it says on the bottom of it.

Keep blowing that racist dog whistle, you should be proud.

Nationality != Race

You are trying really hard to make me shut up, and it's not going to work.

Where is the certificate?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #344 of 594
I just remembered that my brother was born in Hawaii. Next time I see him I'll give him the stink eye.
post #345 of 594
Quote:
Nationality != Race

"It's not racism, it's just xenophobia!"

It is explicitly xenophobic, but in its context on the American political scene it is a racist dog whistle.

Quote:
You are trying really hard to make me shut up, and it's not going to work.

In what way am I trying really hard to make you shut up? By mocking your counter-factual beliefs? That's not trying to get you to shut up, that's laughing at you.

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, and all that jazz.

Quote:
Where is the certificate?

In Hawaii, you can see pictures of it online.

But it's nice to see that you base your beliefs on how angry you are with people on the Internet.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #346 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

"It's not racism, it's just xenophobia!"

It is explicitly xenophobic, but in its context on the American political scene it is a racist dog whistle.



In what way am I trying really hard to make you shut up? By mocking your counter-factual beliefs? That's not trying to get you to shut up, that's laughing at you.

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, and all that jazz.



In Hawaii, you can see pictures of it online.

But it's nice to see that you base your beliefs on how angry you are with people on the Internet.

Indeed.

Essentially, you are mocking that which you fear. Totally understandable.

You're certainly getting more worked up about this than I am, that's for sure.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #347 of 594
What is it I fear? Racism and xenophobia?
Yes, to an extent, you are correct.

I went to high school in a small East Texas town. Until the 1970s one of our rival towns about 20 minutes away had a banner downtown reading "Greenville, Texas - The Blackest Land, The Whitest People".

And I live in Houston, Texas, a town full of white people that celebrated Joe Horn's murder of two Hispanic men who broke into another person's house and is constantly roiling with anti-immigrant rage.

I don't know why others don't see this. There are many reasons I suppose. A true ignorance of the legacy of anti-black racism and anti-foreigner xenophobia in America; a complete lack of perspective outside the desire to wage partisan war. There are others, I'm sure.

You make your choice. You base your beliefs on partisan loyalty and, bizarrely, on spite. I think it useful to remind you that this "I won't say exactly what's wrong with him, but something's fishy" is exactly the kind of racist dog whistle that has been used for centuries in this country to incite murderous violence and racial and ethnic distrust. And for what?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #348 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What is it I fear? Racism and xenophobia?
Yes, to an extent, you are correct.

I went to high school in a small East Texas town. Until the 1970s one of our rival towns about 20 minutes away had a banner downtown reading "Greenville, Texas - The Blackest Land, The Whitest People".

And I live in Houston, Texas, a town full of white people that celebrated Joe Horn's murder of two Hispanic men who broke into another person's house and is constantly roiling with anti-immigrant rage.

I don't know why others don't see this. There are many reasons I suppose. A true ignorance of the legacy of anti-black racism and anti-foreigner xenophobia in America; a complete lack of perspective outside the desire to wage partisan war. There are others, I'm sure.

You make your choice. You base your beliefs on partisan loyalty and, bizarrely, on spite. I think it useful to remind you that this "I won't say exactly what's wrong with him, but something's fishy" is exactly the kind of racist dog whistle that has been used for centuries in this country to incite murderous violence and racial and ethnic distrust. And for what?

Others see it, but clearly not enough, I talked to a friend who said it's just a small percentage, a few percent. I told him no it's not a few percent, it's more like ~20-30 percent that one needs to include into the group people who are willing to give an ear towards believing these outlandish claims, and that indeed all this vitriol crosses the line of racist hate speech.

Just watch the many Republicans in Congress who say things like I don't know first hand, just to appease their base, they don't want their flock turning against them.

I haven't seen this level of racism and hate speech since George Wallace.

These modern day Glenn Beck's and Rush Limbaugh's of the world are hate baiting racists to the core.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #349 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Race has nothing to do with it, either. I don't know why you keep bringing that into the discussion.

Race has everything to do with it. It is racist bullshit.

Of course YOU aren't going to "bring race into the discussion." You are the one with the racist conspiracy nonsense. Most racists don't believe their statements are racist. Most racists don't even believe they ARE racist. "I'm not racist, but..." is the way racists preface a racist comment.

When someone points out that this conspiracy is based on race, that isn't "bringing race into the discussion." YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.
post #350 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Race has everything to do with it. It is racist bullshit.

Of course YOU aren't going to "bring race into the discussion." You are the one with the racist conspiracy nonsense. Most racists don't believe their statements are racist. Most racists don't even believe they ARE racist. "I'm not racist, but..." is the way racists preface a racist comment.

When someone points out that this conspiracy is based on race, that isn't "bringing race into the discussion." YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.

Accusations of racism can have serious consequences if true, such as the Boston cop who sent a mass e-mail where he compared Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. to a "banana-eating jungle monkey". In fact, he used the term "jungle money" 4 times in the mail message.

The cop is now suspended from his military duties and on administrative leave from the police department.

The accusations being leveled here, though, require one to make conclusions based on intrepretation of someone's motive, not conclusions based on intrepretation of something said. That's a tough call to make in the best of times, but from the outside of this argument looking in, the accusation of racism being made here is based on evidence where someone is trying to gain advantage in the discussion because of political differences, not differences of race.

jazzguru would benefit politically if his challenges were to be escalated in the media, but no evidence exists to attribute the challenge to elevate whatever race jazzguru claims for himself, and no evidence exists that supports the challenge as a means to denigrate Obama's race.

Playing the racism card when so little evidence is available cheapens the conversation, it cheapens the accuser, and it cheapens and dilutes the consequence that should accompany a valid case where racism is found to exist.

I don't think you want to do that, Mumbo, but as I see it, you have.
post #351 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Race has everything to do with it. It is racist bullshit.

Of course YOU aren't going to "bring race into the discussion." You are the one with the racist conspiracy nonsense. Most racists don't believe their statements are racist. Most racists don't even believe they ARE racist. "I'm not racist, but..." is the way racists preface a racist comment.

When someone points out that this conspiracy is based on race, that isn't "bringing race into the discussion." YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.

Can we assume that Skip Gates is a racist because he assumed that his arrest by a white cop was racially motivated? Then of course President Obama is a racists because he assumed the arrest was racially motivated.
post #352 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

Accusations of racism can have serious consequences if true, such as the Boston cop who sent a mass e-mail where he compared Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. to a "banana-eating jungle monkey". In fact, he used the term "jungle money" 4 times in the mail message.

The cop is now suspended from his military duties and on administrative leave from the police department.

The accusations being leveled here, though, require one to make conclusions based on intrepretation of someone's motive, not conclusions based on intrepretation of something said. That's a tough call to make in the best of times, but from the outside of ths argument looking in, the accusation of racism being made here is based on someone trying to gain advantage in the discussion because of political differences, not differences of race.

Playing the racism card when so little evidence is available cheapens the conversation, it cheapens the accuser, and it cheapens and dilutes the consequence that should accompany a valid case where racism is found to exist.

I don't think you want to do that, Mumbo, but as I see it, you have.

This birther conspiracy stuff is racist. It absolutely is.

I'm utterly unapologetic if this assertion makes you uncomfortable. It is true, and this is one of those moments when it's valid to declare something racist.

Unfortunately, a racist might be defined as "Someone who propagates racism." If you're going to make racist speculation like this birther conspiracy horseshit, than you're going to open yourself up to accusations of being a racist. C'est la vie.
post #353 of 594
Anyway back to the off topic topic. I found this interesting. A nice analysis of the political maneuvering of both sides.

Its Certifiable
The last word on President Obamas place of birth.


By JAMES TARANTO

Quote:
Several readers have written over the past few days taking us to task for dismissing so-called birthers as lunatics without bothering to refute their claims. We reluctantly concede their point. The birthers have managed to sow confusion in the minds of some who are not lunatics, and for the latter groups benefit it is worth clarifying matters.

Compounding the confusion, some rebuttals of the birthers claims have been based in part on misinformation. National Review, for example, asserts that it would not matter if the president had been born in a foreign country: His mother was a native of Kansas, whose residents have been citizens of the United States for a very long time, and whose children are citizens of the United States as well.

In fact, although some people born outside the U.S. are natural-born citizens (including John McCain, born in Panama, where his father was stationed as a naval officer), the timing and circumstances of Obamas birth make the place a necessary condition for natural-born citizenship. The State Department Web site explains the law that would have applied if Obama were born overseas:

Quote:
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the childs birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
Obama was born before 1986 to married parents, and his father was an alien. Thus if it were an overseas birth, his mother would have to have lived in the U.S. for 5 years after age 14 in order for her child to be a natural-born American. Mrs. Obama was only 18 when Barack was born, so she had not even lived 5 years after age 14.

This is something of a technicality: Someone born overseas and after 1986, but otherwise in identical circumstances to Obama, would be a natural-born citizen thanks to a law signed by President Reagan. We dont recall any outcry back then about the threat that some such person could grow up to be president, nor, as far as we are aware, are any birthers calling for a change in this law to return to the status quo ante 1986. Even if the birthers conspiracy theory were true, it would be hard to square the intensity of their emotion over the subject with the practical effect of Obamas (hypothetical) overseas birth, which would be roughly nil.

Ah, but the law is the law, the birthers will reply--and who can disagree? The birthers can. Whether out of ignorance or dishonesty, they misrepresent the law at every turn. Back in November, as we noted, the birthers were claiming that the Supreme Court had ordered Obama to prove his eligibility for the presidency. In fact, all that had happened was that a lawyer had asked the high court to hear an appeal of a lower courts decision throwing out his frivolous lawsuit for lack of standing. The justices, of course, denied the petition, and all such lawsuits have been summarily dismissed for lack of standing. The law is the law.

The birthers have also misrepresented the law in the claims they have made about Obamas birth certificate. In truth, Obama has proved that he is a native of Hawaii, and this proof would hold up in any legal or administrative proceeding.

In order to explain the birthers deception on this point, it is necessary to delve into the arcana of Hawaiian vital records. The document that Obama has released, which carries the title certification of live birth, confirms that the president was born in Honolulu. It is a legal birth certificate, and, as the Honolulu Star-Bulletin notes, it is the only kind of birth certificate the state of Hawaii issues.

FactCheck.org has a close-up photo of the certificate, which states clearly at the bottom: This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. If a court were somehow to take up the question of Obamas eligibility, then, the birth certificate would almost certainly be sufficient to resolve the question in his favor. The opposing side would have to provide serious evidence calling into question the veracity of Hawaiis official state records. Innuendo and hearsay would not be admissible.

Further, if Congress were to pass the so-called birther bill, Obama would be able to comply easily. The bill would require presidential campaigns to submit a copy of the candidates birth certificate to the Federal Election Commission. The certificate Obama has released publicly would meet this requirement.

Ah, but what about the original birth certificate? This is the nub of the birther case, and this is where things get really obscure.

As the Star-Bulletin notes, Hawaiian birth certificates have changed in form since Obama was born. Back then, the official record was a paper document with the title certificate of live birth (rather than certification), and it included more information, such as the name of hospital, certifiers name and title; attendants name and title, etc. Hawaii no longer issues those old-style birth certificates:

Quote:
[Spokeswoman Janice] Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting, she said.

Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.

The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests, Okubo said.

CNN has reported--or rather, CNN executive Jon Klein reported to staffers in an email that others reported--that the obsolete paper certificates were destroyed when the department switched to electronic record-keeping. Kleins information appears to have been in error. The Honolulu Advertiser reported yesterday that Okubo and her boss, Chiyome Fukino, both confirm that Obamas original birth certificate still exists. Fukino says she has seen it and that the information matches the now-official electronic records reflected on the certificate Obama has released.

So why doesnt Obama release the original certificate? The Advertiser says it is unclear whether the president would even be allowed to see it if he asked. It is clear, though, that the Hawaii statute governing disclosure of public records does not prohibit state officials from providing him with a copy, since he is the registrant and therefore has a direct and tangible interest in the record. One would think that Obama could persuade state officials to give him a copy, even if that is not their usual policy.

But the real question is: Why should he? The demand has no basis in principle and would have no practical benefit.

Obama has already provided a legal birth certificate demonstrating that he was born in Hawaii. No one has produced any serious evidence to the contrary. Absent such evidence, it is unreasonable to deny that Obama has met the burden of proof. We know that he was born in Honolulu as surely as we know that Bill Clinton was born in Hope, Ark., or George W. Bush in New Haven, Conn.

The release of the obsolete birth certificate would not resolve the issue to those for whom it is not already resolved. They claim without basis that todays birth certificate is a fake; there is nothing to stop them from claiming without basis that yesterdays is as well.

The president would gain nothing politically for his trouble. By acknowledging the birthers demands, he would lend them a modicum of credibility. By ignoring them, he actually reaps political benefits from their efforts. His critics, even those who are not birthers, end up looking like cranks by association. His supporters use the birthers to paint Obama foes as racist--which is probably unfair even to the birthers, as we argued Tuesday, but that doesnt mean it isnt effective.

In a Commentary article last year, William F. Buckley recounted the way he, Sen. Barry Goldwater and a handful of other top conservatives worked to stigmatize the John Birch Society, whose founder, Robert Welch, maintained, among other things, that President Eisenhower was a dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy, and that the U.S. government was under operational control of the Communist Party. The Birchers, like the birthers, made respectable conservatives look like kooks, and in preparation for a prospective Goldwater presidential campaign, Buckley and his associates thought it best to do a little conspiratorial organizing of their own against it.

They succeeded in excommunicating the Birchers. Its probably impossible to do the same to the birthers, because today the right wing is too vast to mount much of a conspiracy. The birthers are likely to be with us for as long as Obama is president--and because of them, it is more likely that this will be for the next 7½ rather than just 3½ years.
post #354 of 594
Taskiss:

Quote:
The accusations being leveled here, though, require one to make conclusions based on intrepretation of someone's motive, not conclusions based on intrepretation of something said.

The conclusion is not based solely on motive, it is based on the accusation ("he wasn't born here") and the assumption that something untoward is going on/something is being hidden ("he's a citizen, fine, but something's fishy"). "He isn't one of us"... what is that if not racism and xenophobia?



Racism is only part of the charge, the other is pure xenophobia, and I find it quite telling that no one is even attempting to deny that. It's almost like it is assumed that this is purely xenophobic, but we should have zero problem with multiple posters here spouting it freely and actually voicing how much they enjoy the spectacle such hate causes.

Obviously this is motivated largely by Obama's political party, but that only reinforces the accusation of a dog whistle.

Quote:
jazzguru would benefit politically if his challenges were to be escalated in the media, but no evidence exists to attribute the challenge to elevate whatever race jazzguru claims for himself, and no evidence exists that supports the challenge as a means to denigrate Obama's race.

This is what a dog whistle is; the one who blows it doesn't have to hate anyone, he just has to care about his own partisan feelings more than any loyalty to decent humanity.

No one has called jazzguru or trumptman racist, though the conspiracy theory they push clearly is.

Quote:
Playing the racism card when so little evidence is available cheapens the conversation, it cheapens the accuser, and it cheapens and dilutes the consequence that should accompany a valid case where racism is found to exist.

So little evidence? If your sole standard for acknowledging racism and xenophobia is the existence of racial slurs then you have a fairly poor understanding of how racism and xenophobia work.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #355 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Anyway back to the off topic topic. I found this interesting. A nice analysis of the political maneuvering of both sides.

Its Certifiable
The last word on President Obamas place of birth.


By JAMES TARANTO

Good summary. It brings up most all the points brought up here against the Birthers. But much more concisely and written way better than I could ever hope to do.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #356 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

trumptman:

The premise of this question is that the long form is being hidden because of information it contains.

This premise is flawed on two scores:
1 - No one has established that the long form is being hidden.

Perhaps someone ought to go review the definition of hidden. If it is not available to view, it is by definition, hidden.

Quote:
2 - No one has established that there is even anything that might be on it that would be worthy of hiding.

Obama has released two autobiographies. If the information on the long form conflicts with those, then he would be by definition a liar. It could also just be innocuous information that would feed the fire. No doctor signing the long form would feed the fire so to speak. One premise with regard to Obama is how he was shaped by his father abandoning him. If instead it were a case of alienation by his mother to the father, that would substantially alter the narrative.

Again, I claimed it was speculation from the get go and also said it was something that by lay standards would be innocuous. Kerry lying about Cambodia made it easier for the middle ground and uninformed people to buy speculation in other areas. Hillary Clinton was that much easier to discredit as not being a foreign expertise hard ass during the campaign (even though she turned around and was made Secretary of State) when she "misremembered " how she entered Bosnia.

We aren't talking about facts that are important in actual day to day matters but important to the narrative the politician has built about themselves.

Quote:
That's not a "deeper question", it's a "fucking stupid question built on a faulty foundation".

It would be neat to build a scale that shows that more relevant the question, the larger the amount of profanity and ad-homs associated with dismissing them.

I've given several examples of people hurt politically by such claims. Considering all three people I cited were not elected to the office they were seeking, it is very, very relevant. Obama has been elected but his support is eroding fast. His key to election was never planning but his personal journey. Find a key fact that calls into question that personal journey, something the folks reading the National Enquirer headlines at the checkout counter can easily understand, and you've just knocked another 20% off his support.

Quote:
I don't know. Who is hiding anything?

As the quote goes from The Princess Bride, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What defeat would there be?

You have no facts on your side, so there is no way for me to use facts to defeat your insipid, racist-dog-whistle conspiracy. It is a meritless belief you have, and there is no way to defeat a meritless belief except to fight its spread, much like fighting a communicable disease. The best I can do is mock and bash the conspiracy theory in a way that is clear enough to make sure that others who are reading are not tempted by the insane bullshit.

I wonder how many other people on here could get away with mocking and bashing other forum members to protect invisible people and call themselves the rational one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

No, that would be a clear position to take and I would never assume you capable of that.

I think what you, and trumptman and many other right-wingers, are happy to blow this racist dog whistle despite your knowing that it is a load of shit because it suits your partisan desires.

Since you're asking me to evaluate your motivations and beliefs...

I find it interesting that the tactics of the left are not only so obvious but really at this point sort of threadbare with their effectiveness. What is this reasoning that says, the facts are on my side and thus to really prove the point, I need a bunch of names to be called, to mock other posters and to attack and bash them personally?

See most people view it as just the opposite. The desperate tactics are called for to obscure the point when there is no reasoning or facts to support the thesis.

Apparently the talking points being sent out have set the stakes against anyone inquiring about the long form rather high because the profanity and name calling to actual information ratio is rather high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Race has everything to do with this. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no controversy. If it weren't for his father's race there would be no insidious implications about his birth as trumptman outlines.

This is what I mean by "dog whistle". It's a call to all the worst elements of racist politics while keeping your hands clean. As trumptman puts it, "In the meantime we can just sit back with the popcorn."[/i]

Set the xenophobic hounds loose and watch the show. Take no strong position and validate that there are "concerns" and "questions" without having any spine or backbone.

And this is where conspiracy theory nuttery comes full circle, when the performance of an act is proof of its malfeasance. First you complain that they aren't showing enough, now you complain that they show too much. As I've said repeatedly, no demonstrations of factual evidence can quiet a conspiracy that is not based on facts.

The short form is sufficient, that's what it says on the bottom of it.

Keep blowing that racist dog whistle, you should be proud.

Perhaps this is Texas reasoning coming home to bare. I'm not sure you are aware of this Groverat but in other parts of the country, there are people who are not citizens and also not brown. Thus one can question this fact and not just be talking about one group.

Given the fact that I listed three examples that involved politicians and their crafted personal narratives that had been damaged due to similar circumstances and also stated up front that I have no doubts about the man and his citizenship, all the name calling by you just stinks of desperation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Nationality != Race

You are trying really hard to make me shut up, and it's not going to work.

Where is the certificate?

He is doing a lot more than trying to shut you up. He's called you and me every name in the book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

"It's not racism, it's just xenophobia!"

It is explicitly xenophobic, but in its context on the American political scene it is a racist dog whistle.

In what way am I trying really hard to make you shut up? By mocking your counter-factual beliefs? That's not trying to get you to shut up, that's laughing at you.

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake, and all that jazz.

In Hawaii, you can see pictures of it online.

But it's nice to see that you base your beliefs on how angry you are with people on the Internet.

Someone is projecting again. Jazz and I are not the parties who based on intent and context call others a bunch of vile names and then allege they are angry. It is amazing how the name can change but the allegations from you never do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What is it I fear? Racism and xenophobia?
Yes, to an extent, you are correct.

I went to high school in a small East Texas town. Until the 1970s one of our rival towns about 20 minutes away had a banner downtown reading "Greenville, Texas - The Blackest Land, The Whitest People".

And I live in Houston, Texas, a town full of white people that celebrated Joe Horn's murder of two Hispanic men who broke into another person's house and is constantly roiling with anti-immigrant rage.

I don't know why others don't see this. There are many reasons I suppose. A true ignorance of the legacy of anti-black racism and anti-foreigner xenophobia in America; a complete lack of perspective outside the desire to wage partisan war. There are others, I'm sure.

You make your choice. You base your beliefs on partisan loyalty and, bizarrely, on spite. I think it useful to remind you that this "I won't say exactly what's wrong with him, but something's fishy" is exactly the kind of racist dog whistle that has been used for centuries in this country to incite murderous violence and racial and ethnic distrust. And for what?

You are aware that not all of us live in Texas right? You question out loud why others don't see the need to associate fellow forum members with their neighbors who they then call a bunch of names, spit a bunch of hate at and then wonder why their parade of bad behavior only has one participant?

Try a mirror, Groverat, try a mirror.

BTW, Houston, Texas is minority white.

Houston is a diverse and international city, in part because of its many academic institutions and strong biomedical, energy, manufacturing and aerospace industries. According to the U.S. Census 2000, the racial makeup of the city was 49.27 percent White, 25.31 percent Black or African American, 0.44 percent Native American, 5.31 percent Asian, 0.06 percent Pacific Islander, 16.46 percent from other races, and 3.15 percent from two or more races. 37 percent of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race.

I find it interesting that the areas you visit only seem to be full of seething, racist white people when that is less than half the town in pure demographics and obviously far, far less than that in terms of that demographic practicing certain beliefs.

Again, try a mirror because the places you go, the people you see and the rationales given for angry name calling and personal attacks leveled on your fellow forum members by you don't happen to match reality. Creating stereotypes and using them as justification to attack people not remotely aligned with them is the purest definition of ignorance and hate.

Stop practicing both.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #357 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Taskiss:

The conclusion is not based solely on motive, it is based on the accusation ("he wasn't born here") and the assumption that something untoward is going on/something is being hidden ("he's a citizen, fine, but something's fishy"). "He isn't one of us"... what is that if not racism and xenophobia?

Given the context that this is a political thread, it's much more likely to be politically driven, seeing that the challenge was a reference to the presidents suitability for office because the requirements are that the office be held by a natural born citizen.

There's a leap from the evidence provided in the posts to the conclusion that there is a racial motive for the challenge, and that leaps requires assumptions. No direct connection was provided. To pick race as the motive ... is incredibly weak, and there's not even any circumstantial evidence that I know of to support that charge, like previous rants of a racist nature.

I believe it's insulting to make charges such as this, given the lack of evidence. If someone is comfortable making these accusations, it's, in my mind, likely used as a trump card to cover up a poor logical argument. It speaks volumes about the person who needs nothing other than someone disagreeing with them to spew ugly, unwarranted accusations.
post #358 of 594
Taskiss:

But trumptman and jazzguru aren't arguing that he wasn't natural born. They aren't arguing anything specific at all, it's just a general fear... which is the entire goddam problem. Ignorant hate isn't spread with specific accusations.
You just say, "Well, something's fishy" and those who actually have the hate in them decide what that something "fishy" is.

That's the entire point of the dog whistle.


trumptman:

Quote:
If it is not available to view, it is by definition, hidden.

Is it not available to view? Has anyone actually gone to Hawaii, asked to see it, and been denied?

If yes, is that not how any request to see someone else's birth certificate would be handled?

Quote:
Obama has released two autobiographies. If the information on the long form conflicts with those, then he would be by definition a liar.

Excellent. So what reason do we have to believe that the long form would conflict?
Shouldn't we have cause to launch a witchhunt?

Quote:
No doctor signing the long form would feed the fire so to speak.

There's no doctor's signature on the only copy of my birth certificate that I have. The "Attending Physician" line is completely blank.

Quote:
I wonder how many other people on here could get away with mocking and bashing other forum members to protect invisible people and call themselves the rational one.

Invisible people? Blacks and foreigners aren't invisible.

Quote:
The desperate tactics are called for to obscure the point when there is no reasoning or facts to support the thesis.

What desperate tactics am I employing? Ridicule.
But, as usual, your attempts at Internet psychoanalysis work beautifully as a mirror. You are calling for an unwarranted and unprecedented foray into a president's personal records simply because you think it might shed light on a "narrative", freely admitting that nothing important rests on the question.

Quote:
Apparently the talking points being sent out have set the stakes against anyone inquiring about the long form rather high because the profanity and name calling to actual information ratio is rather high.

What is my source for talking points, pray tell?

Quote:
Jazz and I are not the parties who based on intent and context call others a bunch of vile names and then allege they are angry.

What vile names have I called you or jazzguru?

Quote:
You are aware that not all of us live in Texas right?

Yes, which is the entire point of a dog whistle. I actually live in the area so devastated by America's racist past and present.

Quote:
I find it interesting that the areas you visit only seem to be full of seething, racist white people when that is less than half the town in pure demographics and obviously far, far less than that in terms of that demographic practicing certain beliefs.

This further illustrates the apparently profound ignorance of those who weren't raised in the South to the dynamics of how racism works in America's main racial battlefield (quite literally, in history).

When did I claim that the "areas I visit only seem to be full of seething, racist white people"? I am well aware of my area's racial diversity. That is the entire point. It is those who live outside the context of the South that do not understand it properly (or, at least, have a difficult time understanding it).

Unless you actually live in a former slave state with slave sites where so many races mix it will be hard to understand how racist dog whistles cause so much damage in a community.

But, as you said, you're just here to help stir up old hatreds and eat popcorn while you watch it burn.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #359 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Hey don't spoil it for the rest of me.

I'm working on multiple Birther tangents.

They need to be flushed out some more, but involve the following;

DNA, abortion, adoption, Castro, Mao, miscarrage, kidnapping, crack cocaine, orgies, multiple suicides, drug running, the KGB, Princess Diana, the moon landings, child pornography, satanic worship, breast implants, Bugs Bunny, Prince, DOJ, FEMA, NSA, FBI, DEA, CIA, UFO's, Tiny Tim, witch doctors, zombies, polar bears, leprechauns, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Jim Jones, Sasquatch, Martians, Jodie Foster, the baby Jebus, and a blue dress.

And that's just the short list.

When is someone going to build a Birther conspiracy generator anyway?

Sorry!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #360 of 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Taskiss:

But trumptman and jazzguru aren't arguing that he wasn't natural born. They aren't arguing anything specific at all, it's just a general fear... which is the entire goddam problem. Ignorant hate isn't spread with specific accusations.
You just say, "Well, something's fishy" and those who actually have the hate in them decide what that something "fishy" is.

That's the entire point of the dog whistle.

Who said anything about fear? Find the quote. The entire problem is you making up nonsense to justify mistreating your fellow forum members.

Speaking of ignorant hate not being spread with specific accusations, it sounds like exactly what you are doing.

Quote:
Is it not available to view? Has anyone actually gone to Hawaii, asked to see it, and been denied?

If yes, is that not how any request to see someone else's birth certificate would be handled?

Part of what has fed this nonsense is sorting through all the dust tossed up related to it. You know that dust well because you are tossing it up now. People have requested it, been told the short form as the only form, were told the original was destroyed and wasn't available, and that surrogates have seen it and we should trust their word, but the original itself exists but cannot be seen.

Obama could simply request it and release it. I mean that is all that really needs to be done.

BTW, what dog whistles were being raised when forum members raised issues about McCain via a NY Times article about his eligibility. Sounds like the same nonsense coming back to bite people in the butt.

Quote:
There's no doctor's signature on the only copy of my birth certificate that I have. The "Attending Physician" line is completely blank.

Good for you and if you construct a personal/political narrative around information contrary to that fact, make sure to keep it hidden.

Quote:
nvisible people? Blacks and foreigners aren't invisible.

There is a reason I quote you.

The best I can do is mock and bash the conspiracy theory in a way that is clear enough to make sure that others who are reading are not tempted by the insane bullshit.

You have to personally attack me to protect the "others."

Quote:
Excellent. So what reason do we have to believe that the long form would conflict?
Shouldn't we have cause to launch a witchhunt?

Politics doesn't need a cause. It doesn't even need to be rational. Obama was elected on HOPE and CHANGE. I said from the beginning that I believed it wasn't any sort of legal issue but a straight up political issue. When Palin had to disclose her daughter's pregnancy to turn back the "witchhunt" the only points scored were political. I said from the very beginning this feels very much the same. Why did we care if Sanford was walking a trail or screwing his mistress? It is a political scorecard.

Quote:
What desperate tactics am I employing? Ridicule.
But, as usual, your attempts at Internet psychoanalysis work beautifully as a mirror. You are calling for an unwarranted and unprecedented foray into a president's personal records simply because you think it might shed light on a "narrative", freely admitting that nothing important rests on the question.

I highlighted the points and others have called them out as well. Enjoy the delusion.

Quote:
What is my source for talking points, pray tell?

Who would dare limit a man with so many posts spamming, I mean spanning the internet to a single source? Sure there are several articles today out there that hit the talking points that it isn't just racist, but xenophobic but I would never limit you to just one. I'm sure you read them several of them within the liberal media echo chamber.

Quote:
What vile names have I called you or jazzguru?

I highlighted them along with the "you" and "yours." Go back and find them yourself.

Quote:
Yes, which is the entire point of a dog whistle. I actually live in the area so devastated by America's racist past and present

Yes and you continue to live there while apparently noting that not much has changed. You certainly note that your family is not of limited financial means. Why keep frequenting the same place where the white people all enjoy their hate so much? I mean certainly there are other parts of the country where you can talk football and eat BBQ as well?

Quote:
This further illustrates the apparently profound ignorance of those who weren't raised in the South to the dynamics of how racism works in America's main racial battlefield (quite literally, in history).

Yes, all of us who live in the unenlightened, tolerant places are ignorant and those of us who live in the intolerant, ignorant racist places are enlightened.

The irony of the good ol' boys from Texas and Ol' Miss screaming that a guy from California is a racist because of the dog whistle he is blowing while also being ignorant of the dog whistle since he doesn't live in a place where it would be used.

This reasoning just gets more and more fun.

Quote:
When did I claim that the "areas I visit only seem to be full of seething, racist white people"? I am well aware of my area's racial diversity. That is the entire point. It is those who live outside the context of the South that do not understand it properly (or, at least, have a difficult time understanding it).

Sorry, I guess us Californians just don't understand phrases like...

Quote:
And I live in Houston, Texas, a town full of white people that celebrated Joe Horn's murder of two Hispanic men who broke into another person's house and is constantly roiling with anti-immigrant rage.

.......to mean minority white and racially diverse. Since you are a white person in Houston, I suppose you also include yourself in that claim.

Quote:
Unless you actually live in a former slave state with slave sites where so many races mix it will be hard to understand how racist dog whistles cause so much damage in a community.

I guess I don't understand the dog whistle while being accused of using it exactly for that purpose. Again, wonderful reasoning. I'll keep trotting out that dog whistle to control people I don't understand using concepts I'm not familiar with and code words I haven't lived around because that is exactly what you claimed I was doing before claiming I was ignorant about it.

This is hilarious. No not hilarious... Grove will say I'm angry... VERY ANGRY about all of this.

Quote:
But, as you said, you're just here to help stir up old hatreds and eat popcorn while you watch it burn.

Yes, I'll stir them up while being completely ignorant about it. I'll both get it and not get it and in the meantime I'll be very, very ANGRY!

Dude, you crack me up.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Palin's Sailin'