Advertisement
I has a sad.
I was reading several posts yesterday all revolving around how AWB wouldn’t have stopped any of the mass shootings we’ve had, mostly on right-leaning sites like Brietbart, Twitchy, Hot Air, etc. What I saw in the comments reminded me that sometimes, the enemy of my enemy happens to be people who call themselves my ‘side’, and it scares me.
We have conspiracy theorists on our side who no amount of proof is enough to dissuade them from their conspiracy. Every official report is met with “That’s just what the government wants you to read” or “That’s an electronic copy, I want the real, physical one!” or “Sure, the guy calls himself a coroner, but where’s his diploma?”.
So many out in the open attacks on our rights, and people are more concerned with a plot to somehow change evidence of a horrific event. The reactions to the event, regardless of the details, are the danger and to focus energy on something that won’t change perceptions is wasted.
Take Obama’s birth – He could come out today, say he was actually born in Canada and that he never even applied for American citizenship, and he would remain president until 2016. His place of birth isn’t going to get him out of office, so why continue to obsess over that detail when there are other, more pressing things to fight?
*grumble*
Comments
The birther movement has always bugged me. I don't care where he was born, there are so many legitimate reason why this man should not be president, that arguing over the ridiculous only cheapens all of the other reasons. It gives the pundits a chance to point out the crazy fringe and lump us all in with them.
ExurbanKevin
says:
Sure, you're only saying that because the chemtrails are MAKING you say that!
Paranoid? Me? Who said I was paranoid?
Paranoid? Me? Who said I was paranoid?
My daughter called me the other day and asked my opinion on the WTC collapse. Apparently one of the people she works with is an avid conspiracy theorist. I told her to tell this person to stop reading from the prison planet site and go to google, look up ASCE World Trade Center ,shut up and read
Knitebane
says:
The Constitution specifically states that only a natural-born citizen can be President.
That's why it matters where he was born. Either we obey the Constitution in all its particulars or we are no different than those who would deny us our second amendment rights because they don't like what it means.
For the record, I think That Guy was born in Hawaii and is thus an American citizen. It is also a matter of record that his father was a British subject. There is a considerable amount of legal wrangling over whether that makes him a natural born citizen or not, but the courts really haven't addressed it.
It matters because the Constitution matters. Or it doesn't and we can just turn in our guns.
It's not a buffet.
That's why it matters where he was born. Either we obey the Constitution in all its particulars or we are no different than those who would deny us our second amendment rights because they don't like what it means.
For the record, I think That Guy was born in Hawaii and is thus an American citizen. It is also a matter of record that his father was a British subject. There is a considerable amount of legal wrangling over whether that makes him a natural born citizen or not, but the courts really haven't addressed it.
It matters because the Constitution matters. Or it doesn't and we can just turn in our guns.
It's not a buffet.
I don't need to worry about any Tin-Foil Conspiracies. What is coming out of the mouths of those Politicians on Capitol Hill and the White House is Bad Enough.
Bob Owens
says:
I saw the comment about the coroner, and suspect that you're more tweaked about the Sandy Hook Truthers than Birthers.
Yeah, I hate them, too.
Yeah, I hate them, too.
Robb,
if you do any checking of the back story of his origins, it would appear that there is more than one way he should not qualify as meeting the requirement to be a natural born citizen.
If he was a Republican, he would have been tossed out of office, and everything he has signed would be considered null and void, most likely.
He has shown absolutely nothing to prove he is a citizen. That is the requirement that was, and is being, ignored. Frankly, this point is important. It's not that we have to prove he isn't, he has to prove he IS. And because of WHAT he is, this is ignored.
I expect that history is going to look at this situation with great disdain, and decide that collectively, we were idiots. And they will be correct.
I think part of the problem is the idea that someone could fake their way into the currently most powerful position in the world is so far-fetched, that most people just can't wrap their minds around it.
It's also slightly possible that Obama wasn't aware of the irregularities when he started in politics, but his efforts to stymie any and all research when he began to focus on the top spot clearly shows he is knowledgeable of the facts of the situation, and has been for some time.
The finding that his supposed birth document from Hawaii has been shown to be faked should raise some sort of red flag for people who aren't paying attention.
I imagine that one result of this should be the requirement that anyone going into any level of politics should have his/her citizen status clearly documented, and re-examined every time they want to move up the ladder.
if you do any checking of the back story of his origins, it would appear that there is more than one way he should not qualify as meeting the requirement to be a natural born citizen.
If he was a Republican, he would have been tossed out of office, and everything he has signed would be considered null and void, most likely.
He has shown absolutely nothing to prove he is a citizen. That is the requirement that was, and is being, ignored. Frankly, this point is important. It's not that we have to prove he isn't, he has to prove he IS. And because of WHAT he is, this is ignored.
I expect that history is going to look at this situation with great disdain, and decide that collectively, we were idiots. And they will be correct.
I think part of the problem is the idea that someone could fake their way into the currently most powerful position in the world is so far-fetched, that most people just can't wrap their minds around it.
It's also slightly possible that Obama wasn't aware of the irregularities when he started in politics, but his efforts to stymie any and all research when he began to focus on the top spot clearly shows he is knowledgeable of the facts of the situation, and has been for some time.
The finding that his supposed birth document from Hawaii has been shown to be faked should raise some sort of red flag for people who aren't paying attention.
I imagine that one result of this should be the requirement that anyone going into any level of politics should have his/her citizen status clearly documented, and re-examined every time they want to move up the ladder.
You realize that the precedent of not bothering to ascertain the citizenship status of presidential hopefuls, will now open the door to Ahhnuld making a run for the office!
The Termigovernator in 2016!
This was going to be a joke, but on reflection, maybe not.
The Termigovernator in 2016!
This was going to be a joke, but on reflection, maybe not.
Okay maybe a birther can answer this for me. If the Obama not a citizen thing had legs, why did Hillary ignore it in '08. Don't tell me it's because she's a nice person; this is the Bride of Clinton we're discussing.
Jim, a problem I see is that by using the label "birther", you are stating to the world you have a closed mind.
I don't follow conspiracies. What I care about is facts, and for this situation, the facts don't add up, at all.
I wonder why Robb and others don't care whether he is legal or not? You all complain about what he does in office, yet you ignore a method to remove him, and possibly void his programs. If it turns out he isn't legal for his position, then he can be removed. Would there be an outcry if action was taken to toss him? Sure. My response is: I don't care, I want him out, if it can be done properly (legally). Why would you oppose this?
As far as the mis-direction of a debate question of why Clinton didn't do anything, why would she? That tells me you have not been paying attention to politics for a long time. Repubs savage each other, but not Dems. Dems savage Repubs, but not other Dems. Do you see the difference? I hate politics, due to it's lack of logic, and stay away as much as I can, and even I can see this going on.
Words mean something, and when you acquiesce, and use the "official" Dem supplied labels that are designed to denigrate and belittle and diminish, you are playing their game on their court, with their rules, and you lose.
I don't follow conspiracies. What I care about is facts, and for this situation, the facts don't add up, at all.
I wonder why Robb and others don't care whether he is legal or not? You all complain about what he does in office, yet you ignore a method to remove him, and possibly void his programs. If it turns out he isn't legal for his position, then he can be removed. Would there be an outcry if action was taken to toss him? Sure. My response is: I don't care, I want him out, if it can be done properly (legally). Why would you oppose this?
As far as the mis-direction of a debate question of why Clinton didn't do anything, why would she? That tells me you have not been paying attention to politics for a long time. Repubs savage each other, but not Dems. Dems savage Repubs, but not other Dems. Do you see the difference? I hate politics, due to it's lack of logic, and stay away as much as I can, and even I can see this going on.
Words mean something, and when you acquiesce, and use the "official" Dem supplied labels that are designed to denigrate and belittle and diminish, you are playing their game on their court, with their rules, and you lose.
I used the term birther because it seemed easier than" all of those people who believe Barack Obama is not a real citizen and should be impeached, imprisoned and executed" Hiding behind word games and narrow sophistry does not change the weakness of the initial argument. How does one perpetrate a conspiracy at that level for over 50 yrs
Jim,
It was Hillary's crowd that BEGAN the "Birther" movement in 2008.
(BTW, I think he was born in Hawaii, and thus, is a "native born citizen" as defined in the Constutution. I also have zero confidence in the official story that he's put out to "prove" it. I suspect the truth is more complex than "Birthers" think -- such as that the original birth certificate does docukment him as a Hawaiian native birth, but has a very unpalatable entry that he feels would be a net negative.)
It was Hillary's crowd that BEGAN the "Birther" movement in 2008.
(BTW, I think he was born in Hawaii, and thus, is a "native born citizen" as defined in the Constutution. I also have zero confidence in the official story that he's put out to "prove" it. I suspect the truth is more complex than "Birthers" think -- such as that the original birth certificate does docukment him as a Hawaiian native birth, but has a very unpalatable entry that he feels would be a net negative.)
R.cooper
says:
You young folks, have been interesting ..... I'll be back, I like new, fresh , thinking ...... It's more .....synister than you know....but your safe where you are.
Comments have been closed on this topic.
Yet in the next post you lament "never again" being insincere. If we don't press the point, if will happen again.