1876 replies to this topic

[catsi563]

Actually I knew it wouldnt kill the issue ever. he could have presented the birth certificate the day the issue was brought up and it would have been rejected as fake.

And yes It is racism. if it wasnt racism then John Mccains Birth status would have been questioned as would bushes, clintons and many others.

But no, none of theirs have even remotely been brought up, and Mccains is the most recent and he was born in Panama.

But racism as I said wasnt the reason its been kept going. That lies in republican boogeyman politics. Theyre waving the shiney object in peoples faces with his birth status. using it to scare people.

While I'll agree that not all Birthers are Racist, there is still a racist undertone to the entire argument because once Factcheck.org put the Birth certificate and the long form certificate up which are both legitimate examples of paperwork for the presidency the argument was immediately rejected as a falsehood.

So if legitimate documents dont work, and havent worked how can anyone with even a minute shred of common sense keep spewing the same utter and complete debunked bull crap unless racism is at the heart of the issue.

Ill grant you this much, I do tend to hate when the race card is played on every little thing or instance involving a blackman or the blakc community.

But in this case racism is the only logical argument (irony) for the birth (pun not intended) of this absurd theory which no other president in entire 200+ years of this nation has had to deal with.

[Nate River]

I think it's more like Bush/Quayle. Biden doesn't have the evil genius vibe.

Fair enough.

My point was more about the fact that they'd likely hate the guy replacing the person their trying to oust more than the guy they ousted. Seriously, is the endevour really worth the effort? Do birthers really want President Biden that bad?

I love NPR. They've devoted almost zero coverage to it. Practically all the coverage that I've seen about it is people complaining about the coverage on message boards.

I don't particularly care for NPR, but that'd be a good reason to listen, unless I need to fall asleep.....

[Sakura Blossoms]

My point was more about the fact that they'd likely hate the guy replacing the person their trying to oust more than the guy they ousted. Seriously, is the endevour really worth the effort? Do birthers really want President Biden that bad?

I don't think they're even thinking that far ahead. Their brains (lacking in good 'ol fashioned common sense) are currently hardwired just to reject all things Obama. That's all they can see right now.

So if legitimate documents dont work, and havent worked how can anyone with even a minute shred of common sense keep spewing the same utter and complete debunked bull crap unless racism is at the heart of the issue.

Ill grant you this much, I do tend to hate when the race card is played on every little thing or instance involving a blackman or the blakc community.

But in this case racism is the only logical argument (irony) for the birth (pun not intended) of this absurd theory which no other president in entire 200+ years of this nation has had to deal with.

Good argument.

[Nee-sama]

Some people I know just hate Obama so much that they would prefer to have anyone else take power. Since, after all, Obama is trying to steer this country and this world into a socialist one world order, is also a puppet to George Soros and his secret elite rulers of the world.
And no, of course I didn't think that this would close the issue as much as I would like it to. Nothing will ever appease them.

[Sakura Blossoms]

This article pretty much backs up everything you've already said about this whole racial 'birther' issue, catsi. You hit it right on the nail:

http://www.yahoo.com...n-the-president

Excerpts:

So what's fueling the dogged questioning of Obama's origins? Many critics of the birther movement say its core tenets--and its stubborn resistance to evidence disproving those beliefs--can be traced to racial hostilities. The fundamental birtherist conviction, these critics say, is that an African-American can't have legitimately won the presidency--and that his elevation to power therefore has to be the result of an elaborate subterfuge.

Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. in early April called for the connection to be publicly drawn between birthers and racism: "So it is time to call this birther nonsense what it is--not just claptrap, but profoundly racist claptrap."

And columnist Michael Tomasky wrote for The Guardian Wednesday that the birther conspiracy "had to be the only explanation for how this black man got to the White House." He added: "And if you think race isn't what this is about at its core, ask yourself if there would even be a birther conspiracy if Barack Obama were white and named Bart Oberstar. If you think there would be, you are delusional."

[Nate River]

As my previous post should indicate I think birthirism is a crack theory that needs to die and resent them for the harm they brought on others conservatives. That said, I am suspicious of racism claims in the absence of actual evidence after having watched human debris like Al Sharpton make careers out of playing the race card.

Shauna, I disagree. The evidence it uses is as follows:

1) The opinions of three people (2 journalists and a history professor, with one journalist being from the notoriously left-wing Guardian no less) with no explanation as to why they should be given any more authority than anyone else nor an explanation as to how they arrived at that counclusion outside of personal belief or bais. Honestly, I can write an aritcle to the contrary using the quotes of my neighbors and it would be about as meaningful.

Oh yeah, and the testimony of legendary race baiter Jesse Jackson. Was Al Sharpton not available for comment?

2) A study which, if used to support your and catsi's proposition, engages in the logical fallacy Nick has already mention. This is what Hehman had to say:

While I can't speak to the birther movement specifically, this controversy and others like it are what initially sparked my interest and led to the recent publication in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. President Obama has consistently faced a number of controversies that are, frankly, not based on fact. We thought that his critics' persistence in pursuing these fantasies, such as Obama's birth in a foreign nation or being a Muslim, in the face of facts saying otherwise, might be indirectly rooted in racism.

Our research investigated whether people who held racial prejudices might be more likely to see Obama as "un-American," presumably because of his race. Indeed, this is what we found. Whites who were prejudiced against Blacks were more likely to see Obama as un-American, and in turn, evaluated Obama as performing more poorly as president. Whites who were not prejudiced, and Blacks in general, did not do so. Additionally and importantly, this relationship was only found with Obama, as prejudiced Whites did not see Vice-President Joe Biden as un-American, despite the fact that Obama and Biden share political party affiliation and agenda.

First, I'll go ahead and assume "un-American" can be translated into birthism (which, really, I'm not sure can do based on the limtied information provided in the article as he doesn't define what un-American means)

In short, what they found, at best, shows that those who are racists tended to more willing to buy birthism than others, not that birthires tended to be racists. As Nick said, the fact that racists tend to be birthers does not show birthers tend to be racists.

If you could show me, for example, that most birthers are members of the Klan, then yeah, I buy the argument, but not on this stuff.

3) The story of single nutjob who got punked twice.

4) Regurgitation of catsi's original argument which premuses that there must be a predominent overring logical explanation for what it otherwise illogical behavior. And you presume the explanation must be his race because you can't think of anything else. To which I have two questions:

a) You've never met a hard core consipiracy theorist have you? They tend to be people so convinced as to the truth of their conclusion that every shred of evidence is viewed through that percieved truth. Their behavior following the current release of the certificarte is classic behavior for conspiracy theorists of all types.

b) Why is it impossible for them to be nothing more than a collective bunch of desperate nutjobs?

@catsi: you claim Republican boogeyman and then use the failure to question the Bushses and McCain...at what point can you eliminate unprincipled partisan hackery from the equation? As to McCain, there was plenty of speculation about his eligibity to run, apprently enough, that a Democratically controlled Senate felt compelled to pass a resolution that he was. Finally, what part of Clinton's past lent itself to that particular conspirary theory?

President's have been on the recieving end of all sorts of conspiracy theories, many considerably worse than birthism. That all other 43 Presidents didn't face the same theory he did doesn't require the conclusion that that his must be rooted in race.

I happly agree with the claim that birthers are out to lunch, but you will need far more than this to convince me they are also a bunch of racists. I'm not very receptive to racism claims without solid proof. Supposition isn't enough.

[catsi563]

In this case the supposition is more then sufficent. I too rarely take claims of racism seriously. its an all to often used boogeyman of its own.

That said when I, me specifically calls something racist that alone should be sufficent to tell you that i take it seriously.

In regards to Mccain his eligibility to run being question only furthers my argument. Mccain was questioned, his birth status investigated by a bi-partisan pari of lawyers, and the entire matter dropped in one shot.

For President Obama though this issue has lingerd and and lingered and been dragged out like a pile of taffy. Even long after his birth certificates were posted on reputable sites and acknowledged by the govenor of Hawaii and other officials.

And yes you are right that a hard core conspiracy theorist will believe any claptrap thats throw at them when viewed through their own twisted myopic lense.

That said my argument was never what kept it going. That is boogeyman politics. The republican party jumped on the argument early and used it as a wedge issue to drive voters to the polls by scaring the feeble minded with the scawy boogeyman whos birth circumstances were ""shady"'.

Now however they have given life to this beast which was born in nothing but pure basic racism.

And the cruxt of this Nate is that racism is also a small part of what keeps it going. Even you cannot deny the numbers speak for themsevles.

You want telling numbers more then 67% of republcians believe that President Obama either wasnt born in the USA or isnt an American citizen, or arent sure of his birth status.

and these numbers come AFTER he released his birth certificate. I mean seriously. if you dont like his politics I understand HELL Ive disagreed with some of his political decisions.

But seriously their is no rational explantion for 70% of a specific political party to embrace a crackpot theory that has been debunked not once, not twice, but repepatedly and even recently.

And if you want further evidence that racism is in play lets set aside the birth status for a moment.

Now these freaking fruit loops are calling into question his fing education status. Are you kidding me????????

thats racist in and of it self. because obviously a Black man couldnt get into Columbia and Harvard without help. when a rich white boy like donald trump couldnt do it. (these are Trumps own words by the way).

Ill give this much President Obama admitted that affirmatve action may have played some small part in getting him into Harvard. But once in there AA doesnt help you stay. Nor does it help you become president of the prestigious Harvard law review. Nor graduate Magna Cum Laude with honors.

No that couldnt possibly happen. A lowly black man couldnt possibly succeed where a rich white man failed repeatedly. it must be a fraud it must be *pukes from spewing this utterly unbelievable crap*

No Nate Im sorry but you are wrong on this one. I too like you am very sceptical and sometimes hard on certain factions and people like Sharpton and Jackson for playing the race card on every little thing.

A blackman stubs his toe on a police station doorway and the two of them are hollering about race playing a part in the incedent.

That said no rational mind could not conclude that this entire nonsense was birthed through pure unbridedled racism. The hatred and fear of a Black man with a foreign sounding name who was elected into the highest position in the land by popular and majority vote of the people.

No this couldnt possibly happen because he earned the position, it has to be a conspiracy where a woman and her husband decided to engage in a 50 year long plan to raise a baby in secret, fake his birth cerificate, and education, and force him to violate his muslim **secret** religions tennants while engaging in war against muslim nations. All so he would have to put up with bi partisan bickering and politicing and people looking at him like hes less then human.

No this is racism. its a step back to the 1950s when a black man had to have a note from his employer to be out on the streets at night or he faced arrest. And yes this actually occured my dad lived through it when he was living in both flordia and North carolina.

The conspiracy theories may play a hand in keeping ti going along with boogeyman politicing which now even republicans are trying to distance themselves from the monster theyve helped create.

Ill tell you this Nate. the republicans could have put this insanity to rest years ago. when the question first raised itself, they could have done the same as they did with Mccain. send a lawyer for a freedom of information request verified the certificate and then put out a simple resolution that hes american and thats that. But instead they let it draaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag on so theyd have a wonderful little carrot that they could dangle in front of the looney toons. here boy here boy look at the shiney, and vote for me so I can protect you against the scawwwy black man.

Hell look at the response to his release of the ceritficate. Now that they have it its too late, and not authentic, and wheres the education transcripts.

Its all bullcrap Nate and you are smart enough to know what leis at the root of it.

because Yes you are right that presidents have been targets of conspiracy theories since this nation was founded absolutely correct.

But never has a president been subject to this level of scrutiny on the most basic aspects of his humanity. NEVER.

And as loathe as I am to say it there is but one explanation for this. the racism of certain indivuals feeding into their fear and ignorance has lead to a ridiculous and utterly absurd theory which has had life breathed into it by ambitious politicians and sideshow barkers (trump), and been fed by a media machine (FOX) all because a black man had the audacity to run for and win the highest office in the land.

Edited by catsi563, 01 May 2011 - 02:11 AM.

[Insurrection]

As my previous post should indicate I think birthirism is a crack theory that needs to die and resent them for the harm they brought on others conservatives. That said, I am suspicious of racism claims in the absence of actual evidence after having watched human debris like Al Sharpton make careers out of playing the race card.

Shauna, I disagree. The evidence it uses is as follows:

1) The opinions of three people (2 journalists and a history professor, with one journalist being from the notoriously left-wing Guardian no less) with no explanation as to why they should be given any more authority than anyone else nor an explanation as to how they arrived at that counclusion outside of personal belief or bais. Honestly, I can write an aritcle to the contrary using the quotes of my neighbors and it would be about as meaningful.

Oh yeah, and the testimony of legendary race baiter Jesse Jackson. Was Al Sharpton not available for comment?

2) A study which, if used to support your and catsi's proposition, engages in the logical fallacy Nick has already mention. This is what Hehman had to say:



First, I'll go ahead and assume "un-American" can be translated into birthism (which, really, I'm not sure can do based on the limtied information provided in the article as he doesn't define what un-American means)

In short, what they found, at best, shows that those who are racists tended to more willing to buy birthism than others, not that birthires tended to be racists. As Nick said, the fact that racists tend to be birthers does not show birthers tend to be racists.

If you could show me, for example, that most birthers are members of the Klan, then yeah, I buy the argument, but not on this stuff.

3) The story of single nutjob who got punked twice.

4) Regurgitation of catsi's original argument which premuses that there must be a predominent overring logical explanation for what it otherwise illogical behavior. And you presume the explanation must be his race because you can't think of anything else. To which I have two questions:

a) You've never met a hard core consipiracy theorist have you? They tend to be people so convinced as to the truth of their conclusion that every shred of evidence is viewed through that percieved truth. Their behavior following the current release of the certificarte is classic behavior for conspiracy theorists of all types.

b) Why is it impossible for them to be nothing more than a collective bunch of desperate nutjobs?

@catsi: you claim Republican boogeyman and then use the failure to question the Bushses and McCain...at what point can you eliminate unprincipled partisan hackery from the equation? As to McCain, there was plenty of speculation about his eligibity to run, apprently enough, that a Democratically controlled Senate felt compelled to pass a resolution that he was. Finally, what part of Clinton's past lent itself to that particular conspirary theory?

President's have been on the recieving end of all sorts of conspiracy theories, many considerably worse than birthism. That all other 43 Presidents didn't face the same theory he did doesn't require the conclusion that that his must be rooted in race.

I happly agree with the claim that birthers are out to lunch, but you will need far more than this to convince me they are also a bunch of racists. I'm not very receptive to racism claims without solid proof. Supposition isn't enough.

LONG POST.

I'm going to agree with Nick and Nate that racists are more likely to be birthers, though that said many of us see race subconciously through actions that really don't pertain to race.

And Conspiracy Theorists...*shudders*

McCain and Obama were both eligable, so I don't really see the point. But oh the theories and stuff of the other 43, Good Times. Good Times.

I think Trump is a racist though, he goes from He Wasn't Born Here!, to, How'd he get into Harvard!?! But then again how could Trump let a Casino go under?

And then it goes to why the hell are we still talking about this?

[Greed-Sama]

I think Trump is a racist though, he goes from He Wasn't Born Here!, to, How'd he get into Harvard!?! But then again how could Trump let a Casino go under?

And then it goes to why the hell are we still talking about this?

As much as I hate Trump doing these stupid questions to Obama, it's good politics. Unfortunately its dishonorable politics, but it's getting the public riled up and Republicans, God help them, need something to unite against. It's a spectacle for anyone to be doing something like this.

[Insurrection]

http://www.huffingto...e_n_855881.html

I believe Sakura Blossoms would say they keep shooting themselves in the foot; but, eventually you would lose them after too many shots taken.

Edited by Insurrection, 30 April 2011 - 11:41 PM.

[catsi563]

*Sigh*

You know ironically I understand the context he was using in the remarks, so Im not gonna beat him with the racist label on this one. Still these days with birtherism reigniting the race barrier he should know better then to use a Lynching metaphor in this day and age.

Seriously its as stupid as making a nazi metaphor as a joke to a bunch of holocaust survivors. Sure the context may be understandable but the gallows humor (pun not intended) is going to get lost in the outrage over the insensitvity.

Sadly enough Romneys still the best potential candidate that the republican party can field in 2012. He wont win but the way things are going hell be lucky to be nominated.

[Greed-Sama]

*Sigh*

You know ironically I understand the context he was using in the remarks, so Im not gonna beat him with the racist label on this one. Still these days with birtherism reigniting the race barrier he should know better then to use a Lynching metaphor in this day and age.

Seriously its as stupid as making a nazi metaphor as a joke to a bunch of holocaust survivors. Sure the context may be understandable but the gallows humor (pun not intended) is going to get lost in the outrage over the insensitvity.

Sadly enough Romneys still the best potential candidate that the republican party can field in 2012. He wont win but the way things are going hell be lucky to be nominated.

You know people shouldn't be so sensitive. Things are blown way out of proportioned in some cases and this is one of them. And I find it interesting that you think the Republicans won't win. Obama doesn't have strong support as some would think. A Republican win is still very much plausible and shouldn't be overlooked.

[Insurrection]

You know people shouldn't be so sensitive. Things are blown way out of proportioned in some cases and this is one of them. And I find it interesting that you think the Republicans won't win. Obama doesn't have strong support as some would think. A Republican win is still very much plausible and shouldn't be overlooked.

Meh. It's not a situation of Republicans winning at this point as much as it is Obama losing. That's what makes Obama, it's not that he wins, it's that he doesn't lose. Democrats on the other hand..*shudders* different story.

Edited by Insurrection, 01 May 2011 - 04:33 AM.

[Nick Soapdish]

The birth certificate is a FAKE!

Robert Stanley is an investigative radio reporter for the Washington Times which puts him on about the same level as a beat reporter for a middle school paper, but he may have just managed the scoop of the 21st century and the 20th.

Most of the article is a paraphrase of him talking about the layers in the document and then showing that if he created a forgery, it would have layers. I listened to a few minutes of the interview and he talked about how the layers couldn't possibly be related to OCR. The National Review quickly dismissed it, but it was confirmed by "Joe Friday" in the comments and linked as supporting evidence in the story. But the real scoop and pièce de résistance is halfway down.

Is Barack Obama's birth certificate a distraction from his quantum access time travel pre-identification secret?

Robert Stanley and mainstream media journalists such as CNN commentator Amy Holmes agree that the potential significance of the forensic fraud of Mr. Obama’s, if validated, could go beyond the political repercussions of even Watergate.

There appears to be another hidden factor beyond the location of Mr. Obama’s birth that is at play here – quantum access time travel pre-identification of recent U.S. Presidents, including Barack Obama. The CIA has been pre-identifying future U.S. Presidents such as Barack Obama for 40 years and has, by the evidence, co-opted each of them into CIA.

This secret quantum access program controls the U.S. presidency and makes the United States a functional CIA dictatorship.

As this reporter has written, the eyewitness evidence of whistleblower Andrew D. Basiago, the attorney in Washington State who was a participant in the secret DARPA-administered Project Pegasus that developed Tesla technology-based "quantum access" to past and future events, indicates that it is likely that by 1982 Mr. Obama had been personally informed by CIA that he was destined to be the U.S. President inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

Barack Obama was pre-identified in time as U.S. president by secret DARPA time travel program

...In numerous TV and radio interviews, Mr. Basiago has described how, among other intelligence findings, Project Pegasus was identifying future American presidents and then approaching them and apprising them of their destinies as President.

He has described how as a child serving in Project Pegasus in the early 1970’s, he was present at lunches held at La Hacienda restaurant in Old Town Albuquerque, NM that were attended by project principals and future American presidents, including George Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, shortly after they were informed that Project Pegasus had found via quantum access that they would one day serve as President.

In appearances on talk radio’s Coast to Coast AM with George Noory in 2009 and 2010, Mr. Basiago described at length a 1982 meeting with Barack Obama in Los Angeles in which Mr. Obama also revealed his awareness that he had been briefed on the fact that the US government had detected that he was destined to reach the White House.

We can infer from this meeting between Mr. Obama and Mr. Basiago in 1982 that at age 20 Mr. Obama had already entered into at least a consultative relationship with the CIA, because at the time, the US government was the only country with a time travel capability and the CIA was known to be collecting the intelligence data about past and future events that Project Pegasus was gathering via its time travel technologies.

I don't know about anyone else, but I see no reason to suspect this birther of being racist.

[Nate River]

The birth certificate is a FAKE!

Robert Stanley is an investigative radio reporter for the Washington Times which puts him on about the same level as a beat reporter for a middle school paper, but he may have just managed the scoop of the 21st century and the 20th.

Most of the article is a paraphrase of him talking about the layers in the document and then showing that if he created a forgery, it would have layers. I listened to a few minutes of the interview and he talked about how the layers couldn't possibly be related to OCR. The National Review quickly dismissed it, but it was confirmed by "Joe Friday" in the comments and linked as supporting evidence in the story. But the real scoop and pièce de résistance is halfway down.



I don't know about anyone else, but I see no reason to suspect this birther of being racist.

No, but he does sould like he's out to lunch. I did civil commitments (and some forensic med petitions) for two years and even some of the more severe cases made more sense this.

The layers bit isn't going to prove its fake (cause it's not fake), stop wasting time (referring to the reporter not Nick).

[Insurrection]

The birth certificate is a FAKE!

Robert Stanley is an investigative radio reporter for the Washington Times which puts him on about the same level as a beat reporter for a middle school paper, but he may have just managed the scoop of the 21st century and the 20th.

Most of the article is a paraphrase of him talking about the layers in the document and then showing that if he created a forgery, it would have layers. I listened to a few minutes of the interview and he talked about how the layers couldn't possibly be related to OCR. The National Review quickly dismissed it, but it was confirmed by "Joe Friday" in the comments and linked as supporting evidence in the story. But the real scoop and pièce de résistance is halfway down.



I don't know about anyone else, but I see no reason to suspect this birther of being racist.

WOW. I do not know how to respond or register that.

Time Travel project...I'll go back to my investigative study of Project Imagination Doorway now.

Edited by Insurrection, 02 May 2011 - 01:43 AM.

[Nick Soapdish]

No, but he does sould like he's out to lunch. I did civil commitments (and some forensic med petitions) for two years and even some of the more severe cases made more sense this.

The layers bit isn't going to prove its fake (cause it's not fake), stop wasting time (referring to the reporter not Nick).

That doesn't seem to quite cover it though. This says it a bit better.

[Verilance]

Well for anyone who is vaguely interested North of the border it is Election Day

Conservative Prime Minister Steven Harper is trying to win a majority after two minority Governments in a row.

His main strategy of trying to Demonize his main perceived rival Micheal Ignatief's Liberal Party seems to have backfired and most undecide voters have migrated even further left to the New Democratic Party (Socialist for those who don't know)

Latest National Poll

CON 36%
NDP 33%
LIB 19%
GRN 6%
BQ 5%
Poll: Forum - May 1, 2011

(BQ is Bloc Quebecois a seperatists Quebec only party)

Edited by Verilance, 02 May 2011 - 10:09 PM.

[Nick Soapdish]

I'm assuming that Harper stays in power, but as a minority. From what I hear, they don't particularly like him, but he is super competent and they value that in a politician.


Canadians are so weird!

[Verilance]

He will have a slim Majority with 165 or so seats

NDP leading in 105

Liberals in 30

BQ down to 3 seats

and we may have a Green Party member of Parliament

early days yet but Elizebeth May the leader of the Green Party in leading in her riding

I don't like Harper but the people have spoken

I just hope the loonies that surround him don't F*** up the country

Edited by Verilance, 03 May 2011 - 02:59 AM.