Respectful Insolence

Birthers on parade

You may have heard of the lunatic fringe contingent that thinks that Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and thus not eligible to be President of the United States according to the Constitution. They’re incredible cranks, cooking up all manner of dire conspiracy theories about a doctored birth certificate and birth documents, all full of dark plotting, aided and abetted, of course, by the “liberal” press. They’re very much like 9/11 Truthers, only not as coherent. (And, no, that’s not a compliment to 9/11 Truthers, either.)

That there are kooky conspiracy theorists who just can’t accept that they lost and we now have a black man as the President of the United States does not surprise me. That our Congressional Representatives seem either to side with these nutcases or are so afraid of them that they dare not speak out plainly is illustrated in this video that a reader sent to me last night:

Notice how only one of the Representatives interviewed would come out and plainly say that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and therefore is a U.S. citizen and therefore eligible to be President of the United States. Pathetic. But if you want to know just how insane the “birthers” are, take note of this. Even Ann Coulter thinks they’re loons:

What’s even more hilarious, the far right lunatic fringe has turned on Coulter, as Ed documents.

I don’t blog about politics all that often, but this interested me as a skeptic for the sheer lack of critical thinking involved that it takes to think that one of Obama’s political enemies wouldn’t have dug up the proof by now and used it against him, as pointed out in the Coulter segment. Hillary wouldn’t have hesitated to use such information. Neither would Edwards. And they certainly had operatives looking for dirt on their opponents, as all campaigns do these days. Still, that doesn’t stop them from taking over town hall meetings, as Mike Castle (R-DE) found out:

The scary thing is, these people clearly have influence.

Comments

  1. #1 JohnV
    July 28, 2009

    I really like the one congressman saying “you guys are the scum of the earth” to a reporter-ish guy. Not the birfers, but a reporter giving him a chance to denounce the idiots.

  2. #2 Pablo
    July 28, 2009

    While the left certainly has its share of whackos (9/11 truthers, for example) at least they can say that those morons generally aren’t taken seriously by politicians (with few exceptions), and they certainly don’t commandere attention from the democratic party.

  3. #3 Landru
    July 28, 2009

    It’s not surprising that this captured your attention, Orac, given the similarities between birthers and antivaxxers and other anti-scientists.

    The Castle town meeting was likely somewhere out in the red-state part of Delaware, where I’ve seen as many Stars and Bars flying as anywhere else I’ve been. It’s worth noting that Delaware was a border state (to the extent that those of us next door are willing to acknowledge that it’s a state at all, that is).

    Petty interstate slams aside, the level of belief in the face of contrary evidence here is worthy of supreme beings, UFOs, and Flying Spaghetti Monsters.

  4. #4 DavidD
    July 28, 2009

    Pablo – It’s worth noting that Philip Berg, the lead litigant in last year’s attempt to get the “birth certificate controversy” heard by the U.S. Supreme Court is also a noted “truther”.

    Sometimes the political extremes on both sides of the political spectrum wind up meeting each other.

  5. #5 Tyler DiPietro
    July 28, 2009

    Incoherent is definitely a word I’d use to describe the birfers. Even though they make a bunch of fuss about the birth certificate not proving he was born in Hawaii, they have a whole array of backup theories that makes it all superfluous. Obama’s dad wasn’t an American citizen so he’s not eligible, he renounced his citizenship in Indonesia so he’s not eligible, he traveled to Pakistan so he’s no eligible, etc.

    Like the troofers, for one reason or another they’ve become so emotionally committed to the conspiracy theory that they can’t let go. It’s just a waste of time to deal with them.

  6. #6 tim gueguen
    July 28, 2009

    Fortunately here in Canada political office is open to anyone regardless of place of birth, so we don’t have to worry about this sort of nonsense.

  7. #7 D. C. Sessions
    July 28, 2009

    Like the troofers, for one reason or another they’ve become so emotionally committed to the conspiracy theory that they can’t let go. It’s just a waste of time to deal with them.

    Yes and no. It is kind of amusing, in a guilty pleasure way, to watch.

    Besides schadenfreude, there’s the more practical effect of putting conservative politicians on the spot. They can either alienate their base, or they can show themselves to be batshit insane to the rest of the populace. Now that’s a worthwhile exercise.

  8. #8 rglovejoy
    July 28, 2009

    This “controversy” is even sillier when you consider that Obama’s late mother was an American citizen. Even if he really *was* born in Kenya, he would still be be an American citizen by birth, because his mother was one.

    Back in 1968, when George Romney was running for President, it was brought up that he was actually born in Mexico. As it turned out, both of his parents were U.S. citizens, which settled the issue at the time. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which was an unincorporated territory of the U.S.; being born there did not automatically confer U.S. citizenship to the baby. Since both of his parents were U.S. citizens, he was automatically one too.

    I have to wonder, had McCain won the election, would the “birthers” have gone after him with the same vigor? I highly doubt it.

  9. #9 Matthew Cline
    July 28, 2009

    Obama’s dad wasn’t an American citizen so he’s not eligible,

    How does that one work? The law says that if you’re born in the U.S. you’re a natural-born citizen, period.

  10. #10 John
    July 28, 2009

    Fortunately here in Canada political office is open to anyone regardless of place of birth, so we don’t have to worry about this sort of nonsense.

    The thing is, I don’t think this is really about Obama’s birthplace or whether he can produce a birth certificate. That is the specific issue the birthers have latched onto, but it really seems to be about Obama’s legitimacy as president. I’ve noticed that a lot of the people who fall for the birther nonsense will also call Obama “Hussein” at every opportunity or rant about Obama’s “socialism,” Bill Ayers, or some other thing. That leads me to believe that the birthers are just looking for ways to disqualify Obama as president, and if it weren’t the birth certificate, they would invent some other cause.

  11. #11 Dave
    July 28, 2009

    How does that one work? The law says that if you’re born in the U.S. you’re a natural-born citizen, period.

    It takes a bit o’ doing to get inside the mindset, if you can call it that, of the birfers. See, they have all kinds of “reasons” why Obama wasn’t really born in Hawaii. Basically, the birth certificate you can see on the web is a forgery and he was actually born in Kenya. If you get past that, then they’ll tell you that his citizenship was renounced when he was a kid in Indonesia. It goes on and on.

    If I understand it correctly, had Obama actually been born in Kenya, despite his mother being a US citizen, he wouldn’t be a natural-born US citizen, due to the way the law read at the time. So the birfers are really hanging onto that one, even though it’s idiotic. They don’t have a good explanation of how the birth announcement got into two local papers.

  12. #12 IBY
    July 28, 2009

    Well, I live in Delaware and I have got to say, that must be in one of the lower two counties. The northern county, New Castle county (heh, Mike Castle has the same name ^_^, *cough cough*) is a fairly liberal place, and from what I can tell, it seems like only a portion of Obama’s opposers seem to believe that he is not a citizen.

  13. #13 Joseph C.
    July 28, 2009

    “I saw these bastards in Easy Rider, but I didn’t believe they were real. Not like this, man, not hundreds of them.”

    —HST

    Yeah, I saw a “Where is the birth certificate?” friggen billboard the other day while driving through Pennsylvania. Lovely stuff.

  14. #14 Katherine
    July 28, 2009

    I keep seeing blog posts about “birthers” and confusing them with posts about “forced birthers”. Suppose it’s just what I get for the entire internet being American, and for hanging out on feminist blogs a lot.

  15. #15 Tyler DiPietro
    July 28, 2009

    “How does that one work?”

    It doesn’t (i.e., your second statement is correct), though that ORLY? Taitz lady attempts to claim it does. She also claimed that Magna Carta somehow empowers a “citizen grand jury” to indict Obama under our constitutional system. She’s a crank who got her law degree from a cereal box, but her “reasoning” has been clung to by the birfers with vigor.

  16. #16 The Crack Emcee
    July 28, 2009

    “That there are kooky conspiracy theorists who just can’t accept that they lost and we now have a black man as the President of the United States does not surprise me.”

    Sure, Orac, put it down to racism. That’s about as disingenuous as it gets. (And a bit of anti-white racial projection, maybe?)

    That we have a president with no qualifications, who hung out with domestic terrorists and race-mongers, is a serial apologist, and whose policies reek of Satan-worshipping, Saul Alinsky-style socialism – while seeming to worsen everything he touches – would be more like it. Face it: We – including this black man – don’t like him or what he stands for. I say, if you want to shut up the Birthers, then just show us his friggin’ birth certificate – don’t tell us it exists, or that you’ve seen it, or how logical it should be to everyone: Just produce the damn thing. It may not work but it’s a better answer than your wrong-headed leftist swill.

    You forget, Buddy (as much as I admire what you do) I’ve got your number, so don’t think you can pull this liberal race crap on me without knowing where it comes from:

    You’re a liberal – the biggest race hustlers in the country – from the Dixiecrats to the Democrats, defending white or black, it’s all the same to you. But I’ve got news for you – you’ve lost me, man:

    And you will be defeated.

  17. #17 Marcus
    July 28, 2009

    I’m not American so haven’t been following this closely, but wasn’t the original Birther an ex-Democrat or someone who had been close to Obama in some capacity? I vaguely remember reading something like that when the thing first popped up ages ago.

    If so, I guess it would at least explain why some of these nutters think the issue has legs.

    Also, I’m surprised at your comments about representatives not wanting to speak out against it. Surely this stuff hasn’t spread beyond a vocal but small minority of the loony far right (and maybe the odd nutty HRC supporter)?

  18. #18 bigjohn756
    July 28, 2009

    These ‘birther’ idiots would be perfectly happy to amend the Constitution in order to make Schwarzenegger eligible to run for president, but, now that they have lost, it is time to find any possible criticism of the winner because he is from another party.
    Nobody cares at all about the country; all that matters is who wins.

  19. #19 Matthew Cline
    July 28, 2009

    Hmmm, doing some more digging into the “Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen even if he was born in Hawaii” thing, the argument seems to be this: the U.S. constitution never defines what “natural-born citizen” means, and the 14th amendment only says “citizen”, not “natural-born citizen”, so you have to go by what original intent of those who wrote the constitution, and that original intent was that a person’s father (or both parents) had to be a citizen for that person to be the president.

  20. #20 Tyler DiPietro
    July 28, 2009

    …the U.S. constitution never defines what “natural-born citizen” means…

    Which is what kills the argument dead in its tracks.

    …and the 14th amendment only says “citizen”, not “natural-born citizen”…

    Not quite. The 14th. amendment draws a distinction between being “born” and being “naturalized” for citizenship. Therefore it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude that a “natural-born citizen” is simply one whose citizenship is conferred by birth.

    …and that original intent was that a person’s father (or both parents) had to be a citizen for that person to be the president.

    I haven’t seen this claim before. Care to provide some sauce?

  21. #21 adina
    July 28, 2009

    Last night, there was a House bill with language that honors Hawaii as a state and explicitly mentions Hawaii as Obama’s birthplace. It passed 378-0, with 20 Republicans and 35 Democrats not voting. Not sure if any of the people who abstained were birthers, or if all of the “yes” voters were paying complete attention.

  22. #22 Matthew Cline
    July 28, 2009

    @Tyler DiPietro:

    …the U.S. constitution never defines what “natural-born citizen” means…

    Which is what kills the argument dead in its tracks.

    Well, you can’t simply treat it as undefined, so you have to have some way of figuring out what definition to use, and constitutional intentionalism is one way of doing that.

    … and that original intent was that a person’s father (or both parents) had to be a citizen for that person to be the president.

    I haven’t seen this claim before. Care to provide some sauce?

    From here:

    He received a Kenyan/UK citizenship via his foreign father and is not a “natural born Citizen” by originnal intent.

  23. #23 Tyler DiPietro
    July 28, 2009

    Well, you can’t simply treat it as undefined, so you have to have some way of figuring out what definition to use, and constitutional intentionalism is one way of doing that.

    So is textualism, and “natural-born citizen” pretty much begs to be interpreted as “citizen by birthright” (which is guaranteed in the 14th. amendment).

    It’s also worth noting that, though “original intent” is widely cited in conservative circles as the best mode of legal interpretation, it’s actually quite shaky upon close analysis (in any legal deliberation, intentions of lawmakers vary widely, which was certainly the case with the constitution). Even Antonin Scalia doesn’t adhere to “intent originalism” as much as he adheres to “public meaning originalism”.

    From here:

    It looks like you’re only playing Devil’s Advocate here, but a random crazy making an assertion in one of Ed’s comment threads is not exactly what I was looking for. :-/

  24. #24 RJ
    July 28, 2009

    Sorry, not sure if this has been addressed already….

    If Obama’s mom is an American citizen, then why isn’t he considered an American citizen regardless?

    ….so, his “non-citizenship” just happen to slip by all the universities he attended, the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs where he got his passport (that requires a birth certificate), his applications for all offices (senator, president), as well as Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and the media during the election….only to be exposed now by people who are obviously distraught. Yeah, not buying it either.

    The burden of evidence is on them. They have nothing but accusations. NOTHING!

  25. #25 mediajackal
    July 28, 2009

    Well, Stephen Colbert has just announced that the House is in the District of Columbia and technically not in the United States, so the 378-0 vote is void, ’cause Congress isn’t, er, Congress. Sorta.

    Why don’t we all just agree to respond to birthers with a gentle, “you are a fucking idiot; now shut up and go away”?

  26. #26 mediajackal
    July 28, 2009

    Turn on the Colbert Report NOW — he’s got one of the primo birthers on. Barrel, meet fish …

  27. #28 Matthew Cline
    July 29, 2009

    It looks like you’re only playing Devil’s Advocate here, …

    Partially, but it’s also that I Am Not A Lawyer, so I can’t really tell if the argument is invalid or not. The argument that Obama wasn’t really born in Hawaii is absurd, so it’s less interesting to talk about (though much more interesting for pointing-and-laughing).

  28. #29 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    That we have a president with no qualifications, who hung out with domestic terrorists and race-mongers, is a serial apologist, and whose policies reek of Satan-worshipping, Saul Alinsky-style socialism – while seeming to worsen everything he touches – would be more like it. Face it: We – including this black man – don’t like him or what he stands for. I say, if you want to shut up the Birthers, then just show us his friggin’ birth certificate – don’t tell us it exists, or that you’ve seen it, or how logical it should be to everyone: Just produce the damn thing. It may not work but it’s a better answer than your wrong-headed leftist swill.

    Why am I not surprised that The Crack Emcee has birther sympathies?

  29. #30 Matthew Cline
    July 29, 2009

    Satan-worshiping socialism?

  30. #31 GreenishBlue
    July 29, 2009

    Delurking for a moment…

    Per the link in #27, even if the claims of the birthers were true, wouldn’t Obama STILL be a natural-born citizen by this criteria:

    Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)

    I mean, it’s a moot point anyway, but…

  31. #32 J Todd DeShong
    July 29, 2009

    I don’t know what makes me want to vomit more:
    These crazy ass “birthers” OR the fact that I now agree with Ann Coulter on something! I feel the bile in my throat and it smells like Ann!
    JTD

  32. #33 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    Satan-worshiping socialism?

    Didn’t you know that all socialists must be Satan-worshipers? Of course, that doesn’t explain how socialists can all be atheists too.

    Geez, my Reagan-loving days of the 1980s are far behind me. 25 years ago, I’d never have thought that anyone could ever call me a socialist…

  33. #34 tincture
    July 29, 2009

    The birfers are great, people like The Crack Emcee do the daily show’s writers writing for them.

    Marcus :

    Also, I’m surprised at your comments about representatives not wanting to speak out against it. Surely this stuff hasn’t spread beyond a vocal but small minority of the loony far right (and maybe the odd nutty HRC supporter)?

    The small minority of vocal nutcases is all the republican party has left.

  34. #35 Skemono
    July 29, 2009

    Face it: We – including this black man – don’t like him or what he stands for.

    That proves he was born in Kenya!!

    Wait. No it doesn’t.

    My mistake.

  35. #36 HCN
    July 29, 2009

    Wow, just wow!

    I am an Army brat born in what was then the Panama Canal Zone. There is a law that makes us US citizens that was ratified after McCain was born (it was sometime in the 1930s). Both of my parents were born in the USA (born in Wisconsin and Washington… the latter being the state versus the city), yet there was a time when the Republic of Panama was going to declare us citizens and my dad immigration papers ready for me (my dad was also stationed there during some of my high school years, apparently he took the duty instead of his original orders to… wait for it… Hawaii!… because the officer he was to replace did not want to leave just then).

    I did not turn into a Panamanian because I was born there, and because I was there for 8th, 9th and 10th grades, and because Torrijos thought it would be a good idea to declare anyone born in Gorgas Hospital were citizens!

    Though I will say that a fellow band parent who has taken advantage of Hispanic opportunities for his daughter has admitted I am more Hispanic than he is. His parents came over on the first wave of Cubans escaping Castro before he was born in the late 1950s. His only claim is that his parents were born in Cuba. At least I was born in Hispanamerica (is that right… hispan y america?), lived there for a third of my youth… puedo hablar la lingua! (of course, I have not spoken or written for over thirty years…. which is more than NEVER!).

    I do have a birth certificate. I can get copies by writing Washington, DC, where copies were sent after the turnover.

    So does our president. He can obtain copies of his birth certificate by writing the State of Hawaii.

  36. #37 HCN
    July 29, 2009

    Oh, and this is my standard note of advice if you ever meet any with a Spanish accent: ask them where they are from.

    You will find very few are from Mexico (which is the first assumption).

    Also, I have learned you can really freak someone out by knowing something about the country. I love the reaction I mention Bernardo O’Higgins or Francisco de Miranda (who has hte distinction of participating in the American Revolution, the French Revolution and revolutions to seperate much of Latin America from Spain (mostly Venezuela, which is where I learned much of this stuff).

  37. #38 sophia8
    July 29, 2009

    She also claimed that Magna Carta somehow empowers a “citizen grand jury” to indict Obama under our constitutional system.
    It sounds like she’s also a FOTL kook as well. They’re big on how Magna Carta and “Common Law” trumps every law bought in after the 13th century anywhere in the Western world (hint: they don’t).

  38. #39 Lassi Hippeläinen
    July 29, 2009

    But Hawai’i isn’t part of the USA…
    http://www.hawaii-nation.org/legal.html

  39. #40 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    Oh, now I have “birther sympathies”? Where? Prove it. I offered up a solution to the problem of birthers – show them the elusive birth certificate – I didn’t say I agree with them. (I didn’t even imply it, acknowledging in my birther post that it’s “not my issue” and that I believed the National Review when they said they’ve seen it.) So where’s the great logic and fairness of Orac, now? Poof! It doesn’t exist, as I’ve always said! You’re a coward.

    It’s just a bunch of liberal swill, hidden behind a bunch of bogus racism charges. And, like I also said, I’ve got your number – you’re unwillingness to acknowledge your failings regarding me and my case are as disingenuous as your birther/racism charges reveal. Attack, attack, attack, is that all you’ve got for me? Turning your “followers” on me as a kooky birther – not someone you betrayed? I guess your supposed “sympathy” for me and my plight is all used up now, so you can go back to using me for ridicule, right? Punk.

    And to your idiot “followers” who, for all their intelligence, don’t know shit from Shinola in the real world, Rules For Radicals, Saul Alinsky’s primer for, both, Hillary and Obama was dedicated to Satan – something else I don’t think of as true, but must acknowledge as a part of our world because others do.

    As I’ve said from the first day I found this site:

    For a bunch of supposedly “smart” people, you folks are dummmb.

    Better read up on your Black Lightening, kids, because you and I are in for a shocker – and you’re going to lose. I’m beating my homeopath – not dispairing about him as Orac does his situation with the loons – and I’ll beat Orac, too.

    As a matter of fact, it’ll be a pleasure.

  40. #41 symball
    July 29, 2009

    Regarding the Magna Carta: surely the point of the American revolution was to renounce the rule of British law, if you believe that British law still holds then of course Obama isn’t head of state- the Queen is!

  41. #42 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    Oh, now I have “birther sympathies”? Where? Prove it. I offered up a solution to the problem of birthers – show them the elusive birth certificate – I didn’t say I agree with them. (I didn’t even imply it, acknowledging in my birther post that it’s “not my issue” and that I believed the National Review when they said they’ve seen it.

    I don’t read your blog; so how am I supposed to know what you think of the birther isue, other than what you posted here and that you seem to think that socialists worship Satan?

    I guess your supposed “sympathy” for me and my plight is all used up now, so you can go back to using me for ridicule, right? Punk.

    Yes and no. It’s possible to have sympathy for your plight and still think your behavior in my comment section is execrable and obnoxious. You wave your history like a talisman in front of you to ward of criticism of your behavior, which only works for so long.

  42. #43 Meta
    July 29, 2009

    The Castle town meeting was likely somewhere out in the red-state part of Delaware, where I’ve seen as many Stars and Bars flying as anywhere else I’ve been. It’s worth noting that Delaware was a border state (to the extent that those of us next door are willing to acknowledge that it’s a state at all, that is).

    A border state, yeah, and its politics are a microcosm of the whole East Coast: the southern two counties are pretty Southern in feel, but the northern county (where I live) is mostly an extended cluster of Philadelphia suburbs. Most of the residents live in the northern third of the state.

    According to Daily Kos, the town hall meeting was in Georgetown, which is in the southern third of the state (read: Redneckville). The woman asking the question was someone known as Crazy Eileen, who’s so completely bonkers that even the local conservative radio station, WGMD, has banned her from calling.

    I am not familiar with Crazy Eileen or WGMD because I try to avoid Slower Lower (our nickname for southern Delaware). But it sounds like she’s atypical even for Sussex County, which is saying a lot.

  43. #44 SLC
    July 29, 2009

    1. The problem is that the term “natural born citizen” was not defined when the Constitution was adopted and is not defined in the 14th amendment. There have been statutes passed since then for the purpose of attempting to clarify the situation. However, as I pointed out in a comment on Ed Braytons’ blog, under one statute, a Kenyan born President Obama would not be a natural born citizen, which statute was in effect at the time of his birth and under another statute that was passed after his birth and modified some of the conditions in the first one, he would be a natural born citize, even if born in Kenya. Unless and until the Supreme Court were to find the current statute unconstitutional, the issue of original intent is nothing but a pile of crap.

    2. The issue of the birth certificate, or certificate of live birth is another red herring. If someone requests a birth certificate from the State of Hawaii, the document that President Obama has posted on his web site is what they will receive. Therefore, the birthers’ complaint is not with the president but with the State of Hawaii.

    3. Mr. Crack Emcees’ complaints about President Obama have nothing to do with his eligibility to be president. Even if they were true, this is a matter for the voters, not the courts. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits the election of a Socialist to the Presidency. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents someone who palled around with terrorists from being elected president. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents someone who attended a church whose pastor was a whackjob (by the way, it should be pointed out that the pastor of the church that former Governor Palin attended was at least as round the bend as Reverend Wright) from being elected president.

  44. #45 Ericb
    July 29, 2009

    All this birther nonsense is just a way to give wing-nuts an excuse to engage in behavior that they would call treasonous if a “liberal” has engaged in it.

  45. #46 Gil
    July 29, 2009

    Is this not akin to an archaeological find that ‘proves’ the Bible? That is to say if there was evidence of that sort of calibre then the you-know-what would hit the fan. “The President of the United States is a fraud!” “The Bible is true in a way that contradicts conventional history!” Somehow since ‘birthers’ can only seem to get enough ‘evidence’ that maintains their status quo and doesn’t impact American society in any way then it’s good indication they have nothing.

    P.S. The left equivalent may be when they talk about Al Gore being the rightful President.

  46. #47 peter syms
    July 29, 2009

    Moving the goalpost. It is a very common denier tactic to attempt to justify their case.

    Seriously, crackMC, the COFL, denoted by the seal of the Hawaii gov’t, is Hawaii’s official document stating that it exists. For the birther conspiracy to exist, nearly entire Hawaii government is colluding to hide that fact that a biracial man was born on the island nearly 50 years ago.

    For you to be correct, it would involve a massive smoke screen involving Hawaiian newspapers, their department of health, the US Congress(since they just passed a resolution affirming that Obama was born in Hawaii) etc.

    How about offering up a legal document, or a conversation, or any kind of evidence to support anything you are saying, THAT IS NOT A BLOG POST. Notice how when Orac is discrediting someone, he will link to studies, news stores, etc. You link to the exact same source.

    Your ad hominem attacks further discredit your reliability since you cannot address a single point without calling someone a swine or a satan worshiper. Clearly, you believe your lack of any real and actual evidence can be made up for by name calling and childish posturing.

    Come back when you want to act like a rational adult. Or if you are in fact a juvenile, disregard what I’ve said.

  47. #48 Julie Stahlhut
    July 29, 2009

    … if you want to shut up the Birthers, then just show us his friggin’ birth certificate ….

    Since exactly that has been done several times, why should anyone waste their time and energy by doing it again?

  48. #49 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    Fortunately here in Canada political office is open to anyone regardless of place of birth, so we don’t have to worry about this sort of nonsense.

    Heh, well, if you had the crazies that we have here, they’d find some other mad conspiracy theory to push.

    Look, I’ve got some Canadian friends who have explained how an American like me can understand Canadian socio-politics, so I think I can give you a hypothetical that will help you understand: What if about 3/4 of Canada was exactly like Alberta? Eh?

  49. #50 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    Surely this stuff hasn’t spread beyond a vocal but small minority of the loony far right

    Sort of. One problem is that this loony minority happens to have a lot of TV and radio shows, so credulous ignorant people (and you have them in Canada too, so don’t knock us for that!) who are upset about the election result tend to just parrot what they heard on O’Reilly or Limbaugh or Hannity or Beck. That’s still a minority, but the problem is it’s a sizable enough minority of conservative voters that a conservative candidate who pisses them off could be in some trouble come next election. So even though everybody with a brain knows it’s complete bullshit, certain people have a strong incentive to just give the whole nonsense a nod and a wink.

    The really funny part about all these people (like the insane Crack Emcee, yikes) saying that Obama is a “socialist” is that Obama is probably the most moderate president the US has had since Jimmy Carter. While I recognize he’s got another 3+ years (or maybe 7) to prove himself, if the presidency keeps going like this then Obama will be remembered in the history books as the first black president, and not much else. Maybe a footnote as the one who helped usher in the first lukewarm attempt at universal healthcare, but the version that’s percolating through congress right now isn’t really very revolutionary. Cracks me up that people are calling “Socialism!” and insisting that the sky is falling…

  50. #51 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    Regarding Crack Emcee’s shrill blog, I would just like to take a moment to say that exploiting one of the more shocking images of 9/11 to comment on a completely unrelated pet issue is in the very poorest taste. I’d say the same thing regardless of the position you took on global warming — that’s just sick.

  51. #52 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    “I don’t read your blog; so how am I supposed to know what you think of the birther isue, other than what you posted here and that you seem to think that socialists worship Satan?”

    Oh, Orac, Orac, Orac, you can be such an ass sometimes – along with your idiot pal, Skemono: did I say he was born in Kenya, asshole? – basing your ideas about me on your assumptions (Ass-U-Me) which never fit. First, there’s my statement:

    “If you want to shut up the Birthers, then just show us his friggin’ birth certificate – don’t tell us it exists, or that you’ve seen it, or how logical it should be to everyone: Just produce the damn thing. It may not work but it’s a better answer than your wrong-headed leftist swill.”

    That “If you want to shut up the Birthers” should’ve told you I ain’t one of them, but that I, too, would like to see a birth certificate to end the controversy – it’s what any intelligent person would do if someone asked to see it: They wouldn’t send out a bunch of middle men, to say they’ve seen it, they’d just produce it. That they haven’t done so is what’s fueling the controversy.

    Next, I also said I’m offering a solution that “may not work” on them – again, acknowledging the birthers as a bunch of cranks, like the U.F.O. cultists, who may not be persuaded by real evidence – but, for goodness sakes, give ‘em a chance, before you go claiming they’re crazy, by doing what they ask. They’re disgruntled American citizens with every right to see the damn thing.

    Your other stupid assumption is that I “seem to think that socialists worship Satan”. I never said that – back to my words:

    “We have a president with no qualifications, who hung out with domestic terrorists and race-mongers, is a serial apologist, and whose policies reek of Satan-worshipping, Saul Alinsky-style socialism.”

    Hmm. Nothing in there about all socialists worshipping Satan. A lot about Obama and his policies, which are right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals, which was dedicated to – who? – “Lucifer“. (Alinksky coined the term “community organizer” as well.) I would’ve thought the President of the United States – and his Secretary of State (who wrote her college thesis on the book) – would’ve rejected it’s contents based solely on that, considering they both were pursuing higher office. And, if you ask me, it’s another damn good reason why anyone – including birthers – would question his credibility for the office and willingness to lie to us.

    Now, Jackass, you prove to me where you got your birther/racism charge from, or did your racist ass just make it up out of thin air, as I said?

    Finally, my behavior on your comments section is exactly what you deserve: you are charging people with racism who have shown none. You have dissed me as a crank when I’ve been right about a lot of shit (like Homeopathy being a cult, and the infiltration of hospitals by these cultists) that you dismissed as my crankery before – without an apology, once you changed your tune, I might add. You have not behaved as I – a person who first came to you pleading for help – would expect but as what you are: a cynical, knee-jerk liberal with a “turf” you think you’ve got to protect AKA a very small, and not very bright, man.

    As Panda Bear, M.D. (who you admitted is better at this debunking shit than you are) said, I can see through your liberal science elitism – which you’ve practiced on me from the start – and that’s, partially, why you dislike me. I’ve never thought you very special, as I do the very-Christian but still down-to-earth Panda. (Which explains why you don’t even read my shit, while Panda’s made TMR his sister blog.) From the basis of “alternative” medicine (cultism) to Global Warming, you’ve been more of a representative of conventional thinking than Panda or I and you hate that anyone from the Right will claim the mantle that you liberal wing-nuts – like that idiot, P.Z. Meyers – or the “denial” dolt, Hoofnagle – have occupied. You’re a clique of conventional wisdom compared to us – and you can’t stand it.

    I told you, almost four years ago, that I wasn’t going to stop – or back down – and I’m still going strong, Orac, while you’ve changed your tune to more closely match my song. If I were you, I’d start reading my blog, man:

    I’m bringing in the drums real soon.

  52. #53 Bob
    July 29, 2009

    I agree with D.C. Sessions. Watching and listening to the birthers is kind of a guilty pleasure. The birthers are a respectable “Jerry Springer Show.”

  53. #54 Tsu Dho Nimh
    July 29, 2009

    I notice the woman talking to Castle says she has a birth certificate from the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA … that’s the problem!

    Obama’s certificate is only from the State of Hawaii. He wasn’t born where they hand out the special certificates.

    And her certificate says she is a citizen! His doesn’t! His just says he was born alive in Honolulu on a certain date.

    Good grief!

  54. #55 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    “Since [showing us Obama's birth certificate] has been done several times, why should anyone waste their time and energy by doing it again?”

    Two things: 1) I ain’t seen it – no one’s provided a link to it, even, on this thread – there’s just a bunch of folks claiming they’ve seen it – and after that last election cycle, filled with a liberal media bias unseen in the history of politics (something I don’t hear any of you liberal scientists acknowledging, discussing, or repudiating as you should) nobody in their right mind is going to trust anybody’s word on shit. That’s why I don’t consider the birthers quite kooks yet: They’ve got a righteous beef.

    2) It’s so elitist to say “Why do it again?” You do it because they – the American people – are demanding to see it, that’s why. It shouldn’t be difficult, so do it. Again, and again, and again, if necessary. This is the presidency we’re talking about here, and while totally non-racial liberals were happy to hand it to this loser, to get THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT!!! the rest of us want merely the best man for the job – or, at least, someone we’re sure is an American and on our side.

    James Sweet,

    You’re a pussy.

  55. #56 a-non
    July 29, 2009

    Crack Emcee may not have “birther sympathies”, but the post he refers to is right out of the birther playbook – i.e., raising doubts about whether Obama really has a Hawaii birth certificate even though it’s been widely posted on public websites (like Barack Obama’s personal website) for the better part of a year.

    You can make legitimate, cogent arguments against President Obama’s policy positions and decisions he’s made while in office. But at this point, arguing about his heritage is utterly ridiculous and an EPIC FAIL.

  56. #57 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    To Peter Syms and a-non,

    For the last time: I never – never – said I didn’t think Barack Obama was an American. I said he’s done enough, starting from even before his election, to give people pause and to doubt him on a host of issues, this being one of them. And, like the media onslaught we’ve witnessed for some time now, the Left has encouraged this wariness and doubt.

    And Pete, that “exact same source” has links – in red – that you can follow, as I did, when I put them in there. Sorry if it bothers you that I don’t have time to do it twice:

    I’m too busy putting a foot in Orac’s much-deserving ass.

  57. #58 Tsu Dho Nimh
    July 29, 2009

    Matthew Cline said “He received a Kenyan/UK citizenship via his foreign father and is not a “natural born Citizen”

    I assume his father filed the usual “Consular Report of Birth Abroad” forms to notify his government of the birth – but that alone wouldn’t make Obama a Kenyan citizen.

    Children born abroad, and those born to parents of differing citizenship status are in a legal limbo, sometimes for their entire life. It depends on the rules of the birth country and the rules of the country where the child was born how things are resolved.

    He was born in Hawaii – Hawaii was a STATE – and that’s all it would take to be a “natural-born citizen” even if both his parents had been non-citizens. There are some requirements about spending enough time in the USA post-birth, but he was living in the USA long enough to satisfy those.

    Obama did have, as the foreign-born child of a Kenyan citizen, a chance to claim Kenyan citizenship … when he was of legal age and could renounce his USA citizenship and formally claim Kenyan citizenship. Kenya doesn’t allow dual citizenship and does not allow late claims … a foreign-born child has to claim it soon after reaching legal age.

    He did not do that, or there would be a formal renunciation of US citizenship filed with the State Department.

    Nothing his parents might or might not have done on his behalf – up to and including getting him a non-USA passport, formally or informally adopting him, taking him overseas, enrolling him in school, etc. – can terminate his citizenship that stems from being born in Hawaii.

    The only person who could terminate Barack Obama’s US citizenship is Barack Obama, after his 18th birthday, with a sworn declaration of renouncing US citizenship. Those are filed with the state department, they are witnessed, they are BIG MOJO! And he wouldn’t have been able to get a US passport, or a US security clearance with one of those on file.

    My American niece, with a French husband, had children while they were living in England: The children at the moment are tri-citizens. England by birth, French and American by virtue of the citizenship of their parents … both consulates issued the appropriate “Certificate of Birth Abroad” and the tykes have both American and French passports. France allows a non-French wife to get a French passport, so my niece (legally, without risking her US citizenship) has a French passport too.

  58. #59 Pete D
    July 29, 2009

    Put down the pipe Crack Emcee. Google is your friend… http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg

  59. #61 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee: Hey, at least I can spell.

    Or was the pun intentional? Isn’t “Black Lightening” that controversial skin procedure that Michael Jackson had done?

  60. #62 JohnV
    July 29, 2009

    “the rest of us want merely the best man for the job – or, at least, someone we’re sure is an American and on our side.”

    “For the last time: I never – never – said I didn’t think Barack Obama was an American.”

    You know, it is hard to believe the same person said the two above quotes.

    So you want someone that you’re sure is an American but you never – never – said you didn’t think he was an American?

    *scratches head*

  61. #63 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    You know, it is hard to believe the same person said the two above quotes.

    Heh, it reminds me of an anti-vaxer I confronted who said — with a straight face, and within the same five-minute time span — the following two statements:

    “My kids will get vaccinated over my dead body!”

    “I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. I just want to give people the facts and let them make their own informed choice.”

    Blech. Be honest, will ya? When I talk to anti-vaxers, it is true that I try to restrict myself to merely setting the facts straight, but I’m not going to pretend I don’t have a motive: I would like to convince them to vaccinate, thank you very much. I’m not going to lie about it, because that would make me a disingenuous asswipe. (see also, The Crack Emcee)

  62. #64 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    You know, it is hard to believe the same person said the two above quotes.

    Indeed. Thanks for picking that up. I can smell a disingenuous “I’m just asking questions” or “I want to see the evidence” gambit when I see one. When Crack Em said to “shut the birthers up” just show ‘em the birth certificate, he said it exactly the way I’ve heard it said by birthers. The analogy above to the antivaccine movement couldn’t be more apt.

  63. #65 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    Hmm. Nothing in there about all socialists worshipping Satan. A lot about Obama and his policies, which are right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals, which was dedicated to – who? – “Lucifer”. (Alinksky coined the term “community organizer” as well.)

    Nice straw man. I didn’t say you thought “all” socialists worship Satan. (If you can be ridiculously pedantic, so can I).

    Let’s see, though. You claim that Obama’s policies are right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals. Obama was a community organizer in his youth, and Alinsky coined the term “community organizer.” Alinsky allegedly dedicated his book to Lucifer.

    I know! I’m sorry I got it wrong the first time. You didn’t mean to say that socialists worship Satan. You meant to imply that Barack Obama worships Satan. My bad. I should have seen it the first time.

  64. #66 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    “Thanks for picking that up. I can smell a disingenuous ‘I’m just asking questions’ or ‘I want to see the evidence’ gambit when I see one. When Crack Em said to ‘shut the birthers up’ just show ‘em the birth certificate, he said it exactly the way I’ve heard it said by birthers. The analogy above to the antivaccine movement couldn’t be more apt.”

    Great, Orac, now you’re charging me with a belief that I’ve openly – and vigorously – denied, based on how I talk. ( Just as you’ve charged the Birthers with a racism no one has seen.)

    Sorry I’m not as carefully erudite as you guys, but being a prim little bitch ain’t my calling, and, I’m sure, most Birthers, etc., are “just folks” as well, so y’all can have a good ol’ time picking their english apart, too – it’s a great way to try and avoid other people’s points – if you’re a stupid elitist yourself.

    You really should read my blog, dude, if only to count how often I use the “delusional thinking” tag. It definitely applies here, considering how sure of yourself you are, based on such flimsy bullshit.

    Now pick that last sentence apart: I’m sure you can,…

  65. #67 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    I’m sure, most Birthers, etc., are “just folks” as well

    Nice appeal to the lowest common denominator. “These folks are salt of the earth, so if you criticize the crazy shit they believe then you must be an elitist!”

  66. #68 Anne
    July 29, 2009

    Tsu Dho Nimh, I have a birth certificate from the US of A because I was born on a military installation overseas. But most people just have them from the state where they were born.

    The Crack Emcee – here’s your photographic evidence:
    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

  67. #69 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    James Sweet,

    Jesus, dude, are you stupid?

    “Nice appeal to the lowest common denominator. ‘These folks are salt of the earth, so if you criticize the crazy shit they believe then you must be an elitist!'”

    No, if you spend your time dissing their language – to avoid dealing with the points they raise – then you’re using the tactics of an elitist. I’m an atheist, with a blog that’s all about crushing beliefs – not just a belief in God – so your comment wouldn’t apply to me in the least.

    And I find it odd that you don’t go after Orac for his assumption of racism on their part – where’s the factual basis for it? There is none, unless a woman yelling, “This is my birth certificate,…” is racist. He’s a wide-open target for the accusation of perpetuating the very racism he claims they have (it’s called “projection”) but you let him spout that crap without a word of condemnation. Or is anti-black racism the only kind you see?

    You guys are weird.

  68. #70 rrt
    July 29, 2009

    Crack Emcee:

    The problem you’re failing to notice–or rather, one of the problems–is that disgruntled American citizens do not have a righteous beef if they have done no due diligence to seek answers to their questions, and certainly do not have grounds to assert a specific conclusion MERELY BECAUSE NO ONE HAS SPOONFED THEM. That is infantile.

    It’s readily available at the logical sites and in high Google hits. It’s been here:

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/

    and other famous sites, such as Snopes, for a year. To act as you have in that context is reprehensible.

  69. #71 John Cain
    July 29, 2009

    You really should read my blog, dude, if only to count how often I use the “delusional thinking” tag. It definitely applies here, considering how sure of yourself you are, based on such flimsy bullshit.

    Trolling for traffic: you’re doing it wrong.

  70. #72 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    “I don’t read your blog; so how am I supposed to know what you think of the birther isue, other than what you posted here and that you seem to think that socialists worship Satan?”

    Hmm, I don’t see any qualifiers around the line “you seem to think that socialists worship Satan”, so, since you’re so hot on language and how it’s used – and obviously so much more well-spoken than I – your claim that you didn’t say I “thought ‘all’ socialists worship Satan” sounds like bullshit to me. Do you know how to admit to someone when you’re wrong – which is one sign of a decent man – or is it all about image to you?

    Face it, Orac: Every time you put your foot in your mouth, I’m going to take it out and hold it to the fire. And I’m going to keep doing that until you apologize and get a fucking clue. Why? Because you’re not a bad guy, but – as I discovered from the first – just a bad advocate for “our side” (let’s call it the Atheist American Anti-Alternative Medicine and Cultish NewAge Crew). You’re too leftist, too elitist, and too stuck in conventional thinking to be an effective leader – not that I don’t think you’d make a good one – just that, in your current incarnation, you suck BIG TIME.

    I mean, look at you: “Alinsky allegedly dedicated his book to Lucifer.” No he didn’t – he dedicated his book to Satan, period. And I didn’t “imply that Barack Obama worships Satan” but said – not implied but said – his “policies reek of Satan-worshipping, Saul Alinsky-style socialism” – not the same thing by a country mile. Yet you somehow think you come off as being fair to my argument when you’re clearly twisting it – based on your every-ready bag of what you think are wonderful debating tricks (Straw Man!)

    Dude, your education ain’t gonna help you with me – I’m actually *smart* – and, like you, not so humble. I’ve been battling assholes who went to better schools my whole life. I know all your tricks, and see you coming from a mile away, so don’t try to play me:

    It won’t work, man.

    Now, admit your fucking racism and apologize, so I can get back to tending my own lawn. You may not read my blog, but I read yours, and these racist episodes ain’t what I come here for.

    Plus, you’ll be a better man for it.

  71. #73 Stu
    July 29, 2009

    Question: why are we engaging someone calling him/herself “The Crack EmCee” pimping a blog called “The Macho Response”?

  72. #74 wfjag
    July 29, 2009

    “What’s even more hilarious, the far right lunatic fringe has turned on Coulter”

    Philip Berg, the lead plaintiff, in the case on which review was sought by the Supreme Court about the “birth certificate controversy” is (or was) a Democratic Party activist. Birthers are hardly limited to “the far right lunatic fringe”.

    @ Dave:

    “If I understand it correctly, had Obama actually been born in Kenya, despite his mother being a US citizen, he wouldn’t be a natural-born US citizen, due to the way the law read at the time. So the birfers are really hanging onto that one, even though it’s idiotic. They don’t have a good explanation of how the birth announcement got into two local papers.”

    Not quite. Section 1 of Article Two of the U.S. Constitution states, in pertinent part:

    “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

    From the US State Dept. website:

    “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 child’s 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.”

    http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

    Where ever he was born, Pres. Obama’s mother met the physical presence test as the law them provided. Accordingly, he is a “natural born citizen” — which is the language used, not “born in the U.S.” For those really interested, read the 14th Amendment debates reported in the Congressional Globe. Merely being born in the U.S. was not considered sufficient by itself to confer citizenship — at least according to the drafters of the 14th Amendment. Being subject to the “jurisdiction” (e.g., legal power and authority) of the U.S. government was the key. This is why former slaves and their children were citizens, while the children of foreign Ambassabors born within the U.S. were not.

    FYI: Jennie Churchill (Winston’s Mom) did not meet test so that he son was a U.S. citizen. So, although Winnie’s Mom was a U.S. citizen, he was not a “natural born citizen” and so could only be awarded an “Honorary” U.S. citizenship.

  73. #75 sophia8
    July 29, 2009

    It’s readily available at the logical sites and in high Google hits.
    CrackEmCee knows that perfectly well. But he’s not satisfied with websites and photos. Photos can be photoshopped! Websites lie! Everybody tells lies on the internet!!
    What he wants is the actual paper certificate right there in his sweaty little hands. Examining it. Going over it with a microscope. Checking the watermarks. Checking the signatures. Subjecting it to paper tests.
    The he’ll say “YES! I thought so! It’s a dammed FORGERY!!!”

  74. #76 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    RRT,

    You’re assuming everyone has the internet, or even the knowledge of knowing where to go, which are two big assumptions (Elitism). My roommate doesn’t even know how to download an .mp3, so to assume everyone is as aware as you – of a whole gang of shit – is what’s “reprehensible”. You guys make me wonder if everyone who isn’t like you is looked down upon and regarded as the enemy – do you have any compassion for your fellow Americans? Or are they just a bunch of hicks in “fly-over country” to you? (I know Orac certainly picks and chooses.)

    How can you explain jumping all over little ol’ me, while ignoring all the obvious signs that, even to other people who barely understand politics, science, or cultism, Barack Obama never was even close to what he advertised himself as? Or that the media actively let him get away with it – with you guys cynically applauding the whole charade because you wanted a “win” over the Republicans so bad. So how’s that “win” feel now?

    Look, I’ve tried being nice to y’all, back at the beginning when I thought I had no choice, but I’m emotionally whole now – and with the wisdom that nice don’t work against group-think – which is what you guys are caught in. And with me being around, you’re going to have to change – to re-think everything – because I’m not going along with your bullshit. What you’ve done, politically, is wrong and what you’ve done, culturally, is wrong – and I’ll change you before you change me. Like George Carlin once observed, you ever notice that when white guys start hanging out with black guys, it’s the white guys who start acting black? Well, prepare yourselves for a whole re-working of your outlook on American life because, folks, I ain’t budging – because I know I’m right – and, as I told Orac at the very beginning, I’ll gladly wait for everybody to come to my way of seeing things.

    That’s The Macho Response

    Finally, a note to John Cain: Dude, if you think running a blog is so damn easy – and making money at it – then let’s see your punk ass do it. Mine’s working, asshole.

  75. #77 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    Sophia8,

    How you, and all these other dummies, can keep saying I don’t think the man is an American citizen – when I’ve said, repeatedly, that I do and I think his birth certificate is real (without any “going over it with a microscope. Checking the watermarks. Checking the signatures. Subjecting it to paper tests” is amazing. I can’t believe you guys are really supposed to be the cream of the fucking crop when it comes to thinking! You see what you want to see – just like the cultists I write about so often! How dare you talk about “cranks” when you’re no better!

    You’re an embarrassment to science.

  76. #78 Calli Arcale
    July 29, 2009

    That “If you want to shut up the Birthers” should’ve told you I ain’t one of them, but that I, too, would like to see a birth certificate to end the controversy – it’s what any intelligent person would do if someone asked to see it: They wouldn’t send out a bunch of middle men, to say they’ve seen it, they’d just produce it. That they haven’t done so is what’s fueling the controversy.

    Forgiving that Obama *has* produced the document, and it is available to view on the web, and several people in this very thread have already provided links to it….

    The biggest irony of conspiracy claims is that the person being accused is in a no-win situation. Just as with NASA and the moon landing, if they address the conspiracy theorists, the conspiracy theorists just say “well, they’re lying!” whereas if they refuse to give the wackos the time of day, the wackos say “they won’t deny it! see!” I think the best thing, therefore, is for the one being accused to ignore his accusers. He can’t win in an argument with them (any “debate” will be a trap, as many no-moonies and creationists have demonstrated over the years), and will expend a lot of effort that could be better spent elsewhere.

    Clinging to it does the Republicans no favors. It makes them look like idiots. The McCain campaign wisely ignored the conspiracy theory, even though in theory it favored them by attacking their enemy. Of course, McCain had two reasons to ignore the theory — the fact that it was utterly ludicrous, and the fact that the same tortured logic could be applied to McCain’s citizenship. (The logic would be equally invalid; McCain, born in Panama, is a natural born citizen, even though he was born a year before the law that corrected the Constitutional uncertainties surrounding citizenship of residents. However, it does puzzle me that birthers rarely seem troubled by McCain’s case.)

  77. #79 Orac
    July 29, 2009

    I mean, look at you: “Alinsky allegedly dedicated his book to Lucifer.” No he didn’t – he dedicated his book to Satan, period. And I didn’t “imply that Barack Obama worships Satan” but said – not implied but said – his “policies reek of Satan-worshipping, Saul Alinsky-style socialism” – not the same thing by a country mile. Yet you somehow think you come off as being fair to my argument when you’re clearly twisting it – based on your every-ready bag of what you think are wonderful debating tricks (Straw Man!)

    Dude, you clearly don’t recognize sarcasm when you see it. Either you’re sarcasm-impaired or I didn’t make it obvious enough.

    Here’s a hint: I was making fun of your argument with a flourish. Point blank. Because that particular argument of yours about the “satan-worshiping” socialism was eminently mockable. I was putting my boot up your ass, the way you claim to be (but are failing at) putting yours up mine. I did it because, quite frankly, your antics are starting to annoy me, particularly your penchant for labeling anyone with whom you disagree a “liberal” or a “socialist.” Here’s a hint: I’m neither, although I’m not as conservative as I used to be back in the 1980s and 1990s.

    In any case, look at your words that I quoted above. Look at how ridiculous your argument is. I can’t believe you’re making a big deal over the distinction between Lucifer and Satan. Your own words:

    Nothing in there about all socialists worshipping Satan. A lot about Obama and his policies, which are right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals, which was dedicated to – who? – “Lucifer”.

    I don’t know about you, but my Catholic upbringing taught me that Lucifer and Satan were one in the same.

    Please, step away from the whackaloonery for just one minute and look at how your words appear.

  78. #80 JohnV
    July 29, 2009

    @crack emcee

    Can you please explain how these two statements you’ve made are not mutually exclusive? I’ve even included citations since you’re a fan of that sort of thing.

    “when I’ve said, repeatedly, that I do [think he's an american citizen] and I think his birth certificate is real” (comment 76)

    “the rest of us want merely the best man for the job – or, at least, someone we’re sure is an American and on our side.” (comment 55)

    If you’ve stated, repeatedly, that you think he’s an american citizen, then why do you need further assurances that he’s an american?

  79. #81 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee: So, whenever someone points out that the birth certificate has been provided, you respond by saying, “I’m not a birther! How dare you accuse me!” But then, why did you say in the first place that all Obama had to do to make it go away was provide a birth certificate? You seemed to imply that he hadn’t….

    So I put the point to you bluntly: What is your opinion of the birth certificate image that is widely available online and has been reviewed in person by a number of independent organizations?

  80. #82 Matthew Cline
    July 29, 2009

    @Crack Emcee:

    Given that images of the birth certificate are on the web, what would “dealing with it again and again and again” constitute? Mailing photocopies of the original birth-certificate to anyone who asks for it? Putting the original birth-certificate up on public display so people can look at it in person?

  81. #83 N.C.
    July 29, 2009

    Yeah, Crack isn’t a birther. He’s just here to blogwhore and be an internet tough guy.

  82. #84 Stu
    July 29, 2009

    All you need to know about the EmCee, from his “blog”:

    I’ll be poking in-and-out today, so give me a few thought-provoking comments – preferably not anonymously – and even consider making a donation

    Being a professional asshole is a really lonely job.

  83. #85 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    Calli Arcale,

    I’d like to say, first, thanks for (what I think of as) one of the first intelligent things written here by someone who ain’t me.

    I agree with you – not totally, as I’ll explain in a minute but – like my comparison with the U.F.O. nuts, you discussing the moon landing is apt and probably accurate. I kinda think there was room for a reality-check here, but this thing was handled all wrong. As I’ve said, this (and many other issues* surrounding Barack Obama) required a direct and immediate response – not “it’s on the web” or “so-and-so has seen it” or whatever. Like I said, you may be right that it’s a no-win situation, but I think there was room at one time and that time may be passed.

    Why was that time passed? I think your last paragraph gives us a clue: it’s written cynically, like a political strategist, not like a normal person. McCain had another reason for not pursuing this issue: He’s a decent person – something he showed, repeatedly, during the campaign. He refused to “smear” Barack Obama – even when he was being wrongly smeared – and, like Orac’s birther/racism charges, the always-honorable-and-loving liberals gave Obama a pass on doing such an ugly thing to a man who’d served this country well and done him no harm. (I’m still waiting for one person, including Orac, to admit what he did here was wrong.)

    Finally, people “rarely seem troubled by McCain’s case” because they have no doubt about where McCain stands and where his heart is. They may not like all his ideas, I know I don’t, but we’ve no doubt whose side he’s on and whether or not his patriotic bonafides are in order. With Barack Obama it’s all an open question: From the “Lucifer” dedication in Saul Alinsky’s book to how he’s “governing”, the average American sees nothing but trouble, and more trouble, and still more trouble to come. This is not us – it’s not “American” – so the idea he might not be an American has a lot of resonance.

    Anyway, I’m glad to finally reply to something that doesn’t insult my intelligence.

    Take care,

    CMC

    *And if one of you guys looks at that post and mentions Expelled! I’ll personally reach through the computer and kill you: stay on point.

  84. #86 Edward C. Noonan
    July 29, 2009

    This is BS!

    Were you asleep in your 9th grade Constitution Class? Everyone except you (and those who have attended government run schools) (i.e. public schools of today) know that a natural born citizen is one whose parents are both citizens (both Mom and Dad).

    Mr. Soetoro (aka Obama) had a pappy that was a British Foreign National…he was NEVER a citizen of the US. Whereas Mr. Soetoro may be a native citizen (if his granny was not a pathological liar) and he was not born in kenya and if he indeed was born in Hawaii (I am not convinced he was) he then may be a “native” citizen…MAYBE….

    Then we have the matter of his citizenship in Indonesia. When did he rebuke his Indonesia citizenship and when did he reapply for citizenship back to America? He is supposed to have traveled as an Indonesian Citizen and attended Occidental College and Columbia College as a foreign student. Show me his 1980-1990 passports…show me an american passport. Why is he hiding his passports?

    Pray tell… How can you still claim Mr. Soetoro is a natural born citizen when he carries the baggage of being a citizen of four different nations? britian, kenyan, american, and indonesia. Which country is he a Natural Born Citizen of? His daddy was British so no natural born citizenship to america came from him. His adopted daddy Mr. Soetoro was an Indonesian natural born citizen…so BarryO was last a natural born citizen of that country…not the USA. (We have school records showing him as a citizen of indonesia.)

    prove to me that BarryO had a daddy that was a citizen of our country and I will cease being a birther. Else I would suggest you all take some night class on the Constitution and American Government. You do not know our countries history, laws and Constitution!

    Edward C. Noonan

    P.S. And for that matter, BarryO’s mommie and daddy were never legally married. His daddy was already married in Kenya, so unless bigamy and polygamy was legal in Hawaii in 1961, then their marriage (if there was one) was never valid. So if BarryO was born out of wedlock, then that adds to the problem of his natural born status as well. This whole matter is a MESS!

    P.S.S…And yes! It matters whether or not BarryO is a citizen or not. If he is still an Indonesian Citizen and he never reapplied for American Citizenship it means we have a NON-CITIZEN in the White House. That is scary! I firmly believe barryO is NOT A U.S. Citizen and he is an illegal alien. He needs to be deported and forced to re-apply for citizenship to our country.

  85. #87 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    Yeah, Crack isn’t a birther. He’s just here to blogwhore and be an internet tough guy.

    Yeah really… but I must say Crack Emcee has a lot to learn about effective blogwhoring. Take it from a professional
    blogwhore….

  86. #88 SLC
    July 29, 2009

    Re Crack Emcee

    I have to laugh about Mr. Emcee invoking Saul Alinsky in discussing President Obama. The fact is that it is the right wing Rethuglicans who are the most assiduous followers of Saul Alinsky. Mr. Alinskys’ most famous comment was the statement that the way to get something accomplished was to rub raw the sores of discontent. That is exactly the Karl Rove/Lee Atwater philosophy which they have followed to a tee.

  87. #89 JohnV
    July 29, 2009

    @Edward C. Noonan:

    I was going to reply seriously to you. But I realized it isn’t worth it. That said, I do appreciate the fact that I will derive many lulz from the responses to your bigotry.

    @crack emcee

    Mr. Noonan’s post is an example of a birfer’s problems stemming from racism and bigotry. See, Orac wasn’t off the mark on that one, either.

    Also, please be so kind as to respond to my comment #79.

  88. #90 James Sweet
    July 29, 2009

    Mr. Goobagabba (aka Edward C. Noonan) makes an interesting point… calling people by the wrong last name and interleaving it with a bunch of absurd and incorrect assertions really is a useful rhetorical device!

    It has come to my attention that Mr. Goobagabba (aka Noonan) has been convicted several times for embezzlement, fraud, and jay-walking while wearing a bikini top made out of live salamanders, so that should be taken into account in the future.

    P.S. We have a salamander molester commenting on our blog! This is scary!!!!111!!!!

    P.P.S. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

  89. #91 Stu
    July 29, 2009

    With Barack Obama it’s all an open question: From the “Lucifer” dedication in Saul Alinsky’s book to how he’s “governing”, the average American sees nothing but trouble, and more trouble, and still more trouble to come. This is not us – it’s not “American” – so the idea he might not be an American has a lot of resonance.

    Not with anyone in the reality-based community it doesn’t. Look out: your hatred is showing.

    And if one of you guys looks at that post and mentions Expelled! I’ll personally reach through the computer and kill you

    Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?

  90. #92 Matthew Cline
    July 29, 2009

    @Edward C. Noonan:

    Were you asleep in your 9th grade Constitution Class? Everyone except you (and those who have attended government run schools) (i.e. public schools of today) know that a natural born citizen is one whose parents are both citizens (both Mom and Dad).

    Given that “natural born citizen” is never defined by the constitution, which statute defines the term as you say it is defined? Or are you going by constitutional intentionalism?

    How can you still claim Mr. Soetoro is a natural born citizen when he carries the baggage of being a citizen of four different nations?

    What part of the constitution, or which statute, says that dual (or triple or quadruple) citizenship precludes being a natural born citizen of the U.S.?

    When did he rebuke his Indonesia citizenship and when did he reapply for citizenship back to America?

    What part of the constitution, or which statute, says that a minor gaining citizenship of another country via the actions of their parents causes the loss of American citizenship? From my understanding of the Afroyim v. Rusk supreme court decision it wouldn’t cause a loss of his American citizenship since it wasn’t a voluntary action of his, but rather the action of his parents.

  91. #93 Rogue Epidemiologist
    July 29, 2009

    I was able to keep my hands off the keyboard through CrackheadMC’s vitriol, but Noonan is a bigot who happens to think *I’m* not a US citizen, so I’m gonna have to say something.

    I am a natural-born US citizen. When I came into the world, I happened to be in Pennsylvania. My parents are immigrants. They came here legally. They were naturalized in 1988, just in time to vote for Bush41. They’d have voted for Reagan, too, if they would have had the privilege.

    But not according to Noonan’s whack-ass misinterpretation of the law. Because my parents weren’t US citizens when I was born, he thinks I’m not a citizen? Bollocks! The 14th Amendment says I am. My US passport says I am. That’s what I am: I’m an American citizen.

    You can hate Obama for any number of reasons. I, for one, disagree with him on a lot of points. I tend to vote very conservatively (and I didn’t vote for Obama). But birthers are the most delusional of denialists, and it’s sick that ANYBODY would pay them mind and time of day.

    From the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

    ALL persons born in the United States. Says nothing there about parentage. And the US Citizen and Immigration Services page has a tidy list of our citizenship rules.

    I’d bet Noonan hates “anchor babies” too, which would hypocritically acknowledge that those kids are recognized as American citizens under the US Constitution. So who does Noonan hate more? “Anchor babies” or the POTUS?

    …and for the record, we studied the US Constitution in 8th grade social studies, and I scored better on that exam than all the kids whose families have been in America for generations and generations.

  92. #94 Matthew Cline
    July 29, 2009

    I was able to keep my hands off the keyboard through CrackheadMC’s vitriol, but Noonan is a bigot who happens to think *I’m* not a US citizen, …

    I think that Noonan was saying that:

    1) While you may be a citizen who was born in the U.S., you’re not a “natural-born” citizen, so you’re not qualified to be President of the U.S.

    2) That Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when he gained his Indonesian citizenship, rather than that being born in the U.S. isn’t enough to gain citizenship.

  93. #95 Chris
    July 29, 2009

    Matthew Cline:

    ) That Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when he gained his Indonesian citizenship, rather than that being born in the U.S. isn’t enough to gain citizenship.

    How would Obama gain Indonesian citizenship? He was only in Indonesia between the ages 6 and 10, when he was sent to go live with his grandparents in Hawaii.

  94. #96 Chris
    July 29, 2009

    Also, a child does not take a stepfather’s last name unless the stepfather officially adopts the child. This is usually requires that the natural father be either dead or signs away his parental right (note: I am part of an extended stepfamily, my stepsister was adopted by my father so her name was changed… and my hubby’s stepfather did not adopt him so he kept his late father’s name).

    Does Mr. Goobagabba (aka Edward C. Noonan) have any records of Obama being adopted by his stepfather? Is that in the same location as the green cards he would have needed to be considered a foreign student in college? You know, those places he attended after graduating from a private prep school in Hawaii (which is part of the USA… the fool upthread claiming it that Hawaii is not part of the USA because it was a nation of its own at one time, which would also mean that neither Texas nor California are part of the USA… even the California’s flag says “Republic of California!”).

  95. #97 Chayanov
    July 29, 2009

    And Virginia is a Commonwealth. Are there any actual states in the United States?

  96. #98 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    Orac,

    After answering Calli’s (wonderful) post, I’m going to try to “step away from the whackaloonery for just one minute” and keep this civil with you as well:

    If you re-read the post, you’ll see that I, too, was using “Lucifer” and “Satan” interchangeably. My point was that Alinsky didn’t “allegedly” dedicate Rules For Radicals to Lucifer/Satan – he actually did it – so your sarcasm was misplaced.

    Anyway, in my opinion, you (and many of your fans) are working much too hard to defend yourselves, when there’s no defense for the charge of racism I’m leveling at you now, or the lack of understanding you guys regularly choose to show towards your fellow Americans who are more-than-a-little concerned about the direction of the country and who’s taking us there. You’ve proven before, during, and after the election that (because you think you’re their moral and intellectual superiors) you don’t truly see them, except as subjects of ridicule, and so, as far as I’m concerned (and as Bill Whittle suggests) if they start to lay into you guys with as little concern, it will be just desserts – and long overdue:

    These are the first (and very-possibly the last) elections you’ve won in a long, long time.

    JohnV,

    Again with the semantics thing? Come on, man, I expect you guys to be bigger than this.

    James Sweet,

    I’m saying it’s up to Barack Obama (not you, or his many spokesmen, etc.) to achieve the trust of the American people – which he isn’t doing. Speaking bluntly, I know Barack Obama is an American citizen, but, as I said, I think he handled this as badly as he’s handling everything else. I also think Orac’s charge of racism is a perfect example of how his supporters are mishandling things, too. There’s just no way you can convincingly claim you’re being totally color-blind and, then, keep screaming, “He’s the first BLACK president!” after Al Sharpton’s, Louis Farrakhan’s, Jeremiah Wright’s, Father Pfleiger’s, Bill Ayers’ – and, now, Henry Louis Gates’ – totally racist nonsense and support.

    It just don’t pass the smell test.

    Matthew Cline,

    If I were he, I would’ve gone on television, with my birth certificate, and had it authenticated by the Attorney General. Not just had a bunch of nobodies come out and say “I’ve seen it.” If that didn’t do it, fine, but at least you tried to give the people the dignity their questions deserve. That’s how you act as president; not as if the American people are a bunch of loons.

    N.C.,

    Three things:

    1) You’re right – I want readers – there’s no crime in it and I’m doing better than ever because of it. This post made it onto Instapundit, recently, so someone thinks I have an original perspective, even if you don’t.

    2) Just because I want readers doesn’t mean I’m being disingenuous. Orac and I have been going ’round and ’round for a long time now. I plug his writing on my blog, a lot, but I also criticize him when I think he deserves it. I put a lot of work into my blog, posting often, and think it’s worth your time (and money) to investigate further. Like I said, others do as well, though your opinion may vary.

    3) I’m a former-foster child from South Central, Los Angeles (home of the Crips and Bloods) have several scars on my body from knife wounds, been shot at and had more than my share of guns pointed at my head, and also earned a few medals, specifically for bravery, when I served in the military. I’ve put myself in dangerous situations, on behalf of others, more times than I can count or care to remember. While it may be true that, by looking at me, there’s nothing special to see, my heart is bigger than almost everyone else’s I’ve ever met and my writing reflects that. Consequently, it doesn’t surprise me that Panda Bear, M.D. (a decorated Iraq War vet) has made TMR his sister blog: it’s about integrity.

    Stu,

    The difference between me and Orac is I have openly discarded the “respectful” part of my insolence. I’m about freedom of speech, and I’m not going to pretend that means trying to be civil with words. “Sticks and Stones”.

    SLC,

    And your opinion of Karl Rove and Lee Atwater is what? Are you catching my drift yet?

    JohnV (again),

    I read Mr. Noonan’s rant and found no racism, or bigotry, in it. I think he’s wrong about Obama, but that’s his opinion, and I think his concern that only Americans control America is valid – he’s a patriot.

    Orac, on the other hand, was openly charging the likes of Mr. Noonan with racism (as you are now) based on nothing but his own idea of what such people are possibly thinking – an assumption. I thought scientists would know better.

    Stu,

    Hatred doesn’t bother me – including my own. This world has taught me to hate many things. Only those who think of themselves as more moral (but are actually more easily controlled) because they have a “Hate is not a family value” bumper sticker on their car can be swayed by such P.C. idiocy. What’s wrong with me? I’m free in a way you probably will never be. I think it’s a pity – for you personally and for the country – that you have no idea what I’m getting at. It’s a major failing.

  97. #99 Chris
    July 29, 2009

    Hmmm… Massachusetts is also a commonwealth. In some views a state is its own country. The states in the United States have many of their own laws, and well… that is part of makes them different from provinces, and one of the big reasons for a civil war.

    Taking a year long course in the history of the USA, plus half a year of American government is required to graduate from high school. I really wonder how well Mr. Goobagabba (aka Edward C. Noonan) on the final exams for both of those courses. Oooh… here is a thought, next time there is a group of birthers quiz them using the questions on the US citizenship test (much like Jay Leno did years ago).

  98. #100 Chayanov
    July 29, 2009

    Oooh… here is a thought, next time there is a group of birthers quiz them using the questions on the US citizenship test (much like Jay Leno did years ago).

    That would be a funny segment for the Daily Show to do. Get Jason Jones or Sam Bee to ask the questions to the birthers, who likely won’t get the joke.

  99. #101 The Crack Emcee
    July 29, 2009

    Oops – sorry I forgot the link – this is the post that made it to Instapundit recently.

  100. #102 Raging Bee
    July 29, 2009

    Anyone who would link Barack Obama to Satan in any way, literal or figurative, is, quite simply, both insane and stupid, and no more credible than any of the raving homeless loonies you can find on the streets of any city on Earth. Our “Emcee” needs to get his head out of his “Crack.”

    Speaking of Satan, I wonder how much overlap there is between the Birfer Movement (BM) and the “Obama is the Antichrist” crowd. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find Crack in both camps.

  101. #103 Raging Bee
    July 29, 2009

    I also notice that nearly every single Internet article that even mentions the birfers gets almost instantly gummed up with birfer nonsense. The core of this movement is nothing but alienated losers who troll the Web looking for places to post their repetitive nonsense and hog as much attention as they can for as long as they can, thus maintaining the pretense that there’s still a “controversy.” I’m sure their presence on the Web is inversely proportional to their relevance in the real world. That would explain the insecure bluster we’re getting from Crack.

  102. #104 Robin Levett
    July 30, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee #98:

    If I were he, I would’ve gone on television, with my birth certificate, and had it authenticated by the Attorney General. Not just had a bunch of nobodies come out and say “I’ve seen it.”

    He’s posted it on the Internet; you’ve been referred to it. The keeper of Hawaii’s public records ahs cofnirmed its authenticity. Why get it “authenticated by the Attorney-General”, when the correct public functionary has done just that.

    He has produced an authenticated birth certificate – yet the birthers won’t shut up about it. Nor will you.

  103. #105 Robin Levett
    July 30, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee #98:

    If I were he, I would’ve gone on television, with my birth certificate, and had it authenticated by the Attorney General. Not just had a bunch of nobodies come out and say “I’ve seen it.”

    He’s posted it on the Internet; you’ve been referred to it. The keeper of Hawaii’s public records ahs cofnirmed its authenticity. Why get it “authenticated by the Attorney-General”, when the correct public functionary has done just that.

    He has produced an authenticated birth certificate – yet the birthers won’t shut up about it. Nor will you.

  104. #106 Robin Levett
    July 30, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee #98:

    If I were he, I would’ve gone on television, with my birth certificate, and had it authenticated by the Attorney General. Not just had a bunch of nobodies come out and say “I’ve seen it.”

    He’s posted it on the Internet; you’ve been referred to it. The keeper of Hawaii’s public records ahs cofnirmed its authenticity. Why get it “authenticated by the Attorney-General”, when the correct public functionary has done just that.

    He has produced an authenticated birth certificate – yet the birthers won’t shut up about it. Nor will you.

  105. #107 eddie
    July 30, 2009

    Wow! I followed some of the related videos, and on the third one above, there’s one basically accusing obama of murdering his gran, who died last year. Another, is purporting to be an interview with the the kenya ambassador, talking about how much of a tourist attraction is Obama’s ‘birth place’.

  106. #108 Lee
    July 30, 2009

    Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals was NOT dedicated to Satan.

    The book is commonly used by faith-based community action groups – catholic, baptist and jewish that I know of – to educate their organizers.

    He acknowledges Lucifer – “a figure of legend, mythology, or history” – as the first effective radical, one who rebelled against the establishment and won.

    This is a too-cute claim of the effectiveness of radical action inside the establishment – ‘See, even G_d isn’t immune.’ It is NOT a dedication to Satan.

    Cracked is wrong.

  107. #109 DebinOz
    July 30, 2009

    Who is this on-crackmcee person, and why are people engaging with him?

  108. #110 James Sweet
    July 30, 2009

    …been shot at and had more than my share of guns pointed at my head, and also earned a few medals, specifically for bravery, when I served in the military. I’ve put myself in dangerous situations, on behalf of others, more times than I can count or care to remember.

    If true, this is certainly praiseworthy — but in this context it is merely the Argument from Unrelated Qualifications. I have two patents — does that mean I would make a great professional football player? By the same token, if you’ve demonstrated great bravery in a military context, that doesn’t reflect in any way whatsoever on the quality of your blog or the validity of your views on whether Obama has sufficiently addressed the birthers.

  109. #112 Militant Agnostic
    July 30, 2009

    In the spirit of pedantic nitpicking I would like to point out that the Church of Satan are objectivists (Randroids), hardly socialists.

    I don’t know why everyone is going on about whether Obam is a natural born American when the real issue is whether he is even a mammal. I heard he was a shape shifting reptile.

  110. #113 James Sweet
    July 30, 2009

    when the real issue is whether he is even a mammal. I heard he was a shape shifting reptile.

    Hmmm, in his book Dreams from My Father, Obama makes reference to mythical Kenyan entities known as “night runners”, which are shamans who appear human during the day but shape-shift into tigers and other ferocious beasts at night to rob and menace the general population… Oh noes, we’ve elected an evil Kenyan magician!

  111. #114 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:

    As someone who’s always liked science, to actually engage with scientists has to be one of the most disappointing experiences of my life.

    Like the college professors (who probably schooled the lot of you) you have so much invested in maintaining your leftist ideology, you show no common sense when confronted with anything else. You grasp, and flail, and go waaay out on a limb – saying anything to defend the indefensible – and, somehow, think I’m going to miss it, like I’m as clueless as you are.

    How many times have I said, in post after post, that I’m not a birther? But how many times, in post after post, have you guys insisted – insisted – that I am? You are just projecting your own stupidity onto me – just as Orac projected his racism onto the birthers – and letting the sarcasm fly! My ideas mean nothing to you – my language means everything.

    That’s real scientific logic at work!

    How many times have I said, in post after post, that I think Obama merely handled the birther situation wrong? But how many times, in post after post, have you guys insisted that he didn’t – though you admit the situation has gotten totally out of hand? How can that be?

    Because there’s real scientific logic at work!

    How about this person, calling him/herself “Raging Bee”, claiming there’s “insecure bluster” coming from me? Projecting a bit, maybe? From what I can see, there’s only one me – against a whole army of y’all – so who’s the insecure one here?

    That’s really insecure scientific logic at work!

    Or how about his/her claim that “Anyone who would link Barack Obama to Satan in any way, literal or figurative, is, quite simply, both insane and stupid”? Surely, as all leftists do, she understands Christian cosmology (but probably stays blithely unaware about the NewAge strain) so she also understands that when a politician is being called “The Messiah”, and “The One” – and he himself claims that he’s going to do miracles – people are going to talk. BTW, I notice all you supporters – including Orac – haven’t dissed any of that Obama is God talk, or the media bias he receives, as vehemently as you do his opponents – why not?

    Because you’re using real scientific logic!!!

    Or how about Lee, claiming “Alinksy’s ‘Rules for Radicals’ was NOT dedicated to Satan,…He acknowledges Lucifer – ‘a figure of legend, mythology, or history’ – as the first effective radical, one who rebelled against the establishment and won,..it is NOT a dedication to Satan.”

    There’s only one little problem: Alinksy does it in the book’s dedication!!!

    Real scientific logic at work!

    Then there’s James Sweet, using my claim to bravery to say “that doesn’t reflect in any way whatsoever on the quality of your blog or the validity of your views” – which have, both, been picked up by other blogs – including my sister blog, Panda Bear, M.D., and the post-cult therapy-oriented Didlleyblog, and has lots of praise right there on the front – is what?

    Real scientific logic at work!

    Are you guys catching my drift yet? Talking to you “scientists” is like talking to a bunch of U.F.O. nuts: you see what you want to see. And, while my words may be harsh, your behavior is atrocious. Listen to Orac:

    “My Catholic upbringing taught me that Lucifer and Satan were one in the same.”

    But when I used the names Lucifer and Satan interchangeably, did he respond like he knew “Lucifer and Satan were one in the same”? No – he assumed I was stupid – just as he assumed the birthers were racist. So he projected his own stupidity onto me – just as he projected his racism onto the birthers – and let the sarcasm fly!

    Now that’s what I call real scientific logic at work!

    Orac doesn’t like my style. Fine. I don’t always like his as well, but I read his blog, post lots of praiseworthy shit about and from him, and criticize him when I think it’s called for. Why do I do it? Because my assumption is he’s a big boy and, as far as I’m concerned, we’re on the same team.

    But he doesn’t even bother to read my blog – though I was the first guy to tell him Homeopathy is a cult. I was the first guy to tell him they were infiltrating the hospitals. I was the first guy to tell him he’s fighting this shit all wrong – the first guy to tell him countless things related to NewAge – only to have to listen to him whine and moan when the writing on the wall became so clear he had no other choice but to whine and moan. And he never apologizes for being wrong and abusing my good nature, gives me any credit, or thanks. None. He hasn’t even covered my case, when it would do a world of good, and he has better access to it than most.

    That’s what I call real scientific logic at work!

    You guys aren’t “scientists”, you’re children playing scientists, after being raised in a Leftist NewAge culture that encourages delayed adolescence. You’re so sure the birthers are being hard-headed, but when was the last time you held yourselves – especially your own political views – to any tough intellectual scrutiny?

    I’m not a scientist, so skepticism of my own ideas is not my mandate, but it’s supposed to be yours. When was the last time you tried it? All I see is you guys, twisting yourselves into pretzels, as you (probably a bunch of my fellow atheists) try to defend a man who put up no argument when people were saying he held metaphysical powers. You ought to be ashamed.

    I’m going to stop here but, you can be assured, I can go on, and on, and on in this same vein, because you have no defense for what you’re doing and saying. You’re lying, to me and to yourselves, and, at this point, I’m almost grateful it was Orac’s open racism that allowed this black man to get in your face and tell you just how wrong you can be in defense of the indefensible.

  112. #115 Tsu Dho Nimh
    July 30, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee #98:

    If I were he, I would’ve gone on television, with my birth certificate, and had it authenticated by the Attorney General. Not just had a bunch of nobodies come out and say “I’ve seen it.”

    The Attorney General has no special expertise … he’d just ask the head of Hawaii’s department of vital statistics, the one you dispose of as a “nobody”, to tell him whether it was valid or not.

  113. Robin Levett is wrong when he/she says “The keeper of Hawaii’s public records ahs cofnirmed its authenticity… He has produced an authenticated birth certificate”.

    Now, if you look at what those officials have actually said (original sources, imagine that!), you’ll see that they never said anything about what’s shown on BHO’s site. All they said is that he has a valid cert on file (their first statement) and that he was born there (the director’s second statement).

    If you trust what Robin Levett is telling you, see my name’s link and then look at what those officials have actually said.

  114. #117 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    Tsu Dho Nimh,

    “The Attorney General has no special expertise … he’d just ask the head of Hawaii’s department of vital statistics, the one you dispose of as a “nobody”, to tell him whether it was valid or not.”

    You miss the point: It would be credible to the people he’s trying to persuade, and that’s the objective, is it not?

  115. #118 Raging Bee
    July 30, 2009

    Yo, “facts,” I just had a look at your link, and it’s pure shite. You now appear to be down to admitting that all the facts point to Obama being born in Hawaii, and nothing points to any other answer, but then insisting “we still don’t know for sure.” Which is exactly what creationists and global-warming-denialists do when presented with conclusive evidence disproving their claims.

    Oh, and a bit of diversionary hand-waving about how someone said one thing and not something almost identical, therefore there’s still a controversy. Again, just like the creationists and AGW denialists.

    We’ve all heard your kind of BS before: it’s callled “obscurantism,” and it offers no insight and serves no useful purpose.

  116. #119 Raging Bee
    July 30, 2009

    Yo, “Facts,” I also noticed a post where you go on quite a bit about Obama’s (alleged) dual citizenship (US/Kenya) — without explaining why it’s in any way relevant. And then there’s this gem of gushing stupidity:

    I confirmed today that several teams/individuals visited Jakarta during the last six months to gather up critical documents regarding Barack. It is amazing what money can buy…

    It’s well known in the intel biz that money has a way of buying lots of really shiny nuggets of information that turns out to be false. Problem is, once you show the money, your “source” will tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear, whether or not it’s true.

  117. I’d hope that others could be able to do what I’d be able to do in the same situation: realize what the note at the beginning of my name’s link means and adjust accordingly. Obviously, that’s not going to be good enough due to the wide variety of people who visit that page, including those like “Raging Bee”.

    And, it isn’t a “diversion” to point out that what those officials said doesn’t match up to what Robin Levett said. And, it’s vitally important for those who want an at least somewhat honest MSM that it’s pointed out that they’ve consistently lied and misled about this issue.

  118. #121 The new post
    July 30, 2009

    “Raging Bee”: give it up. The quotes you provide are from others. That’s why they’re in italics and blockquoted. I realize I have to dumb down my site some more, but I don’t think I’m going to ever be able to get it down to your level.

  119. #122 Raging Bee
    July 30, 2009

    I’d hope that others could be able to do what I’d be able to do in the same situation: realize what the note at the beginning of my name’s link means…

    The note you mention says: “Hawaii had not said that he was born there…” Which is pure hairsplitting BS: Obama’s COLB, an official document generated and verified by the state of Hawaii, DID say he was born there, and relevant officials have confirmed that the facts on the COLB are correct according to their own records. So yes, “Hawaii” has been saying for a LONG TIME that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    So what the fuck are you on about again?

  120. #123 Raging Bee
    July 30, 2009

    Ah yes, calling us stupid when we point out your dishonesty, then demanding we give up (before you’re forced to?) — typical birfer infantilism.

  121. #124 Calli Arcale
    July 30, 2009

    The Crack Emcee:

    I think you misunderstood me. Perhaps deliberately. I was comparing you to a Moon hoax proponent. My point was that Barack Obama is in a no-win situation. He tried ignoring the crazies for a while, which is the usual wise thing to do, but eventually their volume got loud enough that he decided to go ahead and call their bluff by showing his birth certificate. Naturally, this didn’t quiet them in the least. Most of them are still clinging to bizarre technicalities to assert that this isn’t *really* his *really real* birth certificate, while suggesting that there is some sort of conspiracy within the Hawaiian government. A few are calling it a forgery. You appear to be in the former category. This is akin to Bart Sibrel saying “ah, but NASA hasn’t explained why there’s a C printed on this one rock here!”

    I think your last paragraph gives us a clue: it’s written cynically, like a political strategist, not like a normal person.

    Well, I am pretty cynical about politics, but I really am a regular person. I’d suck at political strategy. I’m too nice.

    I do think McCain is a very decent person. His party — not so much. Unfortunately, our system rewards parties which are cutthroat in their strategies, and I’m not sure there’s really a way to fix that without losing the strengths that our political system has.

    Finally, people “rarely seem troubled by McCain’s case” because they have no doubt about where McCain stands and where his heart is.

    And that is precisely why it is so hypocritical of the birthers to say they “just want to know the truth”. They don’t. They want to discredit Obama. The truth is secondary to that, and any “truth” which might threaten McCain is to be ignored, even if it is on equal footing.

    This is not us – it’s not “American” – so the idea he might not be an American has a lot of resonance.

    I disagree — both with the idea that Obama’s policies are unamerican, and with the idea that most Americans feel that way. It is not unamerican to have different ideas. However, it may be unamerican to consider differences of opinion as serious enough to justify deliberate distortion of truth to unfairly discredit a person. (The birther argument is, essentially, the epitome of an ad hominem argument.)

    It is true what you say, that some Americans think that Obama might not be a “true” American. (Which makes me think of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy, honestly.) I have yet to meet one who has arrived at this opinion through reason, logic, and facts. Rather, they have decided they don’t like him (usually because he’s a Democrat, though sometimes because he’s black) and then have embarked on a convoluted series of justifications for that position. You are correct — they don’t doubt his Americanness because of his birth certificate. They doubt it because they don’t like him. The birth certificate is immaterial.

    The no-moonies are the same way; the real reason they doubt Apollo is because they have an irrational distrust of scientists and/or NASA and/or the US government and are eager to find anything that seems to justify their otherwise absurd position.

  122. #125 Matt
    July 30, 2009

    The McCain campaign vetted the Birther rumors going into the fall campaign, probably with more scrutiny and resources than most Birthers. Since McCain got desperate and Palin got out of control as the campaign drew to a close, it’s safe to say the Birther rumors would have reared their head if there were any chance of them being true.

    I don’t think the Birther movement is racist. It comes from the fact that Obama has ties to Kenya & spent most of his childhood in Indonesia, whereas most presidents were raised in the US by US-born & raised parents. It’s also a convenient excuse to reject any law, tax, etc., that Obama signs, since his whole administration is illegitimate in the Birther mindset.

    Incidentally, under the Presidential Succession Act and Constitution, the Birthers’ victory if they were right would be short lived- Obama would be replaced with either Biden, Pelosi, Clinton, Geithner or whoever Congress picks, depending on your interpretation. The Birthers are mostly on the right, and there’s no way Obama wouldn’t be replaced with a Democrat, so how does removing Obama make their lives
    any better?

    The Birthers scream, “Where’s the birth certificate?”. I couldn’t agree more. Either they find a non-US birth certificate with Obama’s name on it or admit that they just want attention.

    Those who say, “let’s just see the birth certificate so this nonsense goes away” are missing the point. As National Review pointed out, the Certification of Live Birth serves as a birth certificate and is the only form currently issued by the Hawaii department of Health, a consequence of a late-90s attempt to streamline state government. Obama couldn’t get the long-form birth certificate even if he requested it in person. And how is it different from demanding that George W. Bush prove he didn’t have anything to do with 9-11? You don’t make statements like that unless you think there’s something important to be discovered.

  123. #126 JohnV
    July 30, 2009

    “But how many times, in post after post, have you guys insisted – insisted – that I am?”

    We insisted you were because you said you were. Oops my mistake, holding you to what you say is just arguing semantics. None of us are able to psychically read your mind to understand what you really mean when you make two mutually exclusive statements.

  124. #127 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    Calli Arcale,

    You’re right, I did misunderstand you. I had no idea that, after I’ve denied I’m a birther, you, too, would insist on putting me in that category. Can’t you see a distinction between someone trying to resolve an issue (that would be me with my suggestion of what Obama should do) and the actual issue holders (the birthers)?

    How many times do I have to say I believe he’s American before you accept it?

    Talk about no-win situations – and with scientists even! – who’s really the moonbat here? I mean, look at this comment of yours:

    “I do think McCain is a very decent person. His party — not so much.”

    Come now. Studies have also shown that conservatives are nicer than liberals. Studies have also shown that while conservatives read, hear, and understand liberal ideas, liberals cut themselves off completely from conservative viewpoints.

    Liberals are the folks scheming to make “alternative medicine” into medicine – and throwing the nation’s money away with it. Liberals are the folks mostly using yoga and claiming it’s exercise – when it’s not. Liberals are the folks insisting on revamping our healthcare system – even when they know the answer they offer doesn’t work.

    Is any of that being “nice” to you? I call it “lying” and lying is “mean”.

    And, while you guys are focusing on all the common, but maybe wrong-headed, folks out there, all the big time cranks are on the Left: Oprah Winfrey, Deepak Chopra, Andrew Weil, Senator Tom Harkin, Arianna Huffington – all the really big names in crankery.

    “It is so hypocritical of the birthers to say they ‘just want to know the truth’. They don’t. They want to discredit Obama. The truth is secondary to that, and any “truth” which might threaten McCain is to be ignored, even if it is on equal footing.”

    As a conservative Republican, I can assure you, that’s as nonsensical as Orac’s racism charge. Think about it: If Obama is done in, then “Crazy” Joe Biden would become president – with Nancy Pelosi as Vice-President – no Republican in his right mind would be able to sleep at night if that happened.

    Also, you may not know this but, John McCain isn’t well-liked by conservatives or the Republican Party – one listen to Rush Limbaugh would tell you that – so your argument falls apart pretty quickly.

    “It is true what you say, that some Americans think that Obama might not be a “true” American. (Which makes me think of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy, honestly.) I have yet to meet one who has arrived at this opinion through reason, logic, and facts. Rather, they have decided they don’t like him (usually because he’s a Democrat, though sometimes because he’s black) and then have embarked on a convoluted series of justifications for that position. You are correct — they don’t doubt his Americanness because of his birth certificate. They doubt it because they don’t like him. The birth certificate is immaterial.”

    There’s a lot there for me to debate, and I could, but I’ll merely follow up with a simple point: That’s what liberals did to Bush – for 8 years – so it’s quite hypocritical, now, for them to complain if they’re getting it back in spades.

    I like talking to you, Calli. You should leave this joint and come on over to my place:

    Despite the “tone” of my blog, it’s much more welcoming than with these guys.

  125. #128 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    Matt,

    “As National Review pointed out, the Certification of Live Birth serves as a birth certificate and is the only form currently issued by the Hawaii department of Health, a consequence of a late-90s attempt to streamline state government. Obama couldn’t get the long-form birth certificate even if he requested it in person.”

    I think you’ve hit the problem on the head right there. I didn’t know that, and I bet most birthers don’t either.

    JohnV,

    You’re an ass.

  126. #129 ildi
    July 30, 2009

    I like talking to you, Calli. You should leave this joint and come on over to my place

    Am I the only one who finds this a bit creepy?

  127. #130 Anon A. Mouse
    July 30, 2009

    For an internet Tough Guy, Crack Emcee certainly is thin-skinned and desperate for attention and approval (did you know Panda Bear MD was a sister blog?). This observation will probably provoke yet another thousand-word spate of logorrheic yapping, complete with several dozen references to his own blog.

  128. #131 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    Anon A. Mouse,

    Yo momma’s thin-skinned – and I betcha she’s got a blog, too!

  129. #132 dedicated lurker
    July 30, 2009

    Yeah, woo loving senators Orrin Hatch and Dan Burton are such extreme leftists.

  130. #133 Scientizzle
    July 30, 2009

    How many of you would pay good money to see Cracky and ol’ H*ppeh in a cage match?

    Jebus, that would be a good show…

  131. #134 Matthew Cline
    July 30, 2009

    All they said is that he has a valid cert on file (their first statement) and that he was born there (the director’s second statement).

    If he was born there, what’s the problem? Is the problem that he said “Obama was born there” rather than “the certificate says Obama was born there”? Or is the “there” somewhere other than Hawaii?

  132. #135 Raging Bee
    July 30, 2009

    Can’t you see a distinction between someone trying to resolve an issue (that would be me with my suggestion of what Obama should do) and the actual issue holders (the birthers)?

    Not when the two groups ask the same stupid questions over and over, ignore the same facts and citations offered in response to said questions, and repeat the same lies about how they’re “just asking questions” and “just want someone else to do all their research for them and let them pretend they’re relevant.” And certainly not when both groups give away their true bigotry by lapsing into the same pathological, fact-free hatred of all things “liberal.”

  133. #136 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    “Yeah, woo loving senators Orrin Hatch and Dan Burton are such extreme leftists.”

    That’s two – you wanna do a count and see which side wins?

    I don’t think so. You guys are hypocritically batting for the wrong team – and you know it.

  134. #137 The Crack Emcee
    July 30, 2009

    Oh yea, Raging Bee, you’re just an open-hearted font of compassion for conservatives.

    Hypocrite.

  135. #138 Tulse
    July 31, 2009

    No Person except a natural born Citizen [...] shall be eligible to the Office of President;

    Wait, the birthers are saying Obama’s mom had a caesarian? I’m so confused…

    All this birther nonsense is just a way to give wing-nuts an excuse to engage in behavior that they would call treasonous if a “liberal” has engaged in it.

    And correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there still two wars going on? How is it that the unquestioned loyalty toward the Commander-in-Chief that was demanded during Bush II is now just a distant memory?

  136. #139 gwangung
    July 31, 2009

    Oh yea, Raging Bee, you’re just an open-hearted font of compassion for conservatives.

    ANd…avoiding the argument he posed.

    Not persuasive.

  137. #140 ishobo
    July 31, 2009

    To the folks asking for a statute defining what natural born means, you seem to forget that the United States is a common law country, that inherited its common law from England. The federal and all state govermemnts, other than Louisiana, based its law on existing English case law. This is the reason courts will sometimes talk about English cases that predate the United States.

    The right to habeas corpus does not come from the Constitution, it comes from English common law. Although the Constitution talks about suspension of the right, it does not explicitly give citizens that right because it is presumed to exist. The same is true of the term natural born, which at the time meant a citizen at birth. That meaning had been established through centuries of English common law.

  138. #141 Matthew Cline
    July 31, 2009

    So, searching on “English common law” and “natural born” gives this:

    By the common law of England, as it existed during the whole colonial period in this country, and the revolutionary period, and at the time of the adoption of the federal constitution, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, protection and jurisdiction of the English sovereign. and, therefore, every child born in England of alien parentage was a natural-born subject of England; except the children of ambassadors or other diplomatic agents of foreign states, and the children of alien enemies in hostile occupation of the place of birth at the time of birth. Subject to the two exceptions stated, any person who, whether of English or of foreign parentage, was born within the British dominions, was a natural-born British subject. By natural-born British subject was meant a British subject who had become such at the moment of his birth.

  139. #142 Lee
    July 31, 2009

    Crackhead says:

    “Or how about Lee, claiming “Alinksy’s ‘Rules for Radicals’ was NOT dedicated to Satan,…He acknowledges Lucifer – ‘a figure of legend, mythology, or history’ – as the first effective radical, one who rebelled against the establishment and won,..it is NOT a dedication to Satan.”

    There’s only one little problem: Alinksy does it in the book’s dedication!!!””
    —-

    Wrong.

    Rules for Radicals is dedicated “To Irene.”

    In the 1971 and 1972 editions of Rules for Radicals – the only editions that carry the Lucifer quote – there is a blank page following the dedication page, and then a page of quotes. On that page of quotes, the controversial “Lucifer’ quote is one of three. The other two quotes are by Hillel and Thomas Payne.

    “Where there are no men, be thou a man.” Hillel

    “Let them call me rebel, and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, if I were to make a whore of my soul.” Thomas Payne.

    Lest we forget an over the shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology and history, (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which) , the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.” Saul Alinsky

    —-

    Crackhead should be less easily convinced by the crap he reads on raving-right blogs.

  140. #143 The Crack Emcee
    July 31, 2009

    Lee,

    if I made a mistake, and I concede I may have, then I’m willing to admit it – how about you guys?

    Like the previous claim that conservatives are muddying up the debate on climate change? Would Freeman Dyson be one of those conservatives? How about the scientists who were part of the IPCC who have changed their minds?

    And when it comes to the breath and magnitude of the lies being told (think of all the big name left-loonies, in and out of government, I referred to earlier – many of which Orac disses regularly, but still votes with) who’s really the hypocritical loony here? I’m, at least, trying to keep my logic in some kind of a straight line: For instance, I’m not going to diss Oprah as “evil” – which I and Orac have – and, then, turn around and support for her hand-picked candidate for president. Or vote for a guy people call “The Messiah” and not even mention the lunacy of that, as Orac hasn’t, or not openly wonder and criticize the most massive case of media bias, in support of him, this nation has ever seen.

    Really, man, come on. I can understand an honest debate – if anyone wants to have one, I’ve made clear I’m game – but until you guys want to emphasize the “honest” part, you know you’re just playing as schoolyard bullies.

  141. #144 Raging Bee
    July 31, 2009

    For instance, I’m not going to diss Oprah as “evil” – which I and Orac have – and, then, turn around and support for her hand-picked candidate for president.

    There’s nothing hypocritical or inconsistent about this, and you know it. Oprah is unreliable, but she got her Presidential vote right. (And no, she didn’t “handpick” Obama.)

    Or vote for a guy people call “The Messiah” and not even mention the lunacy of that…

    We voted for Obama because he’s a better man than all of the national Republican Party put together. Given how badly your party managed everything it touched, there’s nothing “loony” about voting against it.

    …or not openly wonder and criticize the most massive case of media bias, in support of him, this nation has ever seen.

    Quit blaming the media — the FACTS have a liberal bias. You’re only blaming the media because you don’t have the guts to take responsibility for your own failure.

    Really, man, come on. I can understand an honest debate…

    No, actually, you’ve proven you can’t.

    So once again, crack-boy, the dishoesty is all on your side of this debate.

  142. #145 The Crack Emcee
    July 31, 2009

    Buzz off, Bee. I take you about as seriously as a broken nail.

  143. #146 Lee
    July 31, 2009

    Crackhead:
    “if I made a mistake, and I concede I may have, then I’m willing to admit it – how about you guys? ”

    You made a claim about Alinsky, and used it to tar Obama. I pointed out that your claim was wrong, and why. You defended your claim by proffering an additional “fact” that is simply not true, and in the process insulted me. I corrected your “fact,” showing that it is simply wrong. You respond by saying you would admit an error – while not admitting the error.

    “I may have” in the face of a clear demonstration that what you said is simply not true, is not an admission of error. It is bluster – which is about all you’ve shown here so far.

    “Real scientific logic at work!” Indeed.

  144. #147 The Crack Emcee
    July 31, 2009

    Lee,

    I ask again: Are you all just a bunch of asses? You’ve “proven” nothing – you stated something – providing no link or any other evidence. So what am I supposed to say to that but “I may have”? Fuck, again. You “scientists” are fucking children.

  145. #148 Lee
    August 1, 2009

    Crackhead:
    “You’ve “proven” nothing – you stated something – providing no link or any other evidence.”

    Which is precisely what you did when you made the “Alinsky dedicated it to Satan” charge.

    The difference is, I’m correct, you are not. I have several editions of the book sitting right here. My wife spent several years as a community organizer for a faith-based organization (jesuit, jewish and baptist), Alinsky was required reading for the job, and we acquired several copies. I just described and quoted the relevant portions to you.

    In other words, I did my homework before mouthing off. You did not – your original charge was wrong and apparently completely unresearched. Now you’re claiming some kind of helplessness in your ability to reality check your own effing claims after I tell you exactly how the claim was wrong? Speaking of children…

    I don’t make it a habit to play research librarian for too-lazy-to-do-his-own-homework random blustering a-holes on the internet, crackhead.

  146. #149 The Crack Emcee
    August 1, 2009

    “You’ve “proven” nothing – you stated something – providing no link or any other evidence.”

    Which is precisely what you did when you made the “Alinsky dedicated it to Satan” charge.

    The difference is, I’m correct, you are not.

    Are you fucking kidding me? You’re (maybe) correct that it’s not in the dedication – Big Fucking Whoop!!! It’s still a book with a glowing-fucking-reference to Satan, you idiot!! What “good” could come of it? He’s supposed to be the Dark Lord of Evil, you dummy!!!

    And let me get this straight: You’re going to diss me for (what you say is) doing the wrong thing – by doing it yourself?!? And you want to talk about childishness?!? Plus, on the basis of that bullshit, you want to try and claim some kind of moral superiority afterward – when you still haven’t “proven” a damn thing yet? What-a-fucking-maroon!!!!

    “The devil challenged authority and got his own kingdom, and that goes to the heart of what left is really about. That of course is to get power any way you can, including lying, cheating and stealing. The ultimate rule is that the ends justify the means.”

    “The ends justify the means.” How fucking delicious. How fucking mature. How fucking evil:

    “To believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles … the practical revolutionary will understand … [that] in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind.”

    Shit, man, you’re as confused as your “jesuit, jewish and baptist” trained “community organizer for a faith-based organization” wife, who’s using a book (“required reading for the job”) that positively references Satan!!! What’s she doing? Preparing to tip over the apple cart, when she gets to Heaven, for all the “good works” she and Obama are doing down here?!? Lucifer will be so proud!!!

    And, since you “don’t make it a habit to play research librarian for too-lazy-to-do-his-own-homework random blustering a-holes on the internet”, let me take a look at Alinsky myself, the guy you and your (religious?) wife are so enamored with:

    “Married” – an institution where one promises to be with one person for life – three times! (His first wife died, tragically, but what happened the other two times?) Yes, indeed, that man’s word meant something! No wonder the poor have been doing so well since he came on the scene: He couldn’t even organize himself and one other person!!!

    Also, his penchant for “rubbing a community’s sores raw” eventually alienated other labor leaders – those would be mostly BLACK people of the time, Lee – so he moved to organizing “white worker councils”. Wow, what a guy!!! Your wife definitely better to listen to him!!! He sounds like a real winner!!!

    “”Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America’s white middle class. That is where the power is. … Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority.”

    Contempt is soooo sexy!!! Soooo radical!!! Sooooo much of what I feel for you right now.

    Like I said, entering sites with “scientists” has to be the most eye-opening experience of this entire “spiritual” odyssey I’ve been plunged into. You’re as petty, confused – and insane – as the people Orac disses everyday!!! What are the “rules” you live by?

    “Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear and retreat.”

    Because confusion and fear are such positive attributes. Boy, your wife must be a real hum-dinger!

    “Make the enemy live up to his/her own book of rules. You can kill them with this. They can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

    “You can kill them with this.” Sweeeet. Yep, all those Christians – trying to be “good” people – are bound to fail somewhere. It’s so much, much better not to even pretend that’s your goal. Again: Satan would approve.

    “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also, it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.”

    And if the people on “Respectful Insolence” are good at anything – other than thinking or trying to be good – it’s ridicule: You’re a bunch of fucking experts.

    “The threat is generally more terrifying than the thing itself.”

    Well he certainly got this one wrong, because before, during, and after this election, I’ve been laughing at you – knowing that “leadership” requires traits that are just the opposite of what Alinsky has been training you for. You’re a bunch of losers!

    “In a fight almost anything goes. It almost reaches the point where you stop to apologize if a chance blow lands above the belt.”

    Amazing! And this is “required reading for the job” for “jesuit, jewish and baptist” organization? Man, I’m glad I’m an atheist!!!

    “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.”

    Repeat after me: Bush, Bush, and more Bush. And, no, I won’t forget: Nothing you say has to be the truth.

    “One of the criteria for picking the target is the target’s vulnerability … the other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract.”

    See above.

    “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

    Yea, that’s why I – a black man – want to be as far away from your pathetic, lying asses as possible. Because you, out of all the conservatives in the world, can be trusted. Oops – wait – no you can’t! Your leader said so!

    Go away, Lee. You sicken me.

  147. #150 Orac
    August 1, 2009

    Are you fucking kidding me? You’re (maybe) correct that it’s not in the dedication – Big Fucking Whoop!!! It’s still a book with a glowing-fucking-reference to Satan, you idiot!! What “good” could come of it? He’s supposed to be the Dark Lord of Evil, you dummy!!!

    This, methinks, is about as close as we will ever see the Crack get to admitting he was wrong about anything.

  148. #151 Raging Bee
    August 1, 2009

    Go away, Lee. You sicken me.

    Why don’t YOU go away, you blustering ignorant sack of shit? You don’t own this blog, so you have no right to tell anyone here to go anywhere. You’re the only one out of place here: you’ve been proven both wrong and dishonest, you can’t handle it, and now you’re flipping out and trying to shout us down like this is just another smoky redneck bar and muscles win arguments. (Oh, and why would an atheist go out of his way to attack all scientists and make lame excuses for the lamest Christian behavior?)

  149. #152 The Crack Emcee
    August 1, 2009

    Really, Orac – after all that – that’s all you have to say? To defend one silly point, probably the silliest one in the whole thread?

    You’re sad, dude.

  150. #153 Lee
    August 1, 2009

    Crackhead pulls out the race card – how lovely.

    Crackhead also offers (among others) this gem:
    “”The devil challenged authority and got his own kingdom, and that goes to the heart of what left is really about. That of course is to get power any way you can, including lying, cheating and stealing. The ultimate rule is that the ends justify the means.””

    The quote is from a Newsmax diatribe by Diane Alden, as are almost all the other out-of-context quotes Crackhead offers here. This is apparently the source of all Crackhead’s claimed knowledge about Alinsky. You can see the article reproduced here:
    http://www.tysknews.com/Articles/dnc_corruption.htm

    Alinsky, BTW, didn’t say that ends justify any means. He said that ends must be analyzed to determine appropriate means, and that one should not let one’s opponents control the selection of appropriate and legitimate means. He also pointed out that charges that one is engaging in unethical means is more often a result of your opponent fearing your effectiveness, than of any actual real analysis of the ethics of the situation.

    BTW, Crackhead, if you’re an athiest, what’s your reason for giving G_d’ view of righteousness in that legend, priority over Lucifer’s view? Apparently you’re an athiest taking God’s side?

    Crackhead, it is utterly clear that you’ve never actually read Alinsky. You’ve discredited yourself on the issue – you might consider whether you want to continue digging.

  151. #154 The Crack Emcee
    August 1, 2009

    No, what’s apparent is you’re cherry picking the points to answer. You left quite a bit out there – what’s the matter?

  152. #155 Robin Levett
    August 2, 2009

    @The Crack Emcee #154:

    Just for information; when did you read the book, and do you own a copy?

  153. #156 Lee
    August 2, 2009

    I should probably drop this – Crackhead is already well and truly discredited by his own words – but…

    Crackhead:
    “And let me get this straight: You’re going to diss me for (what you say is) doing the wrong thing – by doing it yourself?!?”

    Crackhead, I really don’t give a damn whether you bother to link your crap. It took me about 45 seconds to find the source of your blithering about Alinsky, and I linked it for you. I’m not claiming superiority over you on that basis, or any other. I am pointing out that you are a dishonest little f***, because you are attacking other people by making false claims about a book you clearly haven’t even read.

    Crackhead:
    “Are you fucking kidding me? You’re (maybe) correct that it’s not in the dedication”

    See, if you had read the book, or had access to it now, or had even bothered to get access you would know whether I was correct or not. (hint – there are limited-access sources that show the dedication page and quotes pages, available here on the internets). All you have to do is look at the dedication page and the quotes page I cited. The fact that you cant say one way or the other whether Im correct, means you have been citing a book that clearly YOU DON’T HAVE and HAVE NOT READ in attacks on others.

    THAT, crackhead, is why you’re a dishonest fuckhead – not your failure to cite your sources.

    Crackhead:
    “No, what’s apparent is you’re cherry picking the points to answer. You left quite a bit out there – what’s the matter?”

    No, crackhead – I went after the first two points you made, in that order. You were 0 for 2 factually, and dishonest on both – why on earth would I bother to pay any more attention after that? But the fact is, I did, to an extent. I made the comment that all the rest of those were taken out of context. I could demolish the rest, too – some of them without even bothering to bring in context beyond what you’ve provided, because your commentary on many of them is truly cracked. But you aren’t worth it, crackhead.

  154. #157 wfjag
    August 3, 2009

    The truth will out:

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20090802obamanirth-lg.jpg

    Now, to debunk that Moon Landing thingy.

  155. #158 The Crack Emcee
    August 3, 2009

    Lee,

    If there’s one thing I’ve learned on Respectful Insolence, it’s that there’s a big difference between liking science – a process – and liking scientists, who can be as sick a bunch of little creeps as any NewAgers I’ve ever encountered. Considering so many have fallen for NewAge crap in the past – including Orac with accupunture – it’s hardly surprising that you guys don’t have the good sense to determine what’s what without science putting some parameters down for you: Scientists are hardly known as the most sociably adept individuals, and considering they can easily go the Joseph Mengele or Linus Pauling route, I guess I never should’ve expected more.

    That said, the quote about the Devil is in Rules For Radicals (you don’t deny it) so all you’ve “proven” is my claim it’s in the dedication is inaccurate – which only makes me “a dishonest little f***” on a completely irrelevant point – except to immature assholes like y’all. You win – nothing. Happy? You can violently pat yourselves on the back now over a hollow victory. It just makes your insecurity, over my side’s influence creeping back into power, all the more obvious.

    And BTW, on a related point, I don’t own a bible but guess what? I may not know what chapter and verse it is, but I know – somewhere in there – it says the world was created in 7 days, so I still talk about it and claim anyone who bases their beliefs on what’s in that book is a fucktard – just as I did with Rules For Radicals , Obama, you, and your wife. You’re corrupted, misguided, individuals who – in truth – are helping no one with your “community organizing” (As a black person, I’ve had ample opportunity to see the results of your “work”, just as the rest of the country is seeing it now). Whatever. Democrats win a presidential election every 25 years or so, and then, megalomaniacly, think they’re going to take over the world – never happens. So enjoy your moment in the sun, kids, then hurry back under the rock you crawled from under. It’s where you belong: Someplace dark and hot that “Satan” would enjoy knowing is well populated.

    Next, no, you haven’t taken on the rest of my points because you’re a coward. Taken together (Alinsky’s written instructions, their results, along with how he conducted his personal life) you don’t have a leg to stand on. You’ve got a president because we in the opposition didn’t think so many could be so stupid as to believe someone who would lie so blatantly – even with a media onslaught as a wind to his back – our bad. Clearly, America’s catching on now, and (considering how I, and those like me, feel about him) he’ll be lucky if he’s not eventually impeached. As Bill Whittle says, the days of playing political softball with you guys are over: We know what you’re like, and this time – when you’ve fallen and can’t get up – a kick to the face is all you’re going to get.

    And, finally – as a closing example of your great scientific mind at work – if I’m so not worth it, why are you on my dick?

  156. #159 Raging Bee
    August 4, 2009

    …if I’m so not worth it, why are you on my dick?

    Ah, the loser’s last pretense of victory: he made a total ass of himself, he’s been exposed as a belligerent hyperventilating moron, he has nothing to offer but grade-school insults and desperate fake-macho chest-pounding — but he got our attention, so he can claim that as a victory. That puts our cracker-boy in the same winners’ circle as the homeless drunks directing traffic in every city in the US.

    And that’s pretty much all the birfers are about: trolling the Web looking for places to hog attention, make noise, and make themselves feel relevant.

    (And why does cracker-boy mention his dick? Is that where his logic is coming from? Or does he brag about his dick because no other part of his body has ever done anything worth mentioning?)

  157. #160 Orac
    August 4, 2009

    Part II of Birthers on Parade. Enjoy! Especially you, Mr. CE.

  158. #161 Calli Arcale
    August 4, 2009

    The Crack Emcee:

    You’re right, I did misunderstand you. I had no idea that, after I’ve denied I’m a birther, you, too, would insist on putting me in that category. Can’t you see a distinction between someone trying to resolve an issue (that would be me with my suggestion of what Obama should do) and the actual issue holders (the birthers)?

    Your denial rings about as true as Jenny McCarthy’s denial that she is “antivaccine”. If you were truly interested in the truth, you would have noticed by now that Obama *has* produced his birth certificate. It’s been pointed out so many times in this thread. I do notice that subsequent to your post to me, you did acknowledge that the certificate has been presented. While it’s not the document that the most desperate of the birthers demand, it’s as close to one as anybody can get, and legally serves the same function. (I have a similar certificate from the State of Minnesota, which also retains the “true” birth certificate and only provides notarized copies.)

    Come now. Studies have also shown that conservatives are nicer than liberals.

    How do you possibly do a study on niceness? It’s a subjective trait.

    In my experience (anecdotal, I realize), the “niceness quotient”, if you will, of each party is roughly the same.

    Also, you may not know this but, John McCain isn’t well-liked by conservatives or the Republican Party – one listen to Rush Limbaugh would tell you that – so your argument falls apart pretty quickly.

    I am aware that McCain is not liked, which is why it is even *more* ridiculous that they go after technicalities on Obama but not McCain. Clearly, all that matters to the “birthers” is that a Republican win. Whether or not he’s the right person for the job doesn’t seem to be quite as important. Perhaps that’s why the Republicans have lost so much ground lately; they became so focused on winning that they lost track of their core base.

    I’m not a member of either party; I’m neutral. My husband’s a registered Republican. He voted for Obama, as did I, though we both had been favoring McCain most of the way. (If Hillary Clinton had been nominated, I’m positive I would’ve voted McCain.) I like the principles of the Republican party. Only problem is that in recent years, I’m not so sure the Republican party even follows those principles anymore. And I do not like the extreme right. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter . . . they really bug me, with their simplistic views of the world. Mind you, there are Democrats I don’t like either. I have serious mixed feelings about Al Franken as the new Minnesota senator (though I’d have had equally mixed feelings if Norm Coleman had been seated).

    There’s a lot there for me to debate, and I could, but I’ll merely follow up with a simple point: That’s what liberals did to Bush – for 8 years – so it’s quite hypocritical, now, for them to complain if they’re getting it back in spades.

    TWo wrongs don’t make a right — if it was nasty what the far-left Dems did to Bush, why isn’t it nasty what the far-right Repubs are now doing to Obama? I’d like to further point out that it’s also what the Republicans did to Clinton for eight years, and what the Democrats did to Reagan and the elder Bush before that. Put simply, this is what the party not in power does to the party *in* power. Hence my belief that neither party is guiltless. They’re both hypocrites.

    That doesn’t mean *I* can’t call it like it is. Just because the Democrats kinda asked for it (well, this is how politics works, unfortunately) doesn’t mean I can’t stand up and say it’s ridiculous nonsense.

  159. #162 Eric Steinberg
    August 6, 2009

    I’m a friend of The Crack Emcee, and I’m sad to say he is batshit crazy. As this “conversation” shows, his favorite “debate” tactic lately is a combo of lying and playing dumb. He’s a victim of a messy, shitty divorce; he used to be a great rapper. Just thought you should know.

  160. #163 J. Shryock
    August 7, 2009

    My cousin an M.D., researcher and Australian citizen along with his wife and then 2 children with one on the way came to the United States so said nephew could lecture on his medical specialty at Tulane. While they were here, their third child was born. Now, both parents are Australian citizens visiting the United States on an extended visa in the early 1960s. The point is, their newborn third child was automatically an American citizen when he was born here. He was also an Australian citizen by way of his parents citizenship, so he held and still does dual citizenship. All he had to do was be born in the U.S. The citizenship of his parents had no bearing whatsoever on him being a natural-born U.S. citizen.

  161. #164 Steve W
    August 17, 2009

    This controversy would be hilarious if it weren’t for the fact that many people are taking it seriously and so are some in the media. I took the time before writing this post to read through the material on the Birthers website http://www.birthers.org and decided that the crackpots writing this are just that, crackpots. It’s hard to take someone/anyone serious if they cannot spell or use proper grammar. The editor at birthers.org should look up the difference between “lose” and “loose” and use the correct one. Also, what does “cooberating” mean? I’m guessing corroborating. I think under ‘birther’ in the dictionary it should read ‘racist’.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.