Comments on: Why The Press Loves The Birther Issue–UPDATED

By: Tony E Rahman

Tony E Rahman — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 19:09:17 +0000

This is a ‘heads up’ alert on new ‘Birth Certificate’ info for those interested. Maybe the Uninterested Press might finally want to closely watch this one. Could be another Hoax, but claims seem to show all necessary info is there to prove one way or another. If this is finally a bonafied copy of original long form document – then the President and Hawaiian officials are going to have some tall explaining to do… I hope its OK to post links ………. tony

See http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

(Is this really smoking gun of Obama’s Kenyan birth?
Attorney files motion for authentication of alleged 1960s certificate from Africa)

By: Morgan K Freeberg

Morgan K Freeberg — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:31:45 +0000

Aaaaaahhhhhh….someone with a brain finally gets it. It’s like having a longtime itch under a plaster cast finally scratched.

Check out what this nutty guy entered over at Cassy’s place on this issue (comment #4):

The real issue is a straw-man argument. I myself doubt the existence of even a single “birther,” as an incarnation of the caricature that’s been foisted upon us: Middle-aged white guy in a wife-beater shirt living in his momma’s basement, forming conspiracy theories, been shown a zillion times lots of hefty evidence of Obama’s Hawaii birth that he should find convincing, but he doesn’t, because his gears are stripped.

I don’t know anybody like this. Furthermore, I find it really suspicious that this “birther” stuff has a pulse to it, and the systolic pressure just so happens to be conveniently timed as Obama’s approval rating crosses the 50% mark and heads South just as He has a health care bill bottled up in Congress that nobody likes.

I think they’re talking about me.

But I don’t fit the classic definition any better than anyone else does. I’ve never once had a serious doubt that He was born in Honolulu…

Personally, I think we have a Hawaiian-born American citizen in the White House who’s shrewdly seized on a birther-boogeyman to be hauled out of the closet, with a willing press as an accomplice, any time He needs a distraction…Which is lately just about every two weeks. He won’t spend the $22 to produce the slip of paper you & I would’ve produced a long time ago, because He doesn’t *want* this issue to go away. But there isn’t anyone at any address outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. keeping it around.

Classic straw man argument.

You know what this reminds me of? Man-hating feminists complaining about “the expectations of a patriarchal society” that womens’ breasts should be like basketballs, their waists should be thinner than the average coffee pot, their bellies should be non-existent, their butts should be so skinny you can cut a pane of glass with ‘em.

Meanwhile, the men are lusting after Marilyn Monroe’s figure just like they were fifty years ago. Who’s promoting this size-double-zero dress size? The women who run the fashion industry…and men who prefer other men. It takes less effort to blame the straight guys for it, though.

Except that misdirection of blame is accidental. This one is strategic. People think “birthers” and the first thing that enters their minds is that all Republicans are screwy…so a loyal democrat will choose to a) help promote this fairy tale, or b) not? Talk about a no-brainer.

By: Peter

Peter — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:48:39 +0000

I’m with Tony. Why has the President of the United States of America spent so much of whose money to hide his past? How did a young man who, by his own admission could not afford a taxicab, go to Pakistan when it was illegal for an American to go to Pakistan?

Most importantly, why did a media who found it vital to stare up into Governor Palin’s vagina ignore these and other questions?

By: Swcatz@comcast.net

Swcatz@comcast.net — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:28:08 +0000

Just in from WSJ:

Beige Book Sees Recession Easing
Capital Spending Increases, as Durable-Goods Orders Fall

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124887015293690029.html

By: Tony E Rahman

Tony E Rahman — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:37:06 +0000

I have followed this topic with some interest. The bottom line is that there was a Legitimate question about the President’s past. But it turns out the President does not want the public to know everything about his past. He seems to have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars (who’s money?) to cover up, to legally hide his past. Now, that does raise a legitimate question again. Why? By using ridicule to besmirch those questioners by calling them ‘Birthers’ is just another tactic to squelch those who just want to know the truth. Like, where are his school records? where are his passport and birth records, where are his records of published works (not counting the two books he claims to have written – but forensic writing investigators say 90% sure he did not himself write)? And more questions aplenty. No answers, only evasion.

By: jasperjava

jasperjava — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:16:10 +0000

Wait a minute. There’s this group of nuts who believe that Obama is not the legitimate President because he was born in Kenya, and you say that is an example of DEMOCRATS playing dirty politics? I think you’ve got it backwards. The Birthers are a vicious example of dirty politics: extremists, racists, haters of the worst description. The Dems haven’t defended themselves hard enough against these psychopaths, in my opinion.

By: A Convenient Conspiracy

A Convenient Conspiracy — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:58:08 +0000

[...] Dr. Melissa Clouther is exactly right: The Birther issue serves one important purpose: if the whole of the Right can be painted as conspiratorial nutters, then the Left doesn’t have to defend or explain very unpopular policies like Cap-n-Trade, Card Check and Health Care. [...]

By: Dirty Democrats » Why The Press Loves The Birther Issue

Dirty Democrats » Why The Press Loves The Birther Issue — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:15:24 +0000

[...] Why The Press Loves The Birther Issue: “ [...]