28 Apr 2011, 8:33 pm
NeantHumain wrote:
(Imagine the below uttered in a raspy, belligerent Southern accent):
Quote:
Now lissen heeyuh. We all know Barack HUSSEIN Obama ain't no 'Merican. Ain't no 'Merican look like that or with a name like that. I don't know if he wus born in Kenya or Eye-doughnesia, but I know for a God damn fact he ain't wunnuvus. It's a forgery, clear as the sun shine on Mama's shawna waht behahnd. Muslim secular radical atheism ain't belong heeyuh; that's for sure.
That is not hard to imagine
28 Apr 2011, 11:12 pm
29 Apr 2011, 8:51 am
sartresue
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism
29 Apr 2011, 9:59 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've got a question for you, zer0onetgain - what's your beef with Obama, really? I'd say that has more to do with your grasping at straws to disprove the legitimacy of his birth certificate than any layers in the paper, or whatever.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Dissing credit topic
Zero-man is trying to discredit Barack's citizenship, so everything else the US president has done, said, or will/do/say will be discredited.
I ams surprised birthers still pretend Mr. Obama exists at all, given their pretense-fixation and denialismic tendencies.
29 Apr 2011, 10:10 am
sartresue wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've got a question for you, zer0onetgain - what's your beef with Obama, really? I'd say that has more to do with your grasping at straws to disprove the legitimacy of his birth certificate than any layers in the paper, or whatever.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Dissing credit topic
Zero-man is trying to discredit Barack's citizenship, so everything else the US president has done, said, or will/do/say will be discredited.
I ams surprised birthers still pretend Mr. Obama exists at all, given their pretense-fixation and denialismic tendencies.
If Obama was not born in the US, and is ineligible to be President, then everything he has done IS discredited.
The problem with most people is that they think they are too intelligent to be fooled, and the bigger the con, the more convinced they are that it is impossible.
29 Apr 2011, 10:41 am
sartresue
Veteran
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism
29 Apr 2011, 10:44 am
sartresue wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've got a question for you, zer0onetgain - what's your beef with Obama, really? I'd say that has more to do with your grasping at straws to disprove the legitimacy of his birth certificate than any layers in the paper, or whatever.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Dissing credit topic
Zero-man is trying to discredit Barack's citizenship, so everything else the US president has done, said, or will/do/say will be discredited.
I am surprised birthers still pretend Mr. Obama exists at all, given their pretense-fixation and denialismic tendencies.
Tacky tactic topic
Obama's late mama was a US citizen, and he was born in Hawaii (became a state in 1959) in 1961. Canadians know more about the US than many Americans.
Denialism is a serious disease in America, affecting NT and Aspie alike. Just keep it south of the border.
29 Apr 2011, 10:48 am
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
29 Apr 2011, 12:59 pm
29 Apr 2011, 1:15 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Well you definitely have me convinced about one thing - that you have Asperger's. Geez Louise! I thought I could get obsessive about ancient history! I found getting laid relieves a great amount of the monomania our kind more often than not suffers from.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Wow. If only you were a neurologist or some other guy who could officially Dx AS, I'd be taken care of.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
29 Apr 2011, 2:14 pm
zer0netgain wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Well you definitely have me convinced about one thing - that you have Asperger's. Geez Louise! I thought I could get obsessive about ancient history! I found getting laid relieves a great amount of the monomania our kind more often than not suffers from.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Wow. If only you were a neurologist or some other guy who could officially Dx AS, I'd be taken care of.
You're more than welcome.
I'm glad to see you have a sense of humor.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
30 Apr 2011, 7:02 am
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... &emc=thab1
Quote:
Don’t Stop Believing
By PETER CATAPANO
Can Hawaii really be considered a state? Does anybody really believe that a volcanic island chain — described in Wikipedia as “physiographically and ethnologically part of the Polynesian subregion of Oceania,” a place that does not observe daylight savings time — is the sort of thing the founding fathers had in mind? And what is it doing all the way out there anyway?
O.K., I made that up. But judging from the goings-on this week, it is not too far-fetched to think questions like these might be floating around the opinion-sphere in coming days.
Because history has shown us that beliefs die hard.
For instance, if you were of a certain ideological bent, and believed, say, that participation in American politics required a certain type of background — a firm grasp of history combined with a sort of moral or philosophical drive, or at least a character forged in scholarship and public service, then you would have not thought it possible that this man could become governor of California:
Even though this man had done so before him, and then served two terms as one of the most popular presidents in American history.
And if after all that, you still possessed the aforementioned belief, then you would certainly not think it possible that this man could be seriously considered as a possible candidate for the nation’s highest office.
Because beliefs die hard. Take for instance the belief that Barack Obama is not an American-born citizen and is not legally eligible to hold the office he already holds, a topic that Donald Trump, in his media barnstorming in the past few weeks, latched onto like a pit bull with lockjaw.
The Trump-fueled din surrounding the questioning of the fact of the president’s birth became so great that the White House, clearly exasperated, released his long-form birth certificate to the public, upon news of which Trump exulted, “Today I am very proud of myself. I have accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish. … .”
Trump also requested that Obama release his academic records, implying that the president’s Ivy League career was based on something other than merit, unleashing a second wave of outrage among pundits. But now, at last, the presidential birth matter could be put to rest, as Jon Stewart said this week, “thrice and for all.” Right? Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic, among others, quickly noted his skepticism:
I would be shocked if this kills off the birthers. It’s worth remembering that birtherism, itself, is just a mutation of the still current theory that Obama is a Muslim. It’s likely that the “delay” in releasing the long-form certificate will be taken as evidence of yet another, or perhaps even the same, conspiracy.
This isn’t about facts.
An editorial at The Los Angeles Times was one of many that expressed similar skepticism:
[W]e’re under no illusion — and neither is Obama — that the rumor will be entirely quelled. “I know that there’s going to be a segment of people for which, no matter what we put out, this issue will not be put to rest,” the president said at an extraordinary briefing.
That “segment” may turn out to be sizable. A shocking number of Americans give credence to the utterly unfounded notion that the president was born outside the United States — in Kenya, by some accounts — and smuggled into Hawaii, where his birth documents were fabricated. A CBS/New York Times poll released this month found that a quarter of all Americans think Obama was not born in the United States. Among Republicans and “tea party” supporters, the figure was 45 percent.
True to that prediction, there followed plenty of commentary like this, by Carol A. Taber, the head of an organization called “Family Security Matters,” at The American Thinker:
In my opinion, the Obama supporters are very concerned … that whatever he releases as a birth certificate simply must be forensically tested. An honest man does not fear a forensics evaluation of his birth certificate.
President Reagan was right when he said, “Trust, but verify.”
President Obama’s long form birth certificate must be tested forensically.
At the very least, a forensics expert should examine the hospital admission records for Stanley Ann Dunham, as well as the paper and ink formulation on the original long form birth certificate.
Do these requests seem unreasonable? Not at all as one considers that, when enemies of George W. Bush began to question his Texas Air National Guard service, they demanded copies of his service records. He then released them, and they continued to question him, demanding hard copies.
So how is it that the “birther” campaign continues to be so fact-resistant? Go ahead, blame the media. Ian Milhiser at Think Progress did — at least the Fox News branch of it:
Earlier this morning, the White House distributed copies of President Obama’s “long form” birth certificate, an effort to quiet anyone in the delusional birther movement who claims that the President was not born in the United States. Indeed, Fox News is already doing its part to feed the birthers’ collective delusion. Immediately after the news broke that Obama’s long form birth certificate is available, Fox ran a banner headline claiming that the White House had only released “what it says” is the President’s birth certificate.
Of course, today’s birther-stoking is nothing new for Fox. As Media Matters reports, Fox has promoted the birther myth in at least 52 different segments.
(Why pick on Fox? They can at least lay claim to being the only media outlet to answer the question, “What does Joey Lawrence think?” And you still think journalism is in decline?)
At TPMDC, Benjy Sarlin points the finger at the Internet itself:
In a predictable turn, conspiracy theorists are now rallying behind a bogus claim that President Obama’s long form birth certificate is a Photoshopped forgery — with a huge helping hand from one of conservative media’s biggest names.
The fringe theory’s rapid spread within hours of the certificate’s release presents almost a perfect example of one of the White House’s justifications for taking on the birther issue — namely, that thanks to the internet, conspiracy theories can migrate quickly from the fringe and into the mainstream if left unchecked.
In this case, it took only hours. The forgery claim appeared to have first started as an offbeat blog post from an Atlanta-based art director at an ad firm, Bryan Michael Nixon, less than two hours after Obama’s statement. By the end of the day it had become a headline on Drudge Report, one of the single most trafficked news sites on the internet. The debunked forgery revelation drew thousands of comments on message boards, migrated to birther and truther conspiracy guru Alex Jones’ site, while a video explanation was viewed over 160,000 times on YouTube.
Michael Tomasky at The Guardian concurred with many others on the left who think the persistence of the rumors has to do with something more sinister and deep-running in American life than even the media: racism.
Far from being satisfied that this ends the matter, the bloggers who depend on this “controversy” for their daily bread will obviously keep at it, finding more and more baroque angles to explore. It is possible, and maybe even probable, that the existence of this certificate will make them — and the Republicans who pander to them – look sillier to a larger percentage of people.
But the problems here are racial paranoia and the bald willingness of politicians to lie in order to stoke it. In at least this one respect, the election of the first African American president, rather than taking us forward, has drawn us back into a cobwebbed and pitiless past, from which there seems no escape.
In a post at The New Yorker, David Remnick pulls no punches in this analysis:
Let’s say what is plainly true (and what the President himself is reluctant to say): these rumors, this industry of fantasy, are designed to arouse a fear of the Other, of an African-American man with a white American mother and a black Kenyan father. Obama, as a politician, is clearly not a radical; he is a center-left pragmatist. If anything, he believes deeply in his capacity to lead with subtle diplomacy and political maneuvering, with a highly realistic sense of the possible; in fact, to many he is maddeningly pragmatic.
The one radical thing about Barack Obama is his race, his name. Of course, there is nothing innately radical about being black or having Hussein as middle name; what is radical is that he has those attributes and is sitting in the Oval Office. And even now, more than two years after the fact, this is deeply disturbing to many people, and, at the same time, the easiest way to arouse visceral opposition to him. Let’s be even plainer: to do what Trump has done (and he is only the latest and loudest and most spectacularly hirsute) is a conscious form of race-baiting, of fear-mongering. And if that makes Donald Trump proud, then what does that say for him?
Or what does it say for us? Are we misreading the man that Spy magazine famously dubbed the “short-fingered vulgarian” way back in the 1980s? Are we misunderestimating the man who has monopolized an outsized portion of a vast media space in recent weeks and forced the hand of the President of the United States? The Donald himself wrote to Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter this month — in Sharpie — that “you never got the ‘Trump Thing’.” Perhaps we don’t get it either.
Perhaps, but it’s hard to believe.
By PETER CATAPANO
Can Hawaii really be considered a state? Does anybody really believe that a volcanic island chain — described in Wikipedia as “physiographically and ethnologically part of the Polynesian subregion of Oceania,” a place that does not observe daylight savings time — is the sort of thing the founding fathers had in mind? And what is it doing all the way out there anyway?
O.K., I made that up. But judging from the goings-on this week, it is not too far-fetched to think questions like these might be floating around the opinion-sphere in coming days.
Because history has shown us that beliefs die hard.
For instance, if you were of a certain ideological bent, and believed, say, that participation in American politics required a certain type of background — a firm grasp of history combined with a sort of moral or philosophical drive, or at least a character forged in scholarship and public service, then you would have not thought it possible that this man could become governor of California:
Even though this man had done so before him, and then served two terms as one of the most popular presidents in American history.
And if after all that, you still possessed the aforementioned belief, then you would certainly not think it possible that this man could be seriously considered as a possible candidate for the nation’s highest office.
Because beliefs die hard. Take for instance the belief that Barack Obama is not an American-born citizen and is not legally eligible to hold the office he already holds, a topic that Donald Trump, in his media barnstorming in the past few weeks, latched onto like a pit bull with lockjaw.
The Trump-fueled din surrounding the questioning of the fact of the president’s birth became so great that the White House, clearly exasperated, released his long-form birth certificate to the public, upon news of which Trump exulted, “Today I am very proud of myself. I have accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish. … .”
Trump also requested that Obama release his academic records, implying that the president’s Ivy League career was based on something other than merit, unleashing a second wave of outrage among pundits. But now, at last, the presidential birth matter could be put to rest, as Jon Stewart said this week, “thrice and for all.” Right? Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic, among others, quickly noted his skepticism:
I would be shocked if this kills off the birthers. It’s worth remembering that birtherism, itself, is just a mutation of the still current theory that Obama is a Muslim. It’s likely that the “delay” in releasing the long-form certificate will be taken as evidence of yet another, or perhaps even the same, conspiracy.
This isn’t about facts.
An editorial at The Los Angeles Times was one of many that expressed similar skepticism:
[W]e’re under no illusion — and neither is Obama — that the rumor will be entirely quelled. “I know that there’s going to be a segment of people for which, no matter what we put out, this issue will not be put to rest,” the president said at an extraordinary briefing.
That “segment” may turn out to be sizable. A shocking number of Americans give credence to the utterly unfounded notion that the president was born outside the United States — in Kenya, by some accounts — and smuggled into Hawaii, where his birth documents were fabricated. A CBS/New York Times poll released this month found that a quarter of all Americans think Obama was not born in the United States. Among Republicans and “tea party” supporters, the figure was 45 percent.
True to that prediction, there followed plenty of commentary like this, by Carol A. Taber, the head of an organization called “Family Security Matters,” at The American Thinker:
In my opinion, the Obama supporters are very concerned … that whatever he releases as a birth certificate simply must be forensically tested. An honest man does not fear a forensics evaluation of his birth certificate.
President Reagan was right when he said, “Trust, but verify.”
President Obama’s long form birth certificate must be tested forensically.
At the very least, a forensics expert should examine the hospital admission records for Stanley Ann Dunham, as well as the paper and ink formulation on the original long form birth certificate.
Do these requests seem unreasonable? Not at all as one considers that, when enemies of George W. Bush began to question his Texas Air National Guard service, they demanded copies of his service records. He then released them, and they continued to question him, demanding hard copies.
So how is it that the “birther” campaign continues to be so fact-resistant? Go ahead, blame the media. Ian Milhiser at Think Progress did — at least the Fox News branch of it:
Earlier this morning, the White House distributed copies of President Obama’s “long form” birth certificate, an effort to quiet anyone in the delusional birther movement who claims that the President was not born in the United States. Indeed, Fox News is already doing its part to feed the birthers’ collective delusion. Immediately after the news broke that Obama’s long form birth certificate is available, Fox ran a banner headline claiming that the White House had only released “what it says” is the President’s birth certificate.
Of course, today’s birther-stoking is nothing new for Fox. As Media Matters reports, Fox has promoted the birther myth in at least 52 different segments.
(Why pick on Fox? They can at least lay claim to being the only media outlet to answer the question, “What does Joey Lawrence think?” And you still think journalism is in decline?)
At TPMDC, Benjy Sarlin points the finger at the Internet itself:
In a predictable turn, conspiracy theorists are now rallying behind a bogus claim that President Obama’s long form birth certificate is a Photoshopped forgery — with a huge helping hand from one of conservative media’s biggest names.
The fringe theory’s rapid spread within hours of the certificate’s release presents almost a perfect example of one of the White House’s justifications for taking on the birther issue — namely, that thanks to the internet, conspiracy theories can migrate quickly from the fringe and into the mainstream if left unchecked.
In this case, it took only hours. The forgery claim appeared to have first started as an offbeat blog post from an Atlanta-based art director at an ad firm, Bryan Michael Nixon, less than two hours after Obama’s statement. By the end of the day it had become a headline on Drudge Report, one of the single most trafficked news sites on the internet. The debunked forgery revelation drew thousands of comments on message boards, migrated to birther and truther conspiracy guru Alex Jones’ site, while a video explanation was viewed over 160,000 times on YouTube.
Michael Tomasky at The Guardian concurred with many others on the left who think the persistence of the rumors has to do with something more sinister and deep-running in American life than even the media: racism.
Far from being satisfied that this ends the matter, the bloggers who depend on this “controversy” for their daily bread will obviously keep at it, finding more and more baroque angles to explore. It is possible, and maybe even probable, that the existence of this certificate will make them — and the Republicans who pander to them – look sillier to a larger percentage of people.
But the problems here are racial paranoia and the bald willingness of politicians to lie in order to stoke it. In at least this one respect, the election of the first African American president, rather than taking us forward, has drawn us back into a cobwebbed and pitiless past, from which there seems no escape.
In a post at The New Yorker, David Remnick pulls no punches in this analysis:
Let’s say what is plainly true (and what the President himself is reluctant to say): these rumors, this industry of fantasy, are designed to arouse a fear of the Other, of an African-American man with a white American mother and a black Kenyan father. Obama, as a politician, is clearly not a radical; he is a center-left pragmatist. If anything, he believes deeply in his capacity to lead with subtle diplomacy and political maneuvering, with a highly realistic sense of the possible; in fact, to many he is maddeningly pragmatic.
The one radical thing about Barack Obama is his race, his name. Of course, there is nothing innately radical about being black or having Hussein as middle name; what is radical is that he has those attributes and is sitting in the Oval Office. And even now, more than two years after the fact, this is deeply disturbing to many people, and, at the same time, the easiest way to arouse visceral opposition to him. Let’s be even plainer: to do what Trump has done (and he is only the latest and loudest and most spectacularly hirsute) is a conscious form of race-baiting, of fear-mongering. And if that makes Donald Trump proud, then what does that say for him?
Or what does it say for us? Are we misreading the man that Spy magazine famously dubbed the “short-fingered vulgarian” way back in the 1980s? Are we misunderestimating the man who has monopolized an outsized portion of a vast media space in recent weeks and forced the hand of the President of the United States? The Donald himself wrote to Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter this month — in Sharpie — that “you never got the ‘Trump Thing’.” Perhaps we don’t get it either.
Perhaps, but it’s hard to believe.
30 Apr 2011, 11:01 am
30 Apr 2011, 11:26 am
zer0netgain wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Well you definitely have me convinced about one thing - that you have Asperger's. Geez Louise! I thought I could get obsessive about ancient history! I found getting laid relieves a great amount of the monomania our kind more often than not suffers from.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Wow. If only you were a neurologist or some other guy who could officially Dx AS, I'd be taken care of.
The details sound more like paranoia ...
Going back to the longer post. Seriously, do people have TIME to go to the suggested lengths to deceive people AND build a career? Do they think that way? They don't. All these theories require leaders to have a mindset that would have disabled them and committed them to a mental ward so long ago they would never have been able to rise to power. The people i know who tangle webs like that tend to trip themselves into irrelence. Wrapping that many people into their power scheme really isn't possible, at least not in the time and space that is the modern US barring some tragic rallying point, and certainly not in an information age. And so many things you claim to be the reasonable and logical counters don't look that way at all to me.
For every argument in the long post about Obama's sins, I could counter. But would it make a difference? I take heart in the fact that the conspiracy arguments don't begin and end with Obama, so with you it isn't so much about politics or race.
30 Apr 2011, 4:59 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
30 Apr 2011, 6:34 pm
