If it seems too good to be true….

Is it a coincidence that, as the birther issue reaches an ever larger audience, a purported Kenyan birth certificate, complete with raised seal, suddenly pops up?  My suspicion is that the birth certificate is about as reliable as those emails I routinely receive from Nigeria, assuring me that, if I just hand over my bank account or credit card numbers, I’ll receive millions of dollars . . . very soon.  Much as it would be rather fun if it were the real birth certificate, even if I were a wild-assed gambler, I’d bet against this one.

Speaking of the birther issue, Dave Freddoso makes a very good point about the media’s collective guffaw when it comes to the birthers:

Twenty-eight percent of Republicans believe President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States, and 30 percent are “not sure,” according to this poll.

But before liberals begin to smirk, here’s a poll from 2007, in which 35 percent of Democrats said that President Bush knew in advance about the 9/11 attacks, and 26 percent were not sure.

So if 58 percent of Republicans are living in a delusional fantasy world because they are out of power, then 61 percent of Democrats were doing the same thing until just recently (perhaps they still are). It’s a clean, apples-to-apples comparison with a clear lesson: People get a bit kooky when they’re out of power, Democrats about 3 points kookier — which is probably within the margin of error.

The only real difference between the birthers and the truthers is that the birthers’ claim is actually susceptible to proof.  If Obama releases his long form certificate it’s all over.  By not doing so, he waves a red flag in front of the birther bulls so that the media can target them for public ridicule.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. suek says

    Personally, I’m totally willing to believe that the Kenyan birth certificate is genuine – if it will get the matter some time in a court of law that will actually consider the question.

    At that point, let the cards fall where they may.

  2. suek says

    This is a comment made by “spook” on an AT article ( http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/08/antibirthers_are_beginning_to.html )

    Actually, it wasn’t something I’d noticed, but he’s right.

    “I just noticed something. The furor isn’t being KEPT alive and fanned by “birthers”. The work was going along quietly, perfectly, until somebody decides to bring “it” into the light of day for the exact purpose of discreditting it. It was a minor, fringe-type issue, and the fringers weren’t screaming, not like the ANTI-BIRTHERS are now. Why rail against the stupid? No, the issue itself is made all the more suspicious by this entire dynamic; fringe lunatics do not require the carefully crafted tactics of a political machine to discredit them, they’re lunatics.

    Scared? Who knows? Nervous? You bet your ass.”

  3. Charles Martel says

    I am Helen Losse and I approved this message:

    Your skepticism about the Kenyan birth certificate is a manifestation of your white racism. If the certificate had been issued by Germany or Norway, you would have automatically accepted it because it comes from a white country.

    Also your slur against caring, legitimate financial experts who are working to help move Nigerian assets—which, by the way, were created by white imperialism—abroad so that they might yield a greater return is yet another example of your white racism.

    (Say, speaking of white racism, have you ever noticed how insulting it is for white men like Bruce Willis or Jesse Ventura to shave their heads bald when it’s pretty obvious that a.) they don’t look half as good shorn as African American bald men do, which means that b.) they know it and are trying to diss African American baldies by doing such a bad imitation? Just sayin’.)

  4. Larry Sheldon says

    Hurdles:

    Hawaii has certified that he was born there.

    Congress has certified that he won the election and is qualified to serve.

    He has been installed.

    There are a limited number of ways to remove a sitting President:
    Insurrection
    Impeachment and conviction.

    But first and foremost: Joe Biden.

  5. Mike Devx says

    Larry Sheldon, #5:
    > But first and foremost: Joe Biden.

    Joe Biden speaking at an honorary dinner at the University of Cambridge:

    “So, in closing, let me say, Thank You to all of the alumni for offering me this chance to… Hey! Down there at table three! It’s Stephen Hawking, everyone! Guys, just gotta say, we’re all blessed to be in the presence of the smartest man on Earth. I mean, really. Truly. Stephen, buddy, hey, why don’t you leap on up here and wow us with a few of those golden words! C’mon up, big guy. Don’t be shy!”

  6. says

    (This is Bookworm, and I approve this message:)

    Mike and Charles: You need to find a good comedy club and get a two-fer act worked up. You guys make my day every time you go into satire mode.

  7. suek says

    >>Hawaii has certified that he was born there.>>

    Not true. The secretary of health in Hawaii – whose responsibility it is to maintain the birth records – has stated that he has seen the original birth certificate and that it is valid. If you check out this site:

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697

    it will give you a better idea of why that statement may mean nothing at all, and in fact, could be completely deceptive.

  8. suek says

    Larry, there isn’t a question about the birth certificate being _real_, it’s a question of which birth certificate was issued. That has not been clarified. It’s entirely possible that Obama could have been born in Kenya and still have a valid Hawaiian birth certificate. The situation is really more complicated that just “is it valid or not”. Obama’s younger sister also has a Hawaiian birth certificate and she is _known_ to have been born in Indonesia.

    Read my link.

    Also, regarding the birth certificate, there isn’t a question of whether he’s a US citizen, it’s a question of whether he’s considered _ by law _ to be a _natural born_ US citizen. That’s the item in question, not his citizenship. The Constitution requires the status of “natural born” citizen for eligibility to be president. The determination of “natural born” status has been determined by Congress, and has changed several times. You have to go by the law that was in effect when the individual was born. McCain, for example, had slightly different rules applied to him than Obama should have.

    Actually, his US citizenship is also possibly in question, but for different reasons which are totally different from the birth certificate issue.

  9. Larry Sheldon says

    Those questions would all be fascinating if the program was “CSI Washington, District of Chicago”.

    But it isn’t, so they are not.

    What is interesting is the degree to which apparently intelligent people are paying attention to the smoke screens, instead of the destruction of our way of life and the installation of a dictatorship that Idi Amin only dreamed of.

    Was the beer bust important?

    Omnly if you didn’t notice what Conrgess was doing at the same time.

    Is the Clinton-era lead in Michelle’s garden important? Only if you didn’t notice what the other czars (or is it tsars?) were abolishing.

  10. suek says

    >>What is interesting is the degree to which apparently intelligent people are paying attention to the smoke screens, instead of the destruction of our way of life and the installation of a dictatorship that Idi Amin only dreamed of.>>

    Not so.

    You say:

    “Congress has certified that he won the election and is qualified to serve.

    He has been installed.”

    This is true. And it certainly raises questions about whether it can be undone, if someone were to establish that in fact he was never eligible in the first place.

    “There are a limited number of ways to remove a sitting President:
    Insurrection
    Impeachment and conviction.”

    With this Congress, impeachment and conviction are not a realistic consideration. If there were to be an overwhelming change in the majority party in 2010, maybe, but unless that happens, impeachment is simply not going to happen. Additionally, it would not change any presidential actions that already been done.

    That leaves insurrection. We may get there. Personally, I’d prefer to work on the ineligibility issue, which would – if proven – undo much of what Obama has enacted. Maybe. Obviously there is much to consider, but insurrection is not a desirable option, imo.

  11. Larry Sheldon says

    At the risk of seeming to be repetitious, tedious, and monotonous, there are but two ways to remove a sitting President.

    No matter how bad we want it, no matter how much he deserves it.

    And meanwhile, behind this smokescreen, I see me not able to get medical care because I am too old and too sick.

  12. suek says

    So…we’re actually on the same page – we both want Obama out.

    You position is that even if the birth certificate proved without a doubt that Obama is not eligible to be president, he would not be removed from office? Is that correct? and for that reason, it’s pointless to pursue the matter?

    If so, then I can’t address the matter. I really don’t know what’s possible or not possible, and if you do, I’d appreciate a link to any info you might have. I still have hope that the courts will function as intended, will examine the matter and make a decision regardless of the fallout. Unfortunately, I can’t rebut your position – you may be right. I hope you’re wrong, but you may not be.

    I don’t see that either of your other options is likely though, and that would mean we’re stuck with him till 2012. I do think the 2010 elections are critical. I just hope that they’re honest elections, and I’m not at all confident that they will be.

  13. Larry Sheldon says

    Not even point less.

    Or rather, much worse than pointless.

    Because while we are focused on this, he is issuing orders turning over the contents of our computers (look at the “cash for clunkers” orders), outlawing care for people that need it (old and sick…or old or sick are now to be shovel ready) and on and on and on.

    He might be able to carry it off any way, but having all of us stare at the smoke is making is a lot easier.

    Ever watch somebody working with honey bees?

  14. Larry Sheldon says

    The courts act? On what law? Which courts? Ninety Circuit? Sotamayor and company?
    We elected him. (Well, a few of us tried to avoid it, but couldn’t get enough people to use their heads.) But the way it worked up until we elected him was, we elected him.

    The parties are putting up candidates that agree with him so I don’t see much hope there either.

    And as long as we are wasting our energies on lost causes, it doesn’t much matter.

    But I do wonder at the amount of energy being brought to bear on people like Sarah Palin–from “right” and from “left”.

    If we (or you and your children) survive this, it would make interesting reading.

    Regarding the honesty of elections….as long as we worry about birth certificates, ACORN will worry about the elections.

    And “improving” our position by 5 percent is not going to cut it.

  15. suek says

    >>Ever watch somebody working with honey bees?>>

    Not only watched, but worked with honey bees myself.

    I see you offering only one solution. If in fact there _is_ only one solution, then so be it. I don’t like it, but so be it.

    I’m really hoping you’re wrong, and another solution through the ineligibility factor is still available. I’m not as hopeless as you are.

    Yet.

  16. Larry Sheldon says

    I’m not sure I offered any solutions, or did more than point to where one might be.

    I did try to say that being suckered into every smokescreen was not one.

    If there is one available to us, it is in taking back our parties, puytting up, funding, and sporting candidates that are for us and our way of life.

  17. Larry Sheldon says

    And I’m not hopeless.

    I am discouraged.

    And I get moreso as the days go by and the joules are expended on dead-end-no-hope searches form a Holy Grail in the enemy’s dungheap.

  18. says

    And as long as we are wasting our energies on lost causes, it doesn’t much matter.

    You aren’t the person able to judge what is or is not a lost cause.

    I’m not sure I offered any solutions, or did more than point to where one might be.

    If you aren’t going to lead or follow… well you know what comes afterwards.

    And I get moreso as the days go by and the joules are expended on dead-end-no-hope searches form a Holy Grail in the enemy’s dungheap.

    Which means your attempt to demoralize others are actions aiding and abetting the enemy. As would be the case in any war, let alone this conflict.

    If there is one available to us, it is in taking back our parties, puytting up, funding, and sporting candidates that are for us and our way of life.

    When you have a specific recommendation, be sure to mention it. Until then, you’re one of those people in military councils constantly talking about the problems, never offering a better solution, and continues constant criticism of the current plan, saying, “no, I don’t have a better solution, but I know what I wish would be a better solution”.

    Eventually, people will go with what they think will work because the planning stage should only take up so much time with useless argument. It’s not for you to tell them no. You don’t have the authority. And even if you did, it would not be wise. Mutual negotiations over mutual self-interest are much better than arbitrary judgments.

    People said the same things as you, Larry, about how resources from Afghanistan was being diverted to the mirage and distraction and quagmire in Iraq. Doesn’t make it so. Only makes it an opinion.

  19. says

    I got lost in this thread. My sense is that we are all agreed that it would be a huge mistake to focus all of our energy on a birth certificate, which is a dicey proposition at best, when we know with certainty that the policies Obama is currently pursuing are damaging to America’s very fiber.

    It is disheartening what’s going on Larry, but there’s no doubt but that people are getting agitated, which is a good thing. I’ve been enjoying videos of Democratic congress people getting pilloried by citizens asking the right questions: why the rush? how can we pay for it? why haven’t you read the bill? will these changes apply to you too? The great thing is that, as we keep beating the drums, others are hearing the noise.

  20. suek says

    >>My sense is that we are all agreed that it would be a huge mistake to focus all of our energy on a birth certificate, which is a dicey proposition at best>>

    Well, then there’s me. First, I don’t think there’s a heck of a lot of energy being focused on the birth certificate issue at the present time. Momentum does seem to be slowly building, but it seemed to start as a very low peep-peep and hasn’t yet even reached the “cluck cluck CLUCK” stage, much less the “COCKADOODLE DOO” point!

    As for being a dicey proposition – you may be right. It doesn’t seem to me that that’s reason enough to drop the matter. It isn’t over till it’s over, and I don’t see the fat lady in the wings yet. If others are willing to put in the effort, I’m certainly willing to give whatever support I can. If it fails, then it shouldn’t be for lack of trying.

    Do I think we should join with whoever will join with us on August 22 to try to impress Congress with the fact that we _don’t_ want socialism??? Absolutely. And if there’s anything else I can do, I want to know what it is. Count me in for whatever I’m able to do.

  21. suek says

    >>I’m not sure I offered any solutions, or did more than point to where one might be.>>

    You stated that he was a legitimate president, and that there were only two ways to get him out.

    You’re now saying that neither way is a solution?

    We know one of them isn’t going to work – at least any time soon. What does that leave us with?

  22. says

    The reason why I don’t respect Larry’s sentiments here deserves an explanation.

    In any conflict, whether you call it a war or not, each side tends to become intermingled. However, usually the losing side adapts the fastest by picking up the winner’s tactics and methods, starts emulating them, and then winning.

    Now when the winning side is the Democrats and the losing side is us, we have to be particularly careful about just what exactly we are going to emulate from the Demoncrats. The point about not becoming the enemy you fight is a valid one, but it isn’t a guaranteed path for victory. Nothing is in the chaos of strife. Nothing is guaranteed. It’s a paradox. You have to become more like your enemy to defeat that enemy, but you don’t want to become too much like him. It breaks down in very simple concrete steps.

    If you can adopt the enemy’s tactics and win, do so. But don’t adopt their philosophy. Understand their philosophy, but don’t fall prey to it. Don’t start believing it, don’t sympathize with it, and surely don’t use it as a justification.

    What Larry here did is the classic authoritarian centralized control justification. Some people are wasting resources. Wealth, medicine, capital, etc. Well, we can’t have that. It must be made efficient and workable. We’ll do it by centralized control. The centralized leader will decide who gets to use their free time on issues to attack Democrats. There will be a consensus on which attack methodology is best, and no dissenting views will be allowed any resources to conduct foolish lost causes.

    That is the classic authoritarian centralized control justification.

    It’s one thing to mop around talking about doom and gloom. It’s another thing to start sympathizing with the enemy’s ideas of what is right and wrong, and then preaching it to your fellow ‘comrades’ as why they should not be doing what they have been doing.

  23. says

    What is interesting is the degree to which apparently intelligent people are paying attention to the smoke screens, instead of the destruction of our way of life and the installation of a dictatorship that Idi Amin only dreamed of.

    Not even point less.

    Or rather, much worse than pointless.

    Because while we are focused on this, he is issuing orders turning over the contents of our computers (look at the “cash for clunkers” orders), outlawing care for people that need it (old and sick…or old or sick are now to be shovel ready) and on and on and on.

    He might be able to carry it off any way, but having all of us stare at the smoke is making is a lot easier.

    I’m not going to fight Obama by becoming Obama. I hope I am very clear on this point.

    I will not attempt to suppress other people’s free will for tactical or strategic advantages, like Obama does. Nor will I do so for monetary or authority gains.

    The problem with centralized control is that no man is a god, with the omniscient ability of a god. You cannot know for certain what is or is not, what will be or will not be. Your ability to make decisions then depend upon your perception inputs, which can be corrupted by con men, crooks, and corrupt advisers/lobbyists/politicians (not to mention the purely internal problems). Even had Obama been a good man like Bush, the corruption would still have been there. As it was for Bush.

    If people want to fight against Obama, they’re just going to have to tolerate a bit of inefficiency with people as they are, and not try to make people as you want them to be.

    It doesn’t mean you should allow such inefficiency to generate a mob or a battlefield tactical defeat, nor does it mean you cannot attempt to convince people to do it your way, but it does mean people cannot fight Obama by adopting Obama’s philosophy of what is right or wrong.

    And it’s not right to make strategic judgments of worth concerning energy, capital, and medicine based upon what some centralized authority deems “wasteful” or not. It’s not right not least of all because it won’t work. Individual decisions work better. We may not like every decision people make, but they have a right to make it and we shouldn’t attempt to micromanage their decisions on what they are going to do with their life, time, and resources.

    And if that is the case which so called conservatives attempt to argue against Obama’s rule, why wouldn’t it be the case in terms of political strategy? Has political power become such a hot commodity that people are willing to sacrifice anything to it?

    The Democrats are. I am not.

  24. Trish says

    I believe the reason Obama is not producing his birth certificate is this: Barry, though born in Hawaii (and therefore legally OK to hold the highest office in the land) is illegitimate… that is, his mother was NEVER MARRIED to his Kenyan father. Obama does not want to be labeled as America’s only BASTARD president, even in today’s era of “anything goes.”

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply