Blogs and Stories
Catering to Obama Haters
Saul Loeb / Getty Images
Lunatic right-wing “birthers” have gotten a toehold on CNN and Fox News, and even the McCain campaign investigated their claims. Paul Campos on why the media kowtows to the far-right fringe.
Earlier this week, Hardball news anchor Chris Matthews grilled Rep. John Campbell (R-CA) about whether Campbell believes Barack Obama was born in the United States. Campbell, who is co-sponsoring a bill that would require presidential candidates to produce birth certificates proving their eligibility for office, dodged the question no less than seven times before conceding that “as far as I know” Obama was born in the USA.
An exasperated Matthews then started waving a copy of Obama’s birth certificate on camera, while excoriating Campbell for “playing to the crazies” in his party.
It’s been a good week for the (apparently numerous) crazies who believe, against all evidence and common sense, that Barack Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii. After fermenting for months on numerous right-wing websites, so-called “birther” conspiracy theories are beginning to draw attention from the mainstream media, which is not limiting itself to pointing out how preposterous these theories are.
The mainstream media is well aware that the slightest attention to, or tolerance of, nutty left-wing conspiracy theories would be used as yet another stick with which to beat it.
For example, last week prominent CNN anchor Lou Dobbs lent a sympathetic microphone to professional lunatic Alan Keyes and his lawyer Orly Taitz, who are suing Obama to try to force the president to produce a “valid” birth certificate. The bloviating Dobbs, who clearly relishes his role as a pseudo-populist gasbag, commiserated with his guests: “Why not just provide a copy of his birth certificate? Then all this nonsense goes away,” Dobbs claimed, absurdly enough (as if people who believe in crazy conspiracy theories are ever deterred by facts). “But he doesn’t. So none of us know what the reality is,” Dobbs whined.
A piece of that reality was on frightening display earlier this month, at a town meeting in Delaware, during which another GOP congressman, Mike Castle, came face to face with the screeching madness that seems to be infecting significant portions of the Republican base. (Dobbs used a video of this bizarre scene as evidence for his claim that there are legitimate questions about Obama’s legal right to be president.)
An instructive comparison can be made between the right-wing Birthers and their (mostly) left-wing cousins, the 9/11 “Truthers.” The Truthers, who have constructed a myriad of theories in their attempts to prove that the 9/11 attacks were actually carried out by the U.S. government, have almost completely failed to generate any mainstream media attention.
For example, a check of the Nexis news database for the first seven months of 2009 reveals nearly ten times as many stories about Obama’s birth certificate, in comparison to the number of stories that appeared in the first seven months of 2002 referring to any claim about a 9/11 conspiracy.
Furthermore, mainstream media stories mentioning Truther claims have always been uniformly dismissive—and properly so. The claim that the Bush administration flew commercial jets into the World Trade Center (or, in more baroque versions, missiles disguised as jets by holographic technology), to cover up the “fact” that they then brought down the towers by controlled demolition, has always been the most blatant sort of paranoid delusion.
But such beliefs are certainly no more delusional than the claim that Barack Obama’s family inexplicably engaged in a decades-long elaborate cover-up of the “fact” that he was born in Kenya (or in some versions, Indonesia).
Ask yourself this: What would have happened if, in July of 2002, Lou Dobbs would have conducted respectful interviews with various Truthers, in the course of which Dobbs called on the Bush administration to prove by documentary evidence that the U.S. government hadn’t actually carried out the 9/11 attacks?
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Serena Was Totally Justified
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Scalia's Death Row Lunacy
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
She's Lying
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Whatever the merits or lack thereof to the birth certificate case, Campos' comparison of it to the 9/11 Bush conspiracy "Truthers" theory is a major stretch.
It would be a hell of a lot more credible that a paper record could be gotten to in heavily Democratic Hawaii, than that the Bush administration could have or would have engineered the flying of three jets into three major buildings.
Meanwhile, the birth certificate people have a much longer list of documents that they claim have been sealed. And further claim that a squad of heavy hitter attorneys have been sent after them to silence the inquiry.
I have read several refutations of the reason the "original full length birth certificate" has not been produced. And there are at least two different and separate reasons offered.
I have not seen any responses to the alleged sealing of the following documents:
Passport files
University of Chicago Law School scholarly articles
Harvard Law Review articles
Harvard Law School records
Columbia University records
Columbia University senior thesis, "Soviet Nuclear Disarmament"
Occidental College records, including financial aid that he may have received
Punahou School records, where Mr. Obama attended from the fifth grade until he finished high school
Noelani Elementary School records, where Barack Obama attended kindergarten (according to the Hawaii Department of Education, students must submit a birth certificate to register -- but parents may bring a passport or student visa if the child is from a foreign country)
Complete files and schedules of his years as an Illinois state senator from 1997 to 2004
Obama's client list from during his time in private practice with the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill and Gallard
Illinois State Bar Association records
Baptism records
Obama/Dunham marriage license
Obama/Dunham divorce documents
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license
Soetero/Dunham Adoption records
Well we still havent gotten alot of Bush's records WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE. Not to mention his military or Yale records. Daddy juts kept on covering up for ol W. How many people would have to be in on this (not to mention how many govts) to make this work?
That's not exactly true. We do have his Yale records that include his cumulative score for his four years at Yale. Just a little FYI, while you are all obsessed with what a dunce he and pretty much every Republican except Powell is,it might be interesting to note, that his grade average was 1 pt better than John Kerry's who attended at the same time. Also he got into Harvard business school with some help probably as did Kerry in law school as did Ted Kennedy at Harvard ( if it were not for daddy Joe's money , Teddy would have been out on his ass by yr 2). Bush also had his military records open for the public to see and judge. Whether or not there were strings pulled for that is another matter, but they were open and he did allow some of the ugly stuff out as well...Rather's stuff notwithstanding.
As to Obama, it would be simple to disprove his citizenship through passport records for his father and mother at the time of his birth as well as the records of when he came into the country(for the conspiracy idiots). If there are no records of travel during that time by any of the parties, then this matter is the same as Bill Clinton and Mena , AR. Nice story, good for a fiction book , but fiction nonetheless.
I don't like Obama, but please, we pay too much attention to these whack jobs. Why Matthews even bothered to interview Campbell , makes me wonder about Matthews. That bill would 've had to go to committee anyway and I'm sure Boehner and some of the more sane guys would have it withdrawn.
I don't know nutin bout birthin no babies............
Am I to understand that you think there is merit to this "birther" thing? The man has been in public office for years--there has never been any mention of anything relating to this. The theory has been overwhelmingly debunked by every respectable official, unofficial, legal means possible. Are you suggesting by this ludicrous list that you put out that eveything about Obama is a sham--that none of his life ever happened? He is the Manchurian Candidate? You sound like you could work for some secret-service of the loonies.
I haven't a clue if there is merit to the argument. But, it doesn't seem to have been cleanly refuted. I cite specifically in a post below the two separate and different explanations I have seen put forward by the State of Hawaii for not releasing the so called "original long form" birth certificate.
As to Obama having been in public office for years, being a "natural born" citizen is only required for the offices of president and vice president.
Chan, booby: ..."Secret Service of the loonies." I love it.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
By this reasoning and the reasoning the state of Hawaii has produced, nobody in Hawaii is a citizen of the USA.
Oh, good grief. Why doesn't he show us all his report cards while he's at it? Let's just keep him busy digging up papers for the next three and a half years, why don't we? The "alleged sealing," you say, without saying who makes these allegations because they're LOOONS!
I don't hold any brief with the allegations. I have observed that two different answers have been given by the Hawaiian bureau that maintains the record.
The first answer was that they would show the "short form" but not the original "long form" birth certificate because the long form is only made available to persons with a direct legitimate interest in same.
But, more recently I have read a new explanation. That is that in 2001, the State of Hawaii eliminated all their old paper records and replaced them with electronic ones.
Why two separate and different explanations? Also, technically, one would expect that the electronic record would be a digital copy of the original-- a PDF or JPG or such. Not a summation of some information from the original.
As to that long list of documents allegedly not released, most presumably would not require any action on the part of the president accept giving permission.
The allegation about some of the school and university records is that Obama applied as a foreign student. This apparently would have given him financial assistance and/or special consideration for admission.
If he had indeed applied as a foreign student, hen the conclusion would be he either lied for special consideration. Or, of course worse, told the truth.
The right wing conspirators were able to keep the White Water investigation going for years, demanding the Clintons to dig up their old papers again and again. So I would not be surprise this nonsense will go on for many more years until Obama is out of the office. That's what they do. Distraction, wasting public fund and time. But that's what you do when you are out of power and have no idea for solving important problems for the nation, you distract and destruct.
I do genealogy research, and sent for my mother's birth record from Alabama and got what most ALL states are not using. AN ELECTRONIC form. Thank God, she died years ago or I guess I would have to tell her that it proves nothing and is not legitimate. It was legitimate enough for the state of Florida to issue a death record. It was legitimate enough for SS to issue her a # and use it for 30 yrs. When I asked the lady at the state office if I could get the original form (long form), she said this is all that they issue. And, guess what, other than the fact it says ALABAMA, it is almost identical to President Obama's. Years ago you got a copy of the original, my old one from years ago, looks like a negative, but when I recently sent for one, it too looks like the President's. Send for your own and see what you get. ENOUGH!!!!!
SHEWOLF884 is exactly correct, Between my six children and myself - we were born in 3 different states in five different decades, and the various forms look very, very different - even among the five birth certificates that were issued from the same state but notabably from 3 different decades. While my birth certificate is the "long form" - it is actually black with white lettering - it is an exact duplicate of the form that my mother obviously filled out in the hospital - saves the state the time and money of retyping the info. My children's certificates however are extremely different. One child has a sophisticated form that contains the same information that is given on the "long form" - for my other 5 children however, their birth certificates give very, very litte information - not even the time of birth is given. At one point is the 1990's we had misplaced a child's birth certificate and the replacement form we applied for and paid for, doesn't even list my child's parents names on it, just their name and the date and county of birth - not even the city!! The reason for this is that some states feel that releasing the information on the "long form" might violate privacy issues. In the age of identity theft, this policy is a good one - think of how many places request "your mother's madian name", something only you should know but any secretary could get by looking through school files, etc. if the info is on the birth certificate. Also, when applying for a passport, etc - it does not matter what form the birth certificate is - what the agency requesting the info is looking for is the "official seal". When people carry on about this birth certificate not being the "long form" - it's very, very obvious that their life experiences have been very, very limited. What is really hypocritical however is the fact that John McCain was actually born in Panama - he is a natural born citizen under the law - but still he's the one who was actually not born in the "USA" - this whole issue is really silly.
Right. ...........Uh, some guy said..........that Obama...............yeah, that is the truth cuz..............some guy said............
What is the obsession with paper records? They can be manipulated just like electronic ones. However, both are incredibly unlikely.
What do the loonies believe that there is a conspiracy to do? Fix health care? I understand if you don't like the way he is handling a particular issue, then make those specific objections known. Attacking the core of who he is and his whole life, his legitimacy as a patriotic US citizen, that really indicates another sort of intent.
In Hawaii, the governor is a republican, isn't she?
Of the six governors of Hawaii since it became a state in 1959, the first was a Republican, serving a little less than 3 years, and the current governor is also a Republican, serving almost 7 years. All the other governors were Democrats.
All of its current senators and representatives in Congress are Democrats and I believe that has always or almost always been the case. State and local governments in Hawaii are preponderantly to overwhelmingly Democrat.
Wikipedia states, "Hawaii is primarily dominated by the Democratic Party and has supported Democrats in 10 of the 12 presidential elections in which it has participated. In 2004, John Kerry won the state's 4 electoral votes by a margin of 9 percentage points with 54% of the vote. Every county in the state supported the Democratic candidate. In 2008, Hawaii native Barack Obama also won here, by an overwhelming 45 point lead: 72% for the Democrat and 27% for Republican John McCain."
Wow. Do you really think that if The President provided all that info, you loonies would let it go? No of course not.
You never thought about this when Bush would not release his military records; McCain would not release his birth certificate, his military records.
Face it loony tunes, you can't get over having a Black President. This is the bottom line with you people.
What a pathetic bunch of ignorant racists you are.
Yelling "racists," WaltB, is the last refuge of Leftists without an answer.
We yell racist for the simple reason that when you clowns have been given documentary proof, and when we've used reason to debunk this notion, and you keep up with it, racism is the only logical explanation for your pigheaded ignorance.
ChanRobt: The truth hurts, huh?
AlanD2,
I must commend you. Of all the responses and retorts on this threat, your "The truth hurts, huh?" was the most original, most carefully phrased and perfectly thought out that I've read.
You are superb at reasoned debate, AlanD2, and I hope to read you bon mots here often.
With thanks and appreciation,
-ChanRobt
TYPO CORRECTO: ...on this thread...
TYPO CORRECTO ...to read your bon mots...
@ SFGiants,
Please Google "non sequitur". ChanRobt is raising good points about the missing/incomplete documentation, which it is worth noting that other presidents have provided. You're lowering the level of discourse with your muddled logic, name calling and sanctimony.
e.g. "clowns", "pigheaded ignorance"
Here's a quick and dirty answer to nearly every listed item - that is protected personal information. It's a federal offense to share educational information without permission.
Frankly, the Truther movement looks like the Law of Gravity compared to the Birther (Racist) movement. I'm not saying either is with merit, but the latter has been so roundly rejected that one must go to great lengths to remain willfully ignorant in the face of such unequivocal evidence.
Yes, it's understood that most of that information is protected. It would require the president to give permission for its release.
Just like the tax returns and other private financial information presidential candidates are required to release. Or, choose to.
You are not serious. Who the hell do you think you are? The secretary of states of all 50 states where satisfied with all the documentation that their states needed to prove eligibility and that is the law. You do not get to ask anybody for anything that is non of your business. Even the president of the United States has some right to privacy and that is why the laws do not require such an intrusive request. The marriage license and divorce documents are public record, as are his legislative record and believe me they where thoroughly looked at by the Hillary people and the McCaine people, that is what they do. He stood before the American people and they voted for him, he is your president unless you want to denounce your citizenship, which is your right. I have a question for you, Orly Taitz was born in the former soviet Union. How do you know she is not a KGB agent planted here to create racial tension in the USA and thus weaken the president. I want to see all her records of naturaliztion and proof that she is not a KGB agent.
Yeah! Orly should show us her Taitz!
Not only do I want to see Orly's docs, I want all of the morons that ask for private information on the President, I want to see EVERYTHING, including their telephone bills and Sunday School attendance records. I want to copies of all of the videos from "C" Street. I want a list of every dime of rent paid by a US member of Congress (actually, they should release that).
GET A LIFE RACIST.
First of all, no presidential candidate or president releases all records that the loonies want. Most of these records are private data that you have no right to and you do not get it from anyone else. ChanRobt, go get all that data from Bush and Cheney and then you can ask for it from Obama.
Bush's Yale records were not released for many years and his average was only slightly higher because he took many easy classes (look at the class list). He ranked below the 50% in any real classes that matter to law schools.
As to the birth cert - I cannot get the long form in CA either (I am 50). They moved to electronic records in CA and only the short form is kept on microfiche. The short form version is valid for all purposes, including passports. Lou Dobbs saying he should produce "evidence" is an outrage as we know he knows that Obama showed his paper birth cert for multiple media outlets, including all the conservative one.
In fact, note that the WSJ, Amercian Spectator, and many others have validated his birth information. Obviously McCain and Clinton had their people check - if there was any chance of it not being valid, they would have run with it. Further, all presidential candidates have an FBI investigation, and clearly the Bush admin FBI would have been quick to raise any issues.
You racists and opportunists need to stop this nonsense. Let the lunatics and conspiracy nuts go back to UFO theories. This is a sickness that should not be encouraged.
pkimelman, you were credible in your arguments and doing just fine until you played the "racist" card.
Now you've called into question everything intelligent your wrote prior to.
Chan, booby: Do you really believe that the birther stuff is not about race? How bloody naive.
roger37,
Was it "about race" when Democrats questioned McCain's citizenship last year because he was born in Panama? Even though the reason he was born there was because his U.S. Navy officer father was on assignment in Panama.
If you changed Obama's color to white and his name to Smith, but kept all the other circumstances of his childhood as they are, the same questions could and probably would be raised by his ideological opponents.
Meanwhile, Roger37, this is meant to be a forum of civil commentary and debate. Addressing someone you disagree with as "booby" does not raise your prestige in such forums.
Learn to debate with intelligence and without insult, or take it back to the Koz where they don't know any better.
@ChanRobt,
Thanks for your rational, reasoned contributions to this discussion. Much appreciated.
natronic, Tina Brown is an first rate and intelligent editor. Beast is generally well edited, well written, and well art directed.
So, I'm a little surprised at how many emotional, irrational, name-calling children are posting here. I'd expected a brighter average clientele. But, there are some intelligent people here on both sides of the debate.
So, we'll just have to work around the barbarians. Obviously some are not ready for self-government. i used to post at tnr.com a lot. Most there are on the opposite side of the aisle from me, but most were pretty smart. And rarely abusive even when the argument got heated.
Your wrong go to the social security office and try to get a lost ss card with the short form, or try to reg a kid in school with just the short form!
OK, I should have said "boobeleh," not "booby."
Your "rational debate" is still racist bullshit.
This user is no longer registered.
ChanRobt, I used the racist term because I believe there is ample evidence that some of the "birthers" are driven by racism and this is a safe "cover". I do not agree that you could get most of these people started if it had been McCain or Bush or another white man. That is not to say all these loonies are racists mind you, just that I do think racism is a factor in this nonsense having legs. The opportunists (like Inhofe and Liz Cheney) are simply playing on fears (of black men), zenophobia, fears of Muslims (many of the birthers also believe he is a Muslim), and victim mentality of the populist side of the Republican base. Yes, victim mentality is a big factor. This is what Rush and Anne Coulter play to - your sorry lives are the fault of immigrants, black men, etc.
Dobbs the Crazy Uncle. Why would a respected journalist like Lou Dobbs but into this nonsense? The answer is simple. It's about SURVIVAL. Have you noticed that most of the news people are young and good looking? In other words, everything that Lou Dobbs isn't. The only way Lou (and all the other aging white reporters) can stay on the air is to get support from right-wing loonies who are pissed off about illegal aliens, people of color, and a panic as they see their influence slipping away. The birth certificate controversy is perfect Cable TV fare--Michael Jackson for political junkies. Lou Dobbs fans take heart, if CNN fired him, they would lose ALL their conservative audience to FOX instead of just most of it. Dobbs "crazy uncle" act is saving his ass, and by extension, helping CNN keep a significant portion of its withering audience. What is needed is another Walter Cronkite. RIP to both him and the news.
yep the msm is only for the right commies---right? Then how come you only hear the good the demmies do and the bad the repubs do. I don't watch the msm channels, I can believe nothing they say. It's hard to get good news anywhere. But fox does tell both sides but it does lean to the right, but one out of four or five?
Using only one source for news is never a good idea. Getting information from multiple sources and use of reasoning to form your own opinion is the only way. Anything else is just willfull ignorance, be it left or right only listening to one source makes you one of the sheeple.
Clearing up Obamas birth is the right thing to do, even if it has some embarrassment and disgust by his supporters.
First, our Founding Fathers wrote a little document called the Constitution, and every time we deviate from it it weakens it. The Constitution has specific rules for qualifying for President. Whether you like him or not, he needs to clearly meet those qualifications or we weaken our government for decades.
I don't know about you, I don't want Arnold Swartzneggar being President.
Second, he promised complete openness in his administration. This entire event has been blocked since BEFORE the election. Not a very open thing, especially since it such a simple process.
Third, why give the President a different set of rules that you or I wouldn't have. He does work for us you know. Your kids or mine would not be able to participate in Little League if we provided the "evidence" that he has. Lets clear it up with a $20 document, or live witnesses (the Doctor, the Administrator for the hospital, a nurse, family, godfather, whatever), something with hard signatures of witnesses, not just inkstamps on a "announcement".
Lets put this to rest, not just sweep it under the rug. So far, we have not seen substantiating evidence. McCain was approached on this at the same time as Obama before the election, and he provided the birth certificate within days. Obama has not, so, excuses aside, we have to ask the question, why?
There is nothing to clear up. The president has released information confirming his birth in Hawaii. The Governor has taken an extra step of re-releasing the birth announcement. Any non-paranoid birther would find this sufficient. Unless one believes his parents anticipated 47 yrs ago that he would one day run for president and therefore create a conspiracy of newspaper writers, hospital workers and politicians that spanned four decades, then this is over. Good grief.
None of our Founding Fathers were born in United States of America. By their own reasoning, they were qualified to be President, not Washington, not Jefferson, not Adams et al.
This has been put to rest. It was put to rest last year for most sane individuals. The ones who are introducing these ridiculous seeds of doubt have some other agenda they don't want to admit openly.
It's nuts like you that keep this story going.... worry about something other than constantly discredited this president...Why are you and so many others like you so threatened by this man...
because he wants to change the constitution to his way of thinking.
lee, you have NO evidence of that---none!
If you want to talk changing the Constitution, let's examine Cheney & W: The 3rd Article suspended (habeus corpus), the Fourth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (unreasonable search & seizure, cruel & unusual punishment, and deprivation of due process) and that's just for starters. All the data and confessions aren't in yet.
Name one proposal that BHO has advanced that purports to change the Constitution. That's a wacko talking point advanced by that 2-digit IQ, Shawn Hannity (he even misspells his first name).
Yes, and all the blathering blabberings of all the Lefty Lunatics in the world won't change the simple fact that there is ONE person in this world who has the power to end the birth certificate controversy immediately--and that's Barack Obama (real name: Barry Soetoro.) AND HE HASN'T DONE IT. Guess there's a reason people with something to hide try to hide it....who'd a thunk THAT!? Not loony lefty liberal law professors....that's above their pay grade.
And right on cue, crazy birther ChanRobt wants to personally see copies of the president's Elementary school records. Wow.
And I want to see copies of George W's attendance records at Alabama National Guard drills.
You realize if there was doubt about Obama being a natural-born citizen, the Republicans, or even some Democrats, would have exposed it when Obama gave the Convention speech in 2004. As soon as he was proclaimed a contender for 2008, the political operatives would have made sure it was known. If there was no talk of 2012, Sanford and Ensign's adultery wouldn't be so newsworthy. But then again, just because it's news doesn't mean it's important.
Why is any of this your business? How many other President's have you asked for this information? None. You are nothing but a racist, STFU.
Make the offical document available, end of discussion isn't it? Why the continued coverup? Also, why let John Kerry off the hook? How many times has he promised to open ALL his VA military files? Herpes? Dishonorable discharge reinstated by Jimmy Carter? What do these Dems have to hide? And why isn't the state run media beating down the down for answers?
Are you sh*ting me dude? Elementary school records? Parents marriage and divorce licenses? Since when do we require these items as identification. The fact that you demand something doesn't mean you have the right to know all that personal info. Birth Certificate is enough. If you ask the Republican Governor of the State of Hawaii, he was born in Honolulu. They have put their official records in electronic form. If you ask for a long form birth certificate, they will give you a Certificate of Live Birth. I was born in Pennsylvania, when I asked for my Birth Certificate, I got a short form copy. That is enough to prove my citizenship. It should be enough to prove his.
Where was all this concern when he was a Senator? Wait no, this is all a part of a Manchurian candidate scheme because his parents just *knew* that he would graduate with a JD magna cum laude from Harvard, become the first president of the Harvard Law Review, and run for President of the United States.
Obama didn't publish much, but all his scholarly stuff is available - like anyone else's - if you subscribe to the journal in question. The documents related to the birther myth can be seen on factcheck dot org, in an article posted in August 2008. Dunno how the other documents in your grocery list apply to your underlying agenda - but they most likely exist or are sealed for privacy reasons that apply to any US citizen, Barack included. Ohhhh... but that's your point, isnt it? That he's not a citizen, so those laws don't apply to him. Oh dear. You poor, poor thing, caught in a Catch 22 like that. The world is sooo unfair to you, isn't it? For shame. You must keep complaining, darling.
The reason right-wing loonies have a say in the mainstream media is much simpler than the one you give: it's money. The Republican Party is tied to very powerful interests in the military- and medical-industrial complexes, the oil & gas industry and others, which in turn are entertwined with Corporations as part of holdings that own and operate the mainstream media. This is why (formerly) respectable newspapers like the Washington Post can practically hand over its editorial pages to extreme-right, discredited neo-cons (the list is endless--Krauthammer, Kristol, Kagan, Wolfowitz, Gerson, Will, etc.) who peddle against diplomacy, in favor of increasing world tensions, confict and war, in favor of excruciatingly expensive and fictional weapons systems like missile defense (but against considerably less expensive social programs like health care reform), and remarkably, against a President who has exponentially improved America's image abroad (of course, that decreases tensions, which is not in this group's interests, otherwise, where are the incredibly lucrative defense contracts and wars?--by the way, I live abroad, so I am a realtime witness to the Obama effect). What gets me is that the MSM doesn't allow for the extreme left, or even the very left, to be a counterweight to this barrage of ultra-rightism. We don't see Denis Kucinich, or Bil Moyers, or any writer from The Nation, or MIchael Moore, or Ralph Nader or Noam Chomsky ever--they lack even a tiny fraction of the exposure of the loony right. Just follow the money, that's all. The lefties don't control the big contracts and the corporations; quite the contrary, they attack them. So why would corporate-run media want anything to do with this group? Obama has courageously put forward an agenda of change which meddles in the heart of the giant hornets' nests of mulit-billion dollar industries. It is no coincidence that extremism has gone mainstream.
Melissa writes, "...President who has exponentially improved America's image abroad..."
This may well be true. But, it may be temporary. And, even if not, is a highly overrated attribute.
What is most important in a president is how he handles our relationships abroad. His personal charm or popularity with natives of other nations may often be helpful for public relations. But, it is rarely going to decide matters of war or peace.
John Kennedy was very popular abroad. It didn't prevent three or four major foreign crisies from occurring in the three short years of his administration.
Well, a popular president abroad is still TEN TIME better than a goof ball who eat with his mouth open and who everyone hates.
"What is most important in a president is how he handles our relationships abroad."
Then you'd better hope Palin never becomes President.
Not only that, W talks with his mouth full. My mom did that when she was 93, hopelessly senile, and living in an assisted living facility.
ChanRobt, you make excellent points in your posts here. But I'm afraid your dealing with some loony tunes who get their info by daily planting a one hour lip lock on the boil on Keith Olbermann's ass. They are beyond the reach of logic and reason, IMO.
North49, thanks. See my comment above to nantronic. There are reasonable people posting here on both sides.
But, here are also a surprising number of emotional, irrational children making no attempt to think through what they write.
In my experience, such people can be shamed away by the preponderance go good example from their betters.
Yeah, really classy statement, North.
ChanRobert: One correction. Improving our image in the eyes of the rest of the world is not "public relations." It's diplomacy. And it does, in fact, help decide matters of war and peace.
If the rest of the world, as melissa attests, believes that we are not a nation of stupid, xenophobic, ethnocentric little rednecks, and that we can understand and deal with other cultures, we may possibly avert another war and the attendant squandering of our military resources.
Foreign crises happen. Bad things happen. I wouldn't place blame on someone because something bad happened on their watch. I would blame them if they handled it poorly.
millisamsouza: All you say here is pure turth, the one thing ultra rightists, profiteers and racists cannot face. Keep up the good truth work!
Try the decaf next time, melissamsouza. 'Just follow the money' LMAO.. Yes, you have stumbled on quite the conspiracy. Neo-cons control all big-business in the USA so that they can use this shadowy power to get their pundits occasional airtime in the MSM.
'The lefties dont control the big contracts and the corporations, quite the contrary' LMAO.. AGAIN! Yes, those poor lefties - Warren Buffett, George Soros, Bill Gates.. If only someone would give these poor, failed businessmen a big contract, the empire might just be able to strike back at the evil Republicans.
Let me suggest another outlandish theory as to why the MSM gives airtime to Conservative ideology- because a lot of the people in this country are Conservative and want to hear it. Just because an amazing once-in-a-generation Democrat can beat an inept archaic Republican presidential candidate after the country had to endure 8 years of Bush, does not mean that the whole USA has joined the ranks of the Liberals..
Lay off the coffee and get some sleep. And please stay in whatever foreign country has been kind enough to take you in.
Dan100: I have noticed one thing about lefties is that they throw fits like small crazy children and it becomes so annoying that we give in to shut them up....and we've done it for too long. This 4 year long liberal fit will finally awaken the majority middle of the road and slight righties that you allude to. Give it time brother, every time the lefties get power, they go nuts and alienate the majority of the population all the while professing that their agenda is what people want....sad.
You got it wrong, Natural Selection. It'a the religious right of the GOP that goes nuts when they don't get their way. They KILL abortion doctors and nurses and they seem to hate Obama because he is black, not because he was "born in Kenya". They are dangerous and the moderates in the GOP should disassociate themselves from them...but they don't. Then they wonder why we don't take the GOP seriously.
I would argue the opposite. From 1929-1953 the presidency was dominated by democrats,then 1960-68, then Nixon who you would call a leftist, then 76-81 and then 92-2000 and I would argue we won in 2000. You have held a majority in the congress for only 12 yrs out of the last 70 yrs. So I have no idea what the heck you are talking about. If you hate "socialism" campaign against medicare and the va and social security and lets see how many seats you win. You guy are hypocrites thats all.
Sorry, Natural-Selection. It will be at least 8 years of Democrats in power. And given the way Republicans are self-destructing, I'd bet on another 8 or 12 years after that.
@newswoman,
Wow, talk about painting with a broad brush. Abortion doctor murders are extremely isolated incidents carried out by people that have been roundly criticized and ostracized by what you call the "religious right."
Your assertion that they "seem to hate Obama because he is black" is childish logic. Has it ever occurred to you that people disagree with his policies and political philosophy, not his personhood?
"Has it ever occurred to you that people disagree with his policies and political philosophy, not his personhood?"
This is what is confusing about the Birthers' arguments. In spite of reasonable proof to the contrary, they continue to assert that the evidence presented to them is a forgery, without any proof or motivation.
This seems to be an attack on Obama's personhood, not on his policies. I voted for him and I don't entirely agree with all of his policies or everything he says and does. Of the choices presented in the election, simply I thought he was the better choice. A majority of Americans agreed with me.
Drop this Birther nonsense and lets get back to talking about real issues. Otherwise the debate will simply turn towards the motivations behind these 'Birthers'.
Dan 100-whow, you really have trouble dealing with people who disagree with you, don't you? Just like your neo-con friends, I presume. No Dan, sorry to say, the last election results and a considerable amount of reseach since then have shown that, contrary to your assertion, the country is no longer predominatly conservative but is growing considerably more progressive by the minute. Of course, people are worried about deficits, but they are also worried about affordable health care, climate change, education and getting the government to interfere less in their private lives (gay marriage). As for your assertion that the MSM puts out these hordes of neo cons because many people agree with them, well I advise you to look again at the research. An overwhelming majority of Americans think the Iraq War was a mistake and approve of the diplomatic path President Obama is taking, including the prospects of talking to Iran. The neo-cons represent an extremist sliver of American thought, way outside the mainstream of foreign policy even when they managed to heavily influence poor, daddy's boy W. They are now where they should be: in the wilderness of public policy--but they have disproportionate press and media time relative to their acutal influence. I suggest you remember the Orwellian media performance (or non-performance) during the Iraq War. Big Brother would have been proud. It is for a reason that the MSM rubber-stamped that War in good Soviet fashion--it was money-maker for many people (those who sponsor the MSM). And the people who helped shape that money-maker , the "intellectual" neo-cons are owed favors for their services. Hence their ubiquitousness on the MSM. As for calling George Soros and Bill Gates lefties, well, my friend, I think you should go back to college and study the French Revolution, and what gauche and droit actually have meant throughout history. Just because someone happens to have progressive social views does not make them a leftie (contrary to what you say, I don't consider myself a leftie). These men are very much Establishment figures with somewhat of a social conscience--the true lefties--the ones I cited in my comment, don't make it into the MSM so you really don't have them to compare to. As for my foreign country, I will stay or leave as I please, thank you very much. I just wish you would go back to school because your ignorance betrays the decadence of the American educational system.
@melissamsouza,
Please use a few paragraph breaks. You make some debatable points, but they get buried in your stream of consciousness. Thanks.
i'm with mellissa...the wapo op-ed page hands all sorts of real estate over to various far-right views....and never gives much [if any] room to an actual leftist...and all the major broadcast networks, including npr, give conservatives way more exposure than they deserve considering their track record at getting stuff right...
As Cenk Uygur points out in a Daily Kos blog recently , billionaire Rupert Murdoch loses $50 million a year on the NY Post, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife loses $2 to $3 million a year on the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, billionaire Philip Anschutz loses around $5 million a year on The Weekly Standard, and billionaire Sun Myung Moon has lost $2 to $3 billion on The Washington Times.
Why are these guys willing to lose so much money funding "conservative" media? Why do they bulk-buy every right-wing book that comes out to throw it to the top of the NY Times Bestseller list and then give away the copies to "subscribers" to their websites and publications? Why do they fund to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year money-hole "think tanks" like Heritage and Cato?
The answer is pretty straightforward. They do it because it buys them respectability, and gets their con job out there. Even though William Kristol's publication is a money-losing joke (with only 85,000 subscribers!), his association with the Standard was enough to get him on TV talk shows whenever he wants, and a column with The New York Times. The Washington Times catapulted Tony Blankley to stardom.
"Fellowships" and other forms of indirect sponsorship of right-wing talk show hosts have made otherwise-marginal shows and their hosts ubiquitous, and such sponsorships of groups like Norquist's anti-tax "Americans for Tax Reform" regularly get people like him front-and-center.
yep now we have a prez that can't talk with out the tele prompter. And who is running the usa down over seas. Yep that's what we need for the prez to go over and talk about how bad the us is and we were responsbile for every thing that has happened in world. We are the reason there is world hunger even tho we send millions of tons food to these countries, maybe if we quit sending it the world would nor have hunger?
Oh, god---will you give us a friggin break with the teleprompter? That's the most ridiculous criticism dreamed up by The Fat Guy, and you people pick it up without thinking.
Did BHO use a teleprompter when he took that nasty little shit apart in the Presidential Debates? Does he use a teleprompter when he is answering unscreened questions of voters in town hall meetings?
When he does use one, it simply shows that he has prepared for the event.
Unlike a recent President who we had to endure for 8 long years. Try a little original thinking for a change. Tell us how much you hate his left-handed jumper, for example.
By the way, using the teleprompter is a mark of someone who is a trained public speaker. Public speaking involves use of notes, usually an outline of the material to be discussed. Sometimes its written down, and the speaker glances down to gather their thoughts. When you are delivering 30-45 minute speeches, this comes in very handy.
Using a teleprompter lets you keep eye contact with your audience while also referencing your notes. Criticising the President's usage of such a tool is quite silly.
Interesting comparison with the 9/11 'Truthers,' though I do take exception with your characterization of them as left-wingers; they are for the most part 'black helicopter' types, those paranoid of a government-led takeover of their lives - this leads them to attribute fantastic (diabolical) abilities to government. Think Oklahoma or Waco, not San Francisco or Boston.
By the way, doesn't 'Orly Taitz' sound slang for something particularly nasty? As in, "Dude, your taitz is way orly!"
The comparison to the "Truthers" is ludicrously overstated.
The difference between an alleged concerted effort to suppress (for the most part or every part by legal means) and a conspiracy to kill 3,000 Americans by crashing them into two major landmarks is enormous in magnitude.
It sounds like so much Lefty "equivalence" arguments on many issues.
Get real. There's not a dime's worth of dfference between your "alleged concerted effort" and "a conspiracy." You obvious don't know the meaning of either one.
Tmikes, the difference is not between the phrase "concerted effort" and "conspiracy".
The difference is in the magnitude of the two different accusations. It is at least plausible and possible that Obama supporters might find a way to hold back or coverup paper records of various sorts.
It is entirely off the charts and completely implausible that the Bush Administration would have, could have, or would even have had a good motivation to engineer the events of 9/11.
The enormous differences in magnitude between the two different alleged crimes is what I'm pointing out. And why I say the author of this piece has made a preposterous analogy. Even if it were conceded that both groups are "conspiracy nuts".
It is completely plausible that the Bush administration that gave us such gems as "torture", CIA hit squads, the mismanagement of natural disaters, and the us against them mentality. Could concievable make the judgement that 3000 lives are easily worth the grotesque amount of money they could make in an illegal war.
The money is all the motivation needed, just look at insurance companies that easily let 3000 people die each year by dening coverage.
The magnitude in differences is not that large. Fraud in a presidential election would mean bamboozling an entire nation, as would an engineered terrorist attack. So not a preposterous analogy
Personally I think the "birthers" and "Truthers" are crazy and would be better off spending their time thinking of ways to better spend their time. Maybe volunteer, just not Big Brothers and Sisters where they're liable to spread their brand of crazy.
kaonashi raises a question i've been wondering about...are truthers really from the left? strikes me as it comes more from the libertarian crowd..but i have no hard data.... any ideas?
and the comparison between truthers and birthers is pretty solid...both groups, in the face of overwhelming evidence that they haven't a leg to stand on, keep at it anyway...
I have Obama's birth certificate stored in my attic along with Bush's National Guard documents. Elvis gave them to me a couple years ago. Sorry for the confusion!
Love it! Great response!
Have you thought of selling them on e-bay?
By the way, how's the King doing?
lol
It is a legitimate discussion, and merits investigation, once.
This is a done deal, folks.
Mr. Obama's mother is a native-born American citizen.
So Mr. Obama is an American citizen.
Good grief, folks.
Give it a rest.
I would have thought that was the case, too, finderj.
But, according to snopes.com, the rumor debunker site, "...Likewise, the "natural-born citizen" requirement is not so straightforward either, because the Constitution didn't define what a natural-born citizen was. (The definition of "natural-born citizen" was left up to individual states to decide until the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, but even that amendment has been subject to further interpretation.)
What qualifies a person for natural-born citizenship status under U.S. law can be quite complicated, depending on factors such as where the person was born, when he was born, where he and his parents lived, and the nationalities of his parents. "
I would take a closer look at Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Establishing the rules of naturalization is a power expressly vested in Congress, NOT the states. So Congress establishes what naturalization is, subject to the Supreme Court's judicial review. It's not as complicated as you're trying to make it sound either. For someone who claims they "haven't a clue as to the merit" of the birthers' accusations, you sound like you've fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
In any case, what the Framers wanted to avoid was a foreign-born individual coming to America, becoming a citizen, being elected President, and then turning over the Army to the foreign power they still secretly held allegiance to. They didn't want a naturalized citizen to become President.
McCain was born in Panama. Is he a natural born citizen?
Yeah, because he's white.
Pathetic.
WaltB, McCain was born in Panama, I believe in the Canal Zone, then U.S. Territory. And, in any event, he was born there because his father was a U.S. Naval officer on assignment in that region. Both his parents were U.S. born. As were all his grandparents, great grandparents, etc.
And his forbears were U.S. naval and army officers going back at least three generations. There is no ambiguity in McCain's heritage.
WaltB31: Had McCain been elected, there might well be some left-wing loonies bringing up his citizenship as an issue. Sigh...
One big point is being missed here. At least Obama realizes how lucky he is, that was born in America.
It is just like having a heart. A heart is an amazing thing, and more amazing, we never have to realize what a great wonder it is, or thank it, for it to work. It just works anyway.
So it is hard sometimes not to wonder how such a design could have been created.
And sometimes that is what brings us closer to the force of creation, not the bible thumpers, but the wonders, of life, and chance, and luck, the sky, the stars etc etc. And how lucky we are that we have Obama instead of Palin.
TYPO CORRECTO: ...and a conspiracy to kill 3,000 Americans by crashing passenger jets into two major landmarks...
People, PLEASE! You gotta be kidding me. The birth certificate has been produced and it has be validated as real. Here's the proof: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Its nothing more than these f&#kin losers trying to keep their jobs.... so they pull at any little thread, hoping to start a fight... because no controversy no ratings = no job.... Obama's birthplace, his religion etc, enough is enough... ...And BIll Maher, you suck too... you're no different than these Fox tools, begging for a fight. You all deserve a slap across the face....
The "Birthers" are just a bunch a racists who hate to see a black man occupies the White House. There is not much more than that to it no matter what the media want to dress it up as some political movement that is legitimate. It is not. It will end when Obama leave office, until them they will haunt him (and us) for ever.
@fk4711,
I see you have discovered the wonder of the "racist" charge. Easy to make, and it comes with built-in moral superiority. You don't even have to prove anything, make a cogent argument, or even cite any evidence! Truly a marvel of the Left.
natronic: 1) There is no problem with Obama's birth certificate. He is a full-on American citizen.
2) If there had been the slightest doubt about his birth in the USA by an American mother, you'd better believe both Clinton and McCain would have shoved it up his nose.
3) This suggests to me that since the whole birther argument is bogus, it must be covering some disreputable motive, i.e., racism (either that, or you maroons still think Obama is Muslim).
The birthers remaind me of the KKK of decades ago. Angry, out of control, looking for someone to blame for their lot in life.
Sadly, President Obama as the products of a white mothers and black father, is ideally suited to their rage. The birthers, just like Holocaust deniers, won't believe any "evidence" but their own.
However, the fact that netwokrs other than Fox are giving more than a 2 minute (this is what they're up to today) segment to them is disgusting. It's all about rating. It's that simple. CNN is losing to MSNBC and Fox in the primetime ratings race and this is their attempt to pump up the viewers
Once again money and the never ending demand for profits is directing the focus of what were supposed to be news channels.
I believe that many who post here never heard of the Fairness Doctorine or knew there was a time that NEWS was expected not to make money. NEWS was about facts and truth and letting poeple know abou the important things that were happening in their world.
Now when promos describe programs such as O'Reilly and Beck and others as being entertaining and informational, every one should switch the channel. If I want entertaining and information there's always Inside Edition.and similar infotainment programs.
MixPix, the "Fairness Doctrine" existed in an era when there were three major broadcast sources for news-- ABC, NBC, and CBS. All based in Manhattan. All reflecting the same Center Left worldview. Essentially the Establishment point of view coming out of the FDR Democrats era, roughly 1933 through 1980.
The bottom line is that the Fairness Doctrine was an Orwellian name for controlling the potentially independent radio stations which weren't centrally run out of New York City. The Fairness Doctrine is krypto phrase meaning censorship.
"Center Left?" What the hell does that mean? If it means anything (which it doesn't) prove it or be quiet.
Your comparison of the 'birther big mouths' to critics, ('truthers'?) of the official report of the events of 9/11, is way off the mark. The 'birther' rants are not the same as the legitimate issues and criticism of the blatant misinformation campaign surrounding 9/11.
The one, (the 'birthers' movement), is obviously a political ploy to gain media attention, and as you note, smells suspiciously racial in motivation. This nonsense is being fueled by hate-talk media manipulators. The other, the horror of September 11, 2001, is an extraordinary failure by our government and overwhelmed by subsequent political and informational deception.
Regarding concerns of a large segment of the population concerning 9/11: it may behoove you to become better informed concerning what really happened on 9/11, or, as the case may be, DID NOT happen. What did not happen? The United States was left open to attack by our own government! Nothing was done to prevent the attack, and that...is the undeniable TRUTH.
The 9/11 Commission leaders themselves publicly expressed concern about large chunks of missing information and forensic data that should have been included for their review, but was withheld.
ChanRobt
First: Some of those records are not open to the public and it is not unusual for institutions to seal records for public figures. Remember when no one could produce Bush's National Guard records? Remember the scandal when George H. staffers went looking though Clinton's passport records trying to find some dirt? I'm not sure you could find all those records or the equivalent for McCaine or Bush. Does that mean that McCaine was not a legitimate candidate or that Bush couldn't prove he was a citizen?
Second: Even if you could find every single document you mentioned, the Birthers would come up with another document or criteria. When you do come up with a document they claim it is a forgery. There are Birthers who had advertised for anyone who was in the delivery room when Obama was born to come forward. Think anybody remember being in a regular deliver room 50 years ago out of the hundreds of deliveries they attended? But if no one comes forward this will be seen as more 'evidence' that it was all a hoax. Birthers simply do not want to admit to the legitimacy of Obama's presidency and there is nothing you can produce to convince them of it. Obama knows that and so he isn't wasting his time trying to jump through their hoops.
dcbook, it is understood that those records are private, and that for a private citizen is a good thing.
In some instances, as with Bush, legitimate inquiry may justify the public asking an elected officer to open some private records by providing permission for their release.
As you indicated, both Left and Right make such requests when they believe suspicions of wrongdoing justify same.
I don't have an opinion at this juncture whether there is such justification or not. I put forth here the demands that a subset of Rightists are making.
It is a fair subject of debate whether those demands are justified or not. And such a debate is underway, including right here.
I am saddened by the animosity between REPS and DEMS. It seems unAmerican. The GOP will just have to be the 'loyal opposition' until they have their person in the Whitehouse. I am afraid they are sabatoging the health reform program and we will have to have the same old system for another many years.
I had a chance to talk to a long-time Republican party advisor back East some months ago. He's the kind of Republican you'd like to see more of: reasonable, focused on smaller gov't and less regulation, and not a social conservative. He's disgusted with the party as a whole these days and feels it's doing a good job of killing itself. The problem he sees with what's happening is that the Republican party is obsessed with "purity." You have to believe exactly what is the party line, right down the list with no exceptions, or you're going to be a second-class citizen in their POV. Gun control, abortion, healthcare reform, gay marriage? All "No." Tax breaks for the rich, 'traditional family values', more military spending? Yes. If you don't believe in what Rush Limbaugh says, he said, you're not going to fit in.
I personally view this need for purity as a thinly-veiled fascism--"If you're not with us, you're against us"--but the label is not the important thing here. What is important is that the Republicans are going to cater to anyone who can give the 'right' answers to the questions they seem to have by the door, which unfortunately encourages folks as bizarre as Birthers and Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter.
I don't see it as "thinly veiled fascism" because I see it as Fascism on the march. People Will recall a novel by Sinclair Lewis,written in the 1930's,
titled "It Can't happen Here" in which he sees American fascism appearing wrapped in the flag and carrying a bible.
Look familiar??
Republicans (thankfully) don't have the power to sink Health Care Reform. They just don't have the clout or, more Ãmportantly, the numbers. This will rise or fall by the Democrats' determination, and theirs alone. A failure to pass health care reform with overwhelming majorities in Congress and the Presidency will be rightfully seen by the public as collective failure of leadership. Having said that, the public knows, in its gut, that the GOP is incapable of leading a fly off a pile of manure. The country does not have a credible opposition party at the moment, and by the flow of things is unlikely to have one in the near future. So even if the Dems allow this to sink (which I am almost certain they will not do), it willl not necessarily be a gain for the near-extinct, increasingly berzerck and racist GOP.
Health Care Reform as currently constituted is not "reform" but a putsch. The wholesale takeover of a large sector of the economy by the federal government.
If passed, it will be despised by the majority of the people in this country and the Democrats will be despised for imposing it.
That's why the Blue Dogs say they are trying to save the Democratic Party from its radical Left wing under Pelosi and Waxman.
@ melissamsouza,
Do you mean the "racist" GOP that elected Michael Steele, a black man, as RNC chair?
That put Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell in their highly visible and prestigious positions?
The GOP's refusal to play identity politics and deal with people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin (thank you, MLK) is refreshing. Not racist.
You should learn the difference between political disagreement and racism. Unless you see the aforementioned as "Uncle Toms", of course. Then you're probably beyond help.
The animosity between the parties dates from the late 1960's when the far Left that emerged in that era started to become a major influence in the Democratic Party. They eventually, in the form of Pelosi, Kerry, and others, became the mainstream of the Party.
The so-called Blue Dogs would be perfectly comfortable with Jack Kennedy, Moynihan, Scoop Jackson, and others who were once the mainline and mainstream of the Democratic Party.
The current Party would have been deemed radical by most Democrats in the 60s, and indeed the success of Reagan with "Reagan Democrats" in the 80s is an indication that they deemed Carter's Democratic Party to be radical.
When a Party is trying mightily to push the United States far left of where it has ever been or ever wanted to be before, it is a very serious thing. And makes for a certain amount of "animosity".
Why?
Because the main stream media is controlled by the right wing, despite what rush limbaugh and his ilk say.
The owners of the mainstream media are not Right nor Left. They are Coporatists. And, if they can game the federal system for profit, theygame it.
Which is why they are going along happily with the Democrats now. They see marvelous opportnity in Cap and Trade and in the takeover of the medical system by the federal government.
I think we're more or less at a point where if you believe in the Birther (Racist) conspiracy nonsense, there's nothing anyone can say or do to stop you from your willful blindness to the facts. These people are trolls at best and lunatics at worst. Rather than battling them, I propose posting the FactCheck.org link to the story along with a quick note reminding them of their lunacy and how it's a tragic failure of democracy that they can vote. Various Founding Fathers have said that a well-educated populace is essential to a successful democracy. These nutjobs throw that back in their faces with their eager ignorance of the facts.
gak001: for your edification FactCheck.org is a machine run by the Annenberg Foundation, a group Mr. Obama was (is?) closely associated with. Connect the dots.
just a few facts:
FactCheck.org is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.
Walter Annenberg was a life long republican who during his life played host to Presidents Ford, Reagan and George H.W. Bush at his "Sunnylands" estate in California.
Obama's connection to Annenberg : he distributed grant money
from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, to help reform Chicago schools, a program headed by Bill Ayers..
@gak001,
Yes, because thoughtful discussion is dangerous.
And only people that agree with you should be able to vote.
And the best way to dialogue is to call people that disagree with you names.
Right? Sheesh.
It is downright disgusting how the mainstream media aid & abet the smear campaign being orchestrated by nuts like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Savage, Coulter, et. al. It's already nauseating enough having the GOP media consultant (remember Willie Horton?) Roger Ailes running the official mouthpiece of the Republican Party while saying the words "fair & balanced" twenty times a minute; Fox Propaganda Network is as fair & balanced as the Soviet newspaper Pravda (Pravda is the Russian word for "truth").
The birthers are one of the wierder sects among the ranks of the far-right loonies. They are desperately trying to find any basis for opposing a President who received a strong mandate from the electorate, & it is laughable how low they will stoop. No one with a modicum of intelligence cares about their psychotic ideas. The MSM do a tremendous disservice to the nation when they provide a forum for such drivel.
Considering the MSM's refusal to insist on the truth regarding GW Bush's arrest for cocaine in TX in 1972 or his DWI arrest in ME in 1976, they have no basis for lending their resources to the birthers now.
Don't forget Laura Bush's coverup of her fatal car wreck. Notice how the police blotted out part of the report?
Doctor B, FOX is but one cable news outlet. (Owned by Rupert Murdoch, who supported Hillary at one point.)
You seem to forget MSNBC, radically Left; CNN quite Left. ABC, CBS, and NBC, politely but very Left.
Plus the extremely influential (still) New York Times, very Left. The influential WaPo, reasonably Left.
As are most major U.S. newspapers.
I just googled "Laura Bush fatal car accident". There are at least ten pages of citations on this story. Including reference to published books covering the subject.
If this is a coverup, it's a pretty lame one.
Rock on, loonies. The American people are getting an education about reality rejecting crackpots who vote.
By the time 2012 rolls around, sensible Americans are going to be heartily sick and tired of your deliberate ignorance, sick of how proud you are of it, and sick of the pandering attention you get from television news and blogs. This will help put President Obama in the White House for another four years.
Why shouldn't a presidential candidate be required to produce a birth certificate? Sounds like a reasonable requirement to me. When there are legitimate questions about an issue, the media is right to report the situation. And, sadly, the mainstream media has not even pretended to be objective where Obama is concerned. Particularly when he is taking us down a course to economic ruin, we deserve to know whether he is even eligible to be president.
bravo! well said. So refreshing to read an intelligent remark.
where is that intelligent remark? Obama produced a Birth Certificate. It meets the legal requirements. what an absurd argument. It has nothing to do with a certificate and everything to do with a black man with a funny name in office.
Um, baigge, he did produce his birth certificate. Where have you been?
All birth certificates are not the same.
The short form that Obama has released has very little information.
The long form that the Birthers seek has much more detail, like the physicians that attended the birth, etc.
Furthermore, "...there's a Hawaii state law that allows those born outside of Hawaii - including in foreign countries - to obtain Hawaiian birth certificates...That means that Obama could have been born outside Hawaii and still have a valid Hawaiian birth certificate on file..."
If you have an open mind and want to get into the details of Hawaii law, see this: http://24ahead.com/s/obama-citizenship.
A couple of points:
1. The short form indicates specifically that Obama was born in Honolulu. Would that be the case if he had been a foreign national obtaining a Hawaiian birth certificate?
2. Two Hawaiian newspapers carried an announcement of the birth. Would that be the case if Obama had been born in Kenya or Indonesia? Is that something that foreign nationals can also have taken care of retroactively?
You're right, it was a conspiracy. Like any pregnant 19 yo college student, his mother secretly flew from Hawaii to Kenya, gave birth, then flew back and obtained a doctored birth certificate because she planned for him to be president. The birth announcement in the paper was also part of the conspiracy. Obviously, we should shut down the executive branch until the pediatrician who was on call in 1961 steps forward.
What's wrong with letting the crackpots having their say? The more they work themselves into a lather and jump around like a senile, syphilitic old man trying to find a comfortable position in bed, the more people will fear their return.
Thank God for Mexicans. If it wasn't for them, John McCain would be President. And we'd be on our way to eating acorns and insects for dinner.
Priceless!
I am one of those so-called "lunatic crazy birthers".
Until such time of Mr. Obama releases his records, not only his birth certificate, but more impotantly his medical, school, adoption, passport records, I will continue to question his American citizenship.
The MSM and their ilk did not stop investigating W's service records or McCain's birth records until all documents were made public. I say turn-about is fair play. The transparency Mr. Obama claims is his personal stamp on government affairs stops short when it comes to his records. It's the old do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do schtick.
For arguments sake, let's say he was born in Hawaii (snicker), was he adopted by his stepfather, Mr. Soetero, and then conferred with Kenyan/Indonesian citizenship, relinquishing his "American" citizenship? So many questions, so few truthful answers.
He was known as Barry Soetero in his youth. Then he became Barack Hussein Obama II. Is a person able to change his name at will without official documentation of some sort? any sort? The reality-impaired MSM not only should, but must continue to investigate this grave matter until Mr. Obama unseals his records (snicker, snicker).
Personally, I don't care if Mr. Obama is purple, yellow, blue or green (I happen to be a minority). Personally, I do care about
the biggest fraud in American history perpetrated upon the American people resulting in such an embarassament that no one wants to take the blame or be a part of the "gotcha" moment.
All those in favor of the truth say "Aye".
Nope. What's next full investigation of elementary school arts and crafts grades? And medical records hahaha! That would have been a nice relevant fact set for McCain to provide if Obama did also.
And you know the difference on the name. Barry was a child nickname, Soetero was stepfathers and used for school purposes etc.
But no you're not a "lunatic crazy birther", you just demand several years of investigation into the childhood nicknames and grade school records of the Pres. Puh-leez
Genie
As a Senator and President, BHO has needed and been granted an extremely high level security clearance by various law enforcement (fbi) and intelligence agecies.
Do you really truly believe that said agencies granted said clearances without complete and proper documentation (i.e. legit birth certificate, etc.).
If so, this country's in a lot more trouble than we know.
Felipe ~ yeppers, we is in deep doo-doo. As I inferred, forget about the birth certificate a moment and try finding out anything about his name changes from Barack H. Obama, to Barry (short for Barack) Soetero, to Barack Hussein Obama II. Why he doesn't release his passports and school, medical records is a real mystery.
The longer he keeps these records sealed, the guiltier he appears.
As for EpicSarcastic's statement "he used Barry Soetero for school purposes", where is your proof? Is that because he had to have Indonesian citizenship in order to attend the school? Have you, has anybody out there, seen adoption records? Un-adoption records back to Barack Hussein Obama II?
Sorry, folks, as I stated before, we've been had big time.
Genie
I agree with you that the country is in deep sh*t.
However, that was not the question I asked you, so once again: do you think that the intelligence agencies of this country have repeatedly granted BHO high level security clearances without proper vetting. It's a yes or no answer, no dancing like politician.
But obviously all of the passport and school records provided will be fake. A Conspiracy So Immense! None Dare Call It Treason! Surely one of our Pure White Women wouldnt have had a child by an African unless there was a massive conspiracy afoot!
geneimaker, you should be really embarrassed about your beliefs, particularly as a minority! If your refutation to the PROOF that Obama was born in Hawaii is a mere snicker, then you cannot be helped no matter what you are shown. All that nonsense about his stepfather is completely irrelevant to Obama's birth in Hawaii. Having a relative from another country doesn't cancel out Obama's natural born citizenship. Aren't you aware that he is not the first president to have had a parent who was not born here? You have been sold a bill of goods, and your ridiculous allegations don't amount to anything. Go to school and get an education...
The biggest fraud in American history was the Iraq war. You were probably fine with being lied to about that...
I couldn't have said it better myself, geniemaker. And yet WE who think rationally are labelled "lunatics". What's not to get about the fact that there is ONE person who can unseal his records and immediately put an end to the birth certificate/sealed records controversy.....AND HE HASN'T DONE IT. "The thing speaks for itself", a phrase I'm quite certain the lefty loony law professor-author should be familiar with.Why can't reasonable people seem to connect the dots?
I don't think it's the main stream media that is reality-impaired. I think the crackpots who refuse to accept a perfectly legitimate birth certificate, a perfectly legitimate election, and a perfectly legitimate President are the ones who are "reality-impaired".
McCain lost the election, and Obama won. These are facts, this is reality, and I can't imagine what kind of "reality-impairment" would make a sane adult refuse to accept it.
How original.
Until you present proof that there has been a wrong doing why is there an onus on the president to bow to your whims? You have a hunch that he's not an American so he should jump thru hoops to appease you? How about you get something more than a hunch to prove he's not a citizen then maybe he'll let you peruse thru his personal inofrmation.
This is nothing more than the sickening undercurrent of racism that has always existed in our country attempting to merge into main stream society again. This is a disturbing trend. These racist lunatics should not be pandered, they need to be exposed for the 19th century artifacts they are.
The Birthers are all about the 15th amendment and not at all about the 14th.
.
Downriver, when you start yelling "racist," you are out of ideas.
right. another cliche. had Obama been white and without a name that rhymes with Osama this issue never would have come up. This is racism reduced to it's lowest common denominator.
Downriver, keep all the circumstances of his life the same, but change his color to white, and you would still have the same questions raised.
A partial proof of that is that questions were raised about McCain's citizenship since he was born abroad. That McCain was abroad because he was the son of a U.S. Naval officer didn't prevent the question from being raised.
right, and there was NO CONTROVERSY of any consequence regarding McCain's birth status. zero. That is the point.ChanRobt, your are nothing but a racist and are either to stupid to realize it or do weak to admit it. You losers make me sick. The election is over and it was a landslide. Go find some real issues.
And ChanRobt wins yet again, with Downriver unwittingly conceding by demonstrating an inability to use reasoned, civil discourse to make his points, resorting instead to name calling (racist, stupid, weak, losers).
Downriver, one big reason any continuing controversy about McCain's citizenship has subsided is because he lost the election.
But, again, a son of an American naval officer and an American mother, born abroad in the company of said naval officer on duty assignment would not be expected to have his citizenship questioned. But, even McCain did. A white man whose forbears have been American since at least the Revolution.
For the record, Obama won by good margins, but it was hardly a landslide. The history is easy to check. Just google a little bit.
Finally, Downriver, your language, "...you are nothing but a racist...to stupid to realize it...[too] weak to admit it..." etc. Do you believe such phrases either constitute intelligent argument? That they are calculated to convince, persuade, or change minds? Or, to chastise your opponent, hurt his feelings, cause him to feel shame?
Why do you bother to write impotent insults rather than exercising your mind to create convincing arguments or to produce good evidence?
Yes, and it fits nicely with the tradition of racial harassment on ID issues. I was listening to a bob marley song with the lines "hey mr cop, ain't got no birth certificate on me." Those minorities are assumed to be illegitimate of birth to even breath the same air as the racists.
There isn't a problem, and all the docs have been provided. The people voted. "Birthers" can't just make treasonous accusations at the Pres while demanding proof of facts for which they have no real counter claims.
I would really like to know what "docs have been provided"? Please, tell me, where are they posted? I'd love to see them so I can shut up.
Counter-claims? Surely you gest. That's what this thread is all about. Obama has not counter claimed any thing. If fact his silence on this topic is deafening. By his silence, he thinks this issue will go away. Surprise, it's gaining intensity.
Who's paying that $900K lawyering bill to keep his records sealed? Could it, could it possibly be George Soros? The mad marxist billionaire behind moveon.org?
Each day I see more sites spring up on the Internet wanting valid information of this most serious matter. The crazy lunatic birther movement is growing, not diminishing.
I am a minority and I live in a city where the minority is 52% (that's a minority?) Alas, always the same tired old race issue brought up by the weeny linerals when all else fails.
Question, why is it that every single time someone questions anything about President Obama, someone throws out the Racist card? I believe it is my duty to question any Public Servant for anything that I feel is relevant to the way they are leading my County, State or Nation. Someone once called me a racist during the election because I was looking into Obama's voting record (just like Mccain, Biddin, and Palins). What a Joke. It couldn't be that I wanted to know how he has voted on past issue that I feel are important, no I'm a racist because I questioned something about Obama. Get over it. In this country it is our duty to question our elected Official. Is this topic one for tin foil hat wearing people maybe, but who more paranoid these people or the ones who see a racist conspiracy behind every anti Obama remark or question............Get off the Couch, And into the Game.
Bullshit. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Obama and the current administration. This isn't one of them.
Uh, Downriver? Allguns said "Is this topic one for tin foil hat wearing people(?) maybe". He's allowing that the Birther concerns may not ultimately be legitimate.
Or didn't you read that far?
The same reason we were vulnerable on 9/11. The ringt wing crazies kept Clinton so tied up with their nonsense, Bin Laden and his gang just laughed and planned their attacks.
All the blame for the dead on 9/11, an the wars that have sunk us into infinite debt all stem from wasting time on the nut job right wings. Especially the so called "Christian" right.
Where were you when Clinton was given bin Laden on a silver platter not once, but three times? Oh, that's right, he did have a couple of missiles lobbed into wherever (Pakistan, Afghanistan), but then he had to get back to his more important issues of getting sexually satisfied. Disgrace!
You continue on your Kool-Aid drinking mission of blaming the wrong people for 9/11. The rest of the world will worry about and combat terrorism. Oh no, it's not terrorism any more. It's "man made disasters" according to Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security, Ms. Janet Napolitano.
For what's it's worth, we'll let Mr. Obama sink himself ~ its'a comin'.
Religious right wingers are the only Kool Aid drinkers wacko. You Repuglicans even try to "Projection Debate" style steal terms that apply to your Jim Jones ilk.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.