Are guys like him for real or just mentally defective ?

Hard to believe anyone sane can think in that manner.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/a.....nk=rssfeed

I’m sure you’ve seen my links , probably on another thread – I can dig them up – where even Hawaii suggests having an actual birth cert. as POI to apply for programs , downgrading the SLB in their evidenciary chain , and also posts per other info how it is easier to obtain than an actual B.C.

This led to the request for the B.C. , and the refusal led to scepticism and some unrealistic assumptions , but some questionable ones.

I brush off the wild spec , but have doubts as I am not a supporter and so have a higher threshold of proof than a supporter -

If it were Cheney , you’d probably demand his butt cheeks be microfilmed , and scraped for DNA matching the hospital records.

I’m just reasonably asking for a flash of a simple document , and not a classified one.

Not really a whole lot to ask to put the whole thing to sleep.

Again , try to sound a bit more humble and willing to listen rather than teach.

We are getting off track with this “my example of the Holocaust is valid and yours about Frank is not , because you “just dont get it , have no understanding…..”.

My example does not refer to a prediction Frank made about the economy. It refers to his specific assurance that the books , the financial health of FM was just fine , AND THAT WE DIDN’T NEED TO SEE THEM – WE DIDN’T NEED AN AUDIT.

IMO , that is exactly what we are talking about here , with you repeatedly pointing out that “two officials said it was A-OK ” (two Barney Franks ?) , and I saying fine , let us see it for ourselves.

“There are many documents that you are not allowed to personally view”

We are talking about a guy that was running for the Office Of The President Of The United States , and the document is not some highly classified one – it is a simple birth certificate , something we are all asked to show at one time or another , so lets not get so dramatic .

“this does not give one a blanket license to allege endless conspiracy theories.”

Please consider what you are saying here. I cant think of any other issue I support that can be considered a “conspiracy theory” , yet you seem to be following the Reid / Pelosi formula of calling senior citizens who show up concerned about their healthcare “radicals and fanatics”.

This is one issue , not a plural “theories” , and you can call it conspiracy if you like but to me it is simply the satisfactory verification of one fact , and not a myriad of scenarios.

I think the defense of “you have enough evidence” you are emphatic about is more my concern than anything else. Why should the public release of a BC be such a stickling point to a “bipartisan” President looking to engage in a trusting bipartisan effort on issues with minimal distractions?

Please clarify one thing for me -

Why did the Dem Nomination Committe change the wording on their final nomination document to distance themselves from this issue?
It was changed from the original. Why?

The facts remain- the original was vouched for by two officials, his birth was announced in two newspapers from that era(no, these announcements were not at the behest of the family), and his certificate of live birth is valid to obtain a US passport, as is mine.

There are many documents that you are not allowed to personally view; this does not give one a blanket license to allege endless conspiracy theories. And honestly, if this is such a concern for you, how much effort have you personally put into it? Have you traveled to Hawaii? Or better yet, have you made any personal effort to prove his birth in Kenya, which would be the best way to prove the theory that he is not a natural-born US citizen.

Basic reasoning suggests that any allusion to the holocaust invokes a comparative suggestion whether intended or not.

“Namely, pretending to be objective and curious, yet not accepting any evidence against the conspiracy theory no matter how overwhelming.”

Pretending? I am “pretending” and my examples untenable , your’s are spot on?

Why is my example a poor one?

Frank assured us FM was solvent and that “an audit was not necessary” , based on his own knowledge.

Why is that unacceptable when I point out that just as his certain info was wrong , I dont want to “take the word” of other politicians” -

What’s the deal now? We no longer have any right or need to see any documents anymore because we will instead be told what is the case?

And should we dare to ask, we instantly are grouped together with radicals and fanatics and hate mongers?

I know you possess way more reasoning skills than my basic lack of them , but you nonetheless misconstrued my point pertaining to FOX -

My point was that the party doesn’t need to be “saved , and only this one thing can do it”-

It was that when a longtime Dem stronghold like Mass. elects a Conservative and other influential Dems are way behind in the polls (Reid) and some not even running as a result (Dodd) , it may be a good idea to reconsider just who needs to be “saved”.

There is no need to be condescending in making your points. I dont agree with some things you say but am not insinuating it therefore follows that your IQ is in single digits. If you have not by now been able to ascertain that my differing view does not mean that about me either , nor that I am a radical of some sort , then you may unfortunately be in the camp of stereotyping any who dont quite see it your way into one size fits all.

Now would you like an example of a bad analogy? No problem. Look at your post where you mention Barney Frank being wrong about Fannie Mae. You see that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Governor of Hawaii and the State Secretary of Health and Human Services viewed and certified Obama’s original birth certificate, and the one he released publicly is valid to obtain a US passport. You don’t believe these people because you want them, or possibly need them, to be lying. And that is precisely what you are alleging whether you put it in those words or not. It’s called implication.

And your claim that Fox and the GOP aren’t hammering away on that story(actually they have denied it) being overshadowed by Massachusetts(this is how you spell it) is laughable. You are saying that one congressional victory would mean more to them than sure shot at removing the president and embarrassing the Democrats for years to come? Laughable.

Oh by the way- that was pretty tricky how the Obama family managed to go back in time and forge birth announcements in two newspapers.

“We also have to ask why, if there were any merit in this, Fox News and the GOP aren’t hammering away on this every day. This is the one thing that could save their party”

Am I spelling this correctly?

M-A-S-S-E-C-H-U-S-E-T-T-S

I am kinda smiling at that because your analogy was – The Holocaust!

I know you didn’t mean to compare on a moral plane , but that comparison is still a huge stretch.

I really dont care that politicians say everything’s “A-OK”.

Barney Frank assured us Fannie Mae was just hunky dory. Woulda kinda liked to see their books for myself.

You think it’s pathetic to point out that Court decisions can be off the mark ?

I’m sure there are many you can think of that fit that description sans any examples from me.

Not saying he’s ineligible for sure , just have read too much that conflicts to ignore and want the release of documents , and I dont chase , or buy into , conspiracy stuff , which is mostly crap.

Ditto here.

This is why I say despicable -

Not to be discurteous , but because I despise
the tactic of trying to define someone , box them into something , put them in an overall category -

And then use that as an “answer” , instead of debating/discussing the specific issue mentioned .

That is the strategy being used in Massachusetts right now , and the strategy Reid and Pelosi used to define senior citizens opposed to certain healthcare changes , and others opposed to taxation policies.

An old man in a wheelchair is touted as a a “radical” if he dares to disagree.

Debate the specific points of the issue – agree or disagree like a man -

Dont try to villify or inaccurately define a proponent with a different point of view than yours as your response -

“Clever” ? I’m being as open and honest about my views and philosophies as I can. I pointed out I
entertain little to no belief in most conspiracy assumptions.

Yet you choose to continue to attempt to paint me as a “radical conspiracist”.

And then you become irate when I use the description “despicable tactics”?

Address the issue Jay – I dont want to fight and be enemies – just debate the merits of our differing positions in a friendly manner without unsubstantiated personal attacks as if you know
my positions on everything and whether I am sincere and honest or not.

And once again , I dont like that being done by EITHER SIDE.

I just want opposing evidence vetted , and take this position regardless of the Party or candidate in question.

Court decisions can be biased towards a sitting President – I’m not claiming that to definitively be the case , but Courts have also been the entity which has “laughed out” claims of segregation and racial bias also , so I dont always laugh along with
Court decisions.

And yes – you think you are being clever by denying what you are while at the same time continuing to wallow in and spew out conspiracy theory.

You are fooling no one – with the possible exception of yourself.

You know I am not just saying “questions” – you have read my thinking on other threads –

I just dont want to elaborate here because it is not the point of this thread and this isue seems to always “take over” the threads -

And I put faith in very few “conspiracy” issues , and do not identify myself with conspiracists.

Maybe you can tell me why there are two purposely different certifications by the Democratic election committee seeming to guard against citizenship issue backfire?

This was pointed out to me , and is one of the things that raises my eyebrows , and is hardly a “conspiratorial”point undeserving of scrutiny?

And by the way, I am not comparing your “questions” about Obama’s citizenship to Holocaust denial on any moral plane. I am comparing the rhetoric of it all, because all conspiracy theories tend to use the same kind of logic(or lack thereof). They are un-falsifiable.

The term for it is “concern troll”.

“If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck – it’s a duck.”

You spout the same conspiracy theories as the fearmongers at Fox News. And as to being polite – that you are NOT.

An “I’m better and smarter than you are” self righteous attitude , not simply disagreeing , but disrespecting the intelligence of any whose conclusions , or philosophy’s differ from his.

I prefer to converse politely with those whose thoughts differ from mine , hopefully coming to some agreement on some things , and hopefully doing so while remaining friendly and respectful
of their conclusions despite disagreement on issues.

Doesn’t always work out that way.

The only thing that I can agree with here is that Beck is opportunistic.

Regarding Beck, he is more of an opportunist than a racist. He knows fully well that by making inflammatory statements on Fox he is increasing their viewership in the idiot segment of USA and thereby enriching himself. If anything, he stands more guilty of making money off of the idiocy of RW idiots.

Same goes for Limbaugh too.

Ever sicne they elected bush twice, conservatives have lost all right to engage in the national debate in any form. At best, they are to be tolerated, like you tolerate an athlete’s foot itch.

Beck’s comment was a clear attempt to stir up animosity and fear in “white people”; a common tactic of racists was to smear black opponents as white-hating militants, which is precisely what he has done not only with Obama but others around him as well. Beck deliberately induces fear of this, and other things, and then weasels out of it when called on the carpet for his antics. But most importantly, there was simply no reason whatsoever to suggest that Obama has a profound hatred for white culture. In other words, he went out of his way to make that statement.

As for the subject of Revered Wright, I cannot endorse everything the man says(and I would not assume his supporters do either), but every claim must be evaluated and stand on its own merit. Conservatives seem to think that any time you justifiably point out white complicity in the problems of the black community, this is whining or scapegoating.

And I dont speak for Beck – in fact , I’m not necessarily happy with him as a conservative voice -

But whatever his point in that statement – IT AIN’T RACIST.

The definition of racism is not daring to make a statement relating to race.

I can’t stand Reid , but he made a controversial statement that’s a “big deal” now -

But Obama was right , it’s no big deal , and it’s not racist.

It’s just a statement relevant to race.

I can only assume , though I dont agree with his comment , that Beck meant something to the effect that Obama felt white culture had let down blacks and held a grudge?

And I certainly think Wright was quite contentious , contrary to your assumption that he’s just fine.

Do you agree with Wright that aids was a conspiracy to eliminate blacks?

Quite more controversial that a birth certificate .

Thanks for making it plain for all to see your efforts to cover up for Fox News and the other Extremist elements of the Republican / Conservative political sector.

Again, there are two kinds of people in this country who think that Racism is not as pervasive as it truly is:

1) Those who are truly blind to Racism

2) Those who deny Racism in order to facilitate it

I asked you which of the two you belong to . . . your latest post has answered the question.

Just in case . . . what do you think it is we are talking about here??? Race Relations are ALWAYS a matter of Politics . . . but you’d rather white wash . . .

Also I have heard Jeremiah Wright’s words and I find nothing hateful about white people in them, so let’s try this again- what did Beck mean when he said that Obama hates “white culture”?

Whatever political motives you care to suspect per anyone having a problem with the citizenship issue , it is irresponsible to link it to racism..

Any allusion whatsoever to equating questions concerning that issue – (and I’m not saying he’s not eligible , I’m saying that I’m dis satisfied with the incomplete vetting) -

To the issue of race is ridiculous and disgusting .

There is nothing – nada – to link a citizenship uncertainty to race even in a “thinly veiled” capacity,
as you mention.

Why dont you link it to height , eye color , or SAT scores also?

Please explain how the majority of citizenship questioners you refer to supported Clarence Thomas , Condoleeza Rice , and Colin Powell , (which the non-racist Democrats summarily trashed each in turn) -

But nonetheless are racist for daring to have a non race related question about Obama?

You and your ilk make no sense at all and stir up imagined hate where it does not exist as a tactic ,

something that disgusts me whether it is you or Glenn Beck doing it.

I am not “muddying the debate” or claiming self-righteousness – I am calling you out on a despicable tactic of no merit I refuse to allow to go unchallenged , and delineating how silly your argument for it is.

Sad such a worthy thread has to first listen to the
shocking views of July , and then have you stick your agendized political talking points into this as well.

Me, “simple”??? I’m so complex, I’m simple . . . so simple I’m complex. The thing is – neither me nor the great majority here are fooled by your self-righteous posturing nor your attempts at muddying the debate.

I’m not calling you a “racist” – but you do spout the same thinly-veiled racist spew (under the guise of “conspiracy theory”) that the talking heads at Fox News continually regurgitate, including that discredited old “Obama is not an American” chestnut.

I don’t need to call you anything – your own words indict you.

First off , I dont think I agree with that , but second , considering Obama’s connection to Rev. Wright , who certainly feels that way , the comment is not unsupportable.

But either way , it’s not racist – every comment pertaining to race isn’t an automatic “he’s a racist” badge .

Is Harry Reid a racist also , or that one is ok?

Jay , people like you are either extremely simple or extremely political.

I ALSO WANT AN ACCOUNTING OF OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP.

So , am I a racist also?

You think that anyone who dares to question that will not , because your ilk has equated it with racism?

Not hardly.

I dont necessarily think he was born elsewhere , but I think it was not vetted as it should have been.

How do you a equate questionable citizenship issue for a Presidential candidate (McCain’s was questioned also) = racist?

That’s the rap libs run , and it’s why I dont just disagree with some libs – I’ve lost respect for some as a result of what I consider below the belt , despicable tactics such as the equation above.

( Yes , Conservatives can be “below the belt” also , and I dont particularly like the practises of Beck , but if you want to unwarrantedly throw him into racist territory , just be dam sure that Reid is thrown into it just as far.).

Mr. Varez – if you can’t see the similarity between July’s post and the kind of innuendo & out-and-out lies continually spewed by Fox News, then you are part of the effort to COVER UP racism and hate in America.

There are two kinds of people who deny that Racism is as prevalent as it is in America today:

1) Those who are genuinely blind to Racism.

2) Those who want to cover up Racism in order to facilitate it.

Which kind are you, Mr. Dave Varez?