A provocative conservative view on birtherism

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#1

Post by Patricia »



[linkbtn]A provocative conservative view on birtherismis here,http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... overu.html[/linkbtn]



The Alchemy of Democrat Cover-ups





I have no idea whether Barrack Obama is a natural born American. I'm not a "birther" and I haven't spent a lot of time on the issue, but I have noticed a lot of people are curious, not just fringe "kooks", but reasonable people who seem to have logical reasons for their curiosity. I do not know if Obama fits the constitutional requirements for the Presidency, but I do know Democrats, and when they work hard to hide something, that something is usually a doozy.



...



How about all the assurances that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good order? No audits or reforms necessary, everything is just fine. How many members of Congress blocked meaningful regulation for many years? The Democrats have profited and continue to profit greatly from the two enterprises, costing the taxpayers billions. Yet a majority of Americans blame President Bush for the financial crisis. Yet another successful cover-up, as well as an effective propaganda campaign courtesy of the party of coincidence. Do you remember that financial crisis that miraculously popped up last November? You know, just before the election. Pure coincidence, really, you can trust the Democrats.



And last but not least, is the record of the Clinton administration's contribution to 9-11. We know that members of the administration actively built barriers to data sharing between intelligence and law enforcement. We know the Clintons viewed terrorism as a law enforcement matter. We know that Madeleine Albright warned Pakistan before Clinton's half-hearted cruise missile strike on Bin Laden, thereby giving days of warning to Al Qaeda.



We know that soon after the formation of 9-11 commission was officially announced the Clinton administrations National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, went to National Archives over a period of weeks to steal and destroy highly classified records of the Clinton administration decision-making process in handling Al-Qaeda and terrorism. He stuck them in his pants and socks and later burned and shredded them. You can bet they held incriminating evidence, evidence that would have tanked the Democrats on security issues and ripped away the "Clinton Legacy." It was a very successful cover-up, about which the press is remarkably silent. Berger received what amounts to a wrist slap, while old Bill laughed it off saying; "That Sandy, he's so absent minded." By all reports, Obama and his administration have gone to great expense to prevent examination of his birth record outside of carefully staged statements from loyal Democrats.



When Presidential spokespersons ridicule and demean Americans, even political enemies, in a public forum, they are purposely inserting ideas into the public psyche, and when those ideas are choreographed with the press you can bet it was cooked up among the likes of ABC's George Stephanopoulos, CNN's James Carville, CNN commentator Paul Begala, and Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. The message appears on leftist web-exchanges like Journo List and it is off to the political smear races.



If you say a thing often enough, people will eventually believe it, for example; the press is in the Democrats' pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket, the press is in the Democrats pocket... Well, that one is real.



This is an example of where we need to stick to the new four paragraph limit as found in the new posting guidelines. I'll be dropping reminders here and there as people adjust to the new policy. Thanks.
bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#2

Post by bogus info »



Patricia,Wow. I guess the Democrats are to be blamed for everything?
Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#3

Post by Patricia »



Another conservative take, maybe more provocative? [/break1]nationalreview.com/]http://corner.nationalreview.com/Wednesday, July 29, 2009National Review - The CornerNixonian Secrecy [Mark Krikorian]The whole birther thing is lunacy, and I'm glad NRO smacks it down so thoroughly. But Glynn Custred of Prop. 209 fame elaborates, in an e-mail, on a point briefly mentioned in the NRO editorial: The question of Barack Obama's birth certificate has provoked a surpisingly aggressive response from the White House and near hysteria from Obama supporters. If the question is so crazy, and especially since conservatives have joined the Obama supporters in their condemnation of those who asked them (Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, the National Review), why all the fuss? The question on which the "birthers" hinge their complaint is, is there a more specific document that the president is purposefully witholding from the public? No one seems willing or able to answer that question in a straight forward manner, thus fostering an atmosphere in which doubts linger and conspiracy theories thrive. [Actually, I think that's been addressed. - MK] The real problem, however, is not the president's place of birth (it is highly unlikely that he was born anywhere but where he claims) but the Nixonian secrecy with which he has chosen to surround himself. Has Obama released his transcripts from Occidental College and Harvard? (we know all about Bush's mediocre grades at Yale). Has he given permission for his theses and publications to be released? If not, why not? Michelle got into hot water when her thesis was publicized. Maybe Barack learned a lesson from that episode. And why the secrecy about the grades of such a smart guy as Obama? Might they reveal some kind of favoritism along the way? We do know that there are things Obama tried to hide, such as his association with Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger as well as William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. Do his records reveal other questionable associations or statements? Where is the transparency we expect of public officials? Why is Obama getting a pass when other presidents do not? And why the hysteria when the topic is brought up?
Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#4

Post by Patricia »



Patricia,Wow. I guess the Democrats are to be blamed for everything? He didn't say that. In fact, the title of the thing might lead one to think otherwise.
MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#5

Post by MaineSkeptic »



Patricia,Wow. I guess the Democrats are to be blamed for everything? He didn't say that. In fact, the title of the thing might lead one to think otherwise.LOL -- I think it depends on whom one thinks one is provoking.
bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#6

Post by bogus info »



What part of President Obama has published his COLB online do they not understand. No other President has ever done this. Have they seen McCain's birth certificate? Did Palin release her birth certificate?



President Obama released the COLB which is what the State of Hawaii issues. My question is why are they trying to hold President Obama to a different standard than other Presidential candidates or Presidents.



Others in the news media were invited to inspect and photograph the COLB at the Obama Campaign HQ and only Factcheck.org showed up. McCain only let one reporter look at his but no copy was released.



There is no requirement for candidates to release anything whatsoever. What part of this do they not get? These people demand which just might be the reason why Obama refuses. I know I would bow up to them too.
bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#7

Post by bogus info »



The question of Barack Obama's birth certificate has provoked a surpisingly aggressive response from the White House and near hysteria from Obama supporters.I guess I've missed something but I sure haven't seen the aggressive response from the White House? :? Could you please point me to it? Also, the only hysteria I've seen is from the birthers--recycling piles of poop that have been debunked.
User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7809
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Everett. WA
Occupation: Middle Aged College Student

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#8

Post by PatGund »



"Did you see the way she was dressed! She was totally asking for it!"Wow. Talk about blame the victim.....
iangould
Posts: 728
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:10 am

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#9

Post by iangould »



Patricia,Wow. I guess the Democrats are to be blamed for everything? He didn't say that. In fact, the title of the thing might lead one to think otherwise.No just the financial meltdown (which was completely the result of the actions of Fannie Mse) and 9/11 (only we'll never know because Sandy Berg destroyed uncounted top secret documents - except the people at the Archives say they have multiple copies of everything he took.)Other than that for Godless baby-killing America-hating tools of the Islamo-Marxo-Fascists Democrats are okay.
User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6294
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#10

Post by June bug »



Hi Patricia,This is a perfect example of the level to which politics has sunk. Not the questioning of Barack Obama's eligibility...that's anyone's right to opine upon, informed opinion or not. But I resent like hell the wholesale character assassination of an entire class of Americans that accompanies it. On the second page of the article, there's a flat out statement that "Democrats(or "the left"?) lie, manipulate and intimidate". Throughout the piece, the writer implies that those on the left are immoral, corrupt, care nothing for American security and basically have no socially redeeming value.Sadly, this article is no anomaly. I see similar examples all too frequently, and not only from the conservative side. Although at the moment I seem to see far more of it from the right, I know some from the left were also brutal when Bush was in office. It disgusts me, whatever its source. Jihadists from the extremes of our political spectrum have chosen to engage in the "politics of personal destruction" for their own gain and/or to advance their particular agenda. They portray people who disagree with them politically as not just wrong, but evil (or psychopathic). In the same way that repeated exposure to violence numbs our ability to be shocked by it, so the constant demonization and dehumanizing of enemies eventually makes such behavior appear acceptable in the mainstream. Irresponsible people with a public pulpit who incite their followers with this swill will, at some point, "reap the whirlwind". Most unfortunately, so will the rest of us.
User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7809
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Everett. WA
Occupation: Middle Aged College Student

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#11

Post by PatGund »



[linkbtn]Damage Control: GOP Bosses Coming Down Hard On Birthers,http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009 ... hp?ref=fpa[/linkbtn]"It's now looking like a lot of prominent Republicans, ranging from party leaders to big-name pundits that we usually expect to make outrageous partisan attacks, are doing something they'd been previously neglecting: Definitively cracking down on the Birthers, rather than playing to the conspiracy theorists allowing this stuff to continue festering among their activist base.Until recently, this wasn't the situation at all. Indeed, prominent Congressional Republicans were openly entertaining this stuff. A bill to require birth certificates from presidential candidates has picked up 11 total co-sponsors; Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) declared that the Birthers "have a point," and that he doesn't discourage it. Even House GOP Vice-Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), a member of the leadership, was saying she wanted to see the documents.But now there's a pattern from on high -- in both the punditocracy and from the party leadership -- of Republicans backing away from this:"
User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#12

Post by TollandRCR »



[linkbtn]Full Quote,http://www.politijab.com/phpBB3/viewtop ... 058#p52928[/linkbtn]



The Alchemy of Democrat Cover-ups



It would be pretty hard to find me saying much good about the Clinton-Gore Administration. With Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, I believe that they caused or permitted a lot of environmental damage and advanced the environmental cause not at all. Gore is a big blow-hard on the climate issue, I think, and has done more to confuse public understanding than I would have thought it possible for one man to do. A British court even ruled that his documentary film could not be shown in British schools as science; it had to be shown as a political film. Sandy Berger was surely trying to conceal something that would make him and/or his bosses look bad. The penalty he got was absurd, but that came during the Bush Administration. Madelyn Albright did us no good on the diplomatic front, whether in the Mideast or in the Muslim world, and probably caused harm in the Mideast. Clinton's response to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center was a disgrace both militarily and politically, as was his response to the bombing of the U. S. S. Cole. He made both "Wag the Dog" and "Canadian Bacon" look to be reasonable Presidential actions. I could add the Rose Law Firm records, TravelGate, and a few others to the list. Did Clinton and Gore deceive the American public? I think they did. That is why I voted against Gore. And I would never have voted for Hillary. I might have sat out the 2008 election if she had won the nomination.



But Clinton and Gore are not identical to the Democratic Party. To accuse an entire party of engaging in cover-ups on the basis of the people who were, admittedly, its leaders for eight years is unjust. To accuse the entire Republican Party of managerial incompetence because of the way that Rumsfeld ran Bush's war in Iraq would be equally unfair. There were several Republicans who could have done a far better job than Rumsfeld did, starting with Gates. Rumsfeld was experimenting with a neo-conservative theory of American dominance, at the cost of people's lives.



The Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac thing was indeed a problem. However, it was not those two institutions that engaged in derivatives trading and in insuring those derivatives. Had we only had to bail out the FM's, TARP would have been minute in comparison to what was required. Chris Dodd contributed greatly to the FM's problems, and I hope he pays for that at the polls in 2010, even if it means losing to Rob Simmons, a moderate Republican.



So if you take out the Clinton-Gore Administration and correctly weigh the FM crises, there's not much evidence left in the article that the Democratic Party engages in cover-ups. I stipulate that the Clinton-Gore Administration was riddled with cover-ups and compromises. That does not mean that any other Democrat ought to have to bear that burden.
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut
bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#13

Post by bogus info »



June bug,I wish I'd written that. =D> =D> =D>
User avatar
Addie
Posts: 43022
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#14

Post by Addie »



Me, too. That was really good.June bug,I wish I'd written that. =D> =D> =D>
"The very least you can do in your life is to figure out what you hope for." - Barbara Kingsolver
User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6294
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#15

Post by June bug »



Bogus info and Adelante,Awww, gee thanks!
bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#16

Post by bogus info »



Obviously these individuals have never visited a birther blog, especially Dr. Taitz blog. This is hysteria. And I have many, many more just like them.





@ Phineas M.:

The worse peril to our security is the Muslim 'usurper' in now..hold onto your hat..he's about to be removed by a resistance movement waiting and ready to take our country back(unless he escapes and could be the reason they sold their house that wasn't really their house)...........check out this site if you have the balls.....





[/break1]blogspot.com/]http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/



Funny? Sure but how much does this imitate life?



Military, listen up!

Now comes your day of reckoning.

Will you wait for others to honor their Oath before YOU do?



Major Stefan Frederick Cook successfully challenged his deployment orders based on BHO's illigitimacy. Orders to deploy to Afghanistan were rescinded! Please spread this to every military person you know as it is further confirmation you have NO legal Commander In Chief. Now do you get why THEY have not arrested Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick? They CAN'T risk exposure, plain and simple. So here's your task. Use the Lt. Commander's criminal complaint and substitute your name and rank. Notarize and send to me and your State U.S. Attorneys. It will be used in Grand Jury Presentments and other actions designed to FORCE compliance of the top brass to their "OATH OF OFFICE". In case you haven't figured it out yet, it WILL be the MILITARY that comes to the rescue of our country. Only YOU can stand up against this monster. Only YOU can make the difference. We The People have had our GOD given rights stripped by the Legislative and Judicial branches of this now FOREIGN government. We stand shoulder to shoulder with you in this fight to restore America to its basis as a Constitutional Republic. The best form of government ever invented on this planet.



Here's why we need to do it NOW

[/break1]wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104009]http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104009



From a friend I get this:



After Hannity talked about Major Cook's case and the California case last night, Alan Colmes called Orly about a radio interview. It's coming out...





If the military stands up to Obama, it's all over for him. We will be rid of this imposter and his band of criminals soon. It's going to be tough, but God knows we'll make it.





YES WE CAN!

YES WE WILL!



As Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick says, "Here endeth the lesson"



Please go here to download and customize your own criminal complaint.

[/break1]riseupforamerica.com/yourcriminalcomplaint.html]http://www.riseupforamerica.com/yourcri ... laint.html



and remember to get me a copy. That's real [/break1]com]important---PRevere@RiseUpForAmerica.com



Just so you know what they think of us the call in number for the CONgressional switchboard is 1-877-SOB-USOB





[/break1]riseupforamerica.com/]http://www.riseupforamerica.com/



We will not announce any action until we are are ready so have a little patience...

I have a question for all of you..,

Do want to place your faith in the Organic Constitution or the laws of men?



We need to get rid of this man as fast as we can. Call on the military, a citizens’ volunteer army, whatever, but get rid of him soon!





Chris Smith







Jul 3, 2009 - 8:25AM QuoteReply Note from a Cop



So quiet. Hope everyone is preparing for TEA PARTIES as well as Independence day celeb.

Anyway, when you are back, here is an interesting article from a cop (now we have a sense of what might be brewing beneath the surface):



[/break1]com/2009/07/note-from-a-cop/]http://patdollard.com/2009/07/note-from-a-cop/



Note From a Cop



The fear on the street is palpable. Ever since the election of Barack Obama as President of these United States in November 2008, coupled with the election of a democrat party majority in both the U.S. House and Senate, concern for the United States and personal safety has ignited like a fire in dry grass.



Sales of guns – black guns, rifles, shotguns and handguns (particularly 9mm) everywhere, have gone through the roof. AR15s have literally flown off of dealer shelves, and only now in the spring of 2009, have I seen the display samples of ARs begin to reappear on the wall of my favorite shooting emporium after the initial post election rush.



Manufacturers of ARs are still working to catch up and some of the major suppliers are as much as 150,000 guns behind. Not only that, ammo is in the shortest supply I have ever seen in the 43 years of my shooting life. Have you recently tried to get 5.56mm, 9mm or even 380 ammo?



Supplies of 5.56mm and 9mm ammo are in short supply due to the black gun buying craze; .380ACP because of the rise in people getting concealed carry permits and the resurgence of interest in convenient 380 handguns like the fine Ruger LCP. In fact, in doing a review of the Ruger LCP, my gun store only had a small supply of ONE .380 round on hand, the Winchesters 95-grain SXT, which they had just gotten in. Unfortunately, I had to do a 30-round review of that pistol. There was none other to be found.



What is odd about this new fear is that it is not coming from the average citizen gun owner out there, but it is coming from what to me is an almost shocking source: street cops.



Street cops and SWAT cops that I know from various agencies – rural, suburban and metro – in my area are scared. Cops that before November 2008 never gave much thought (that I knew of anyway) to politics or more

importantly to gun rights. For the most part, these are the guys that didn’t generally have any interest in shooting or gun ownership beyond keeping track of where their duty gun is, and a few of them didn’t even do that so well.



The guys I am talking about now are some of the same guys who used to not even carry off duty on a regular basis- but not anymore. They don’t scare easily, defenders of the Constitution of this State and the United States (as our oath of office reads), have been buying ARs, survival gear, and all the ammo they can lay their hands on. All of them (or I should say “us”) have been discussing and have been acquiring guns to provide a layered perimeter defense.



What are we suddenly so afraid of? Well in our discussions it seems to boil down to four areas.



First, fear of federal government intrusion into our lives. Every time I look at or listen to the news, there is something new and intrusive coming out of the Obama administration and this Congress. New tax schemes, government-run Canadian-style healthcare, a volunteer citizen defense force (whatever that is, what happened to the National Guard?) equipped with funding similar to our military, forced voluntary “service” after retirement, a lack of a southern border with hordes of illegal and criminal aliens pouring over our border, the swine flu scare as well as government forced closing of thousands of privately held Chrysler and GM dealerships, which will be the final nail in the coffin for these companies and the list goes on and on.



But these items in the news are just the tip of the iceberg. We can’t see the full impact of these actions yet, but we don’t know what was added into the thousand of pages of stimulus package bills in the dead of night yet. I predict however that when the plans contained in the stimulus packages go into effect, a lot of us are going to be surprised if not shocked by what has suddenly and sweepingly changed.



What also scares us is the second, well-founded fear that there is an assault weapons ban looming, one that would make the Clinton Ban appear like a look of disdain in comparison. I remember well the 1990s and the Clinton years: the rise of militia groups, the “black helicopter” rumors and paranoia, all of which was motivated by the Brady Law and the Assault Weapon’s ban. What if a new ban comes requiring registration or confiscation and turn-in of banned weapons as what happened in Australia?



…I foresee much civil disobedience coming down the road. Americans are citizens, and not subjects like the British, Canadians or Australians. They just don’t always obey the law blindly and not one officer or citizen that I spoke to said anything like “I hope I get to keep this gun for awhile before they are banned; They are fun to shoot, so I would hate to give it up.” It isn’t going to happen, so the cop on the street and the soldier on the base needs to think now what he will do if the orders come down. I think you all get what I am saying here.



Which leads me to the third fear, that there is a revolution coming, yes, a revolution on the scale of the original American Revolution. You can hear this topic discussed on many of the talk radio shows by even the big name hosts. The possibility of an armed revolution against the U.S. government being discussed, albeit very gingerly and fleetingly and as something to be avoided, which it is. I never heard this mentioned in the 90s. One of my quietest, low profile officer friends brought it up the other day.

State: anywhereThis is another example of where we need to stick to the paragraph limit found in the new posting guidelines. I'll be dropping these reminders where necessary as people adjust.
iangould
Posts: 728
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:10 am

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#17

Post by iangould »



Sales of guns – black guns, rifles, shotguns and handguns (particularly 9mm) everywhere, have gone through the roof.what's a black gun?
MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#18

Post by MaineSkeptic »



Sales of guns – black guns, rifles, shotguns and handguns (particularly 9mm) everywhere, have gone through the roof.what's a black gun?I believe it's an untraceable gun, one that has been guided through one of the many cracks in the gun registration system.
Koyaan
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#19

Post by Koyaan »



I believe it's an untraceable gun, one that has been guided through one of the many cracks in the gun registration system.No, I think he means so-called "assault weapons," which are typically black. You know, the semi-automatic versions of REAL assault weapons that liberals like to misrepresent to the public as "assault weapons."k
Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#20

Post by Patricia »



Hi, Junebug,American politics from the beginning was like this, and actually a lot worse. This is actually quite tame compared to our earliest days. And we don't duel anymore, so that's good.
User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7809
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Everett. WA
Occupation: Middle Aged College Student

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#21

Post by PatGund »



Hi, Junebug,American politics from the beginning was like this, and actually a lot worse. This is actually quite tame compared to our earliest days. And we don't duel anymore, so that's good. I'm not sure that's good. There are people out there I'd love to invite for coffee and pistols at dawn.
User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6294
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#22

Post by June bug »



Hi, Junebug,



American politics from the beginning was like this, and actually a lot worse. This is actually quite tame compared to our earliest days. And we don't duel anymore, so that's good. Hi Patricia,



Yes, I'm aware that rhetorical nastiness and incitement to violence has always been a part of our political culture, but the internet allows it to spread farther and faster nowadays, plus cloaks it in more seeming legitimacy. I worry a lot about the consequences of that (see bogus info's post from the policeman).



I am glad we don't duel anymore (pistols would be okay, but dawn??).
Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#23

Post by Patricia »



Suborned in the U.S.A.

The birth-certificate controversy is about Obama’s honesty, not where he was born.



By Andrew C. McCarthy

Extensively hyperlinked, long article that summarizes how people like me think. I recommend reading the whole thing, so I'm not posting a teaser. I think it might surprise those of you who may think there is absolutely no valid point of view in this entire issue. I can't explain further; you'll have to read it (it's long), but I think it's really worth it for you to understand how McCarthy thinks and how thoughtful conservatives do think.

[/break1]nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=&w=MA==]http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Zm ... mU=&w=MA==
User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31131
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#24

Post by mimi »



There may be perfectly benign answers to all of this. But the real question is: Why don’t the media — the watchdog legions who trekked to Sarah Palin’s Alaska hometown to scour for every kernel of gossip, and who were so desperate for Bush dirt that they ran with palpably forged military records — want to dig into Obama’s background?Who in their right mind thinks they haven't? Who truly believes that the McCain and Clinton camps didn't have people all over Obama's records? Who doesn't think the media, especially the conservative media, wasn't all over his records?What they found, they printed. The whole Ayers thing. The whole Rev. Wright thing. The "community organizer". And, the rumors too. The problem is, they couldn't find anything else. At least nothing worth printing. And, you can be sure that they would print it had they found it.Or, is everyone in the world in on this big conspiracy? Hiding all of Obama's life. If so, they have been in on it since he was born. They found dirt on Palin because there was dirt to find. They found dirt on Edwards because there was dirt to find. And so on.
User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31131
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

A provocative conservative view on birtherism

#25

Post by mimi »



Weigel's apparent opinion on McCarthy's article:[linkbtn]Andrew McCarthy Embarrasses National Review,http://washingtonindependent.com/53305/ ... nal-review[/linkbtn]In addition to his blog entry (linked above), a few tweets from Dave:@johnhboyer But McCarthy cites wholly discredited sources. It's like an "expose" of George Bush that cites Craig Unger or Dan Rather.19 minutes ago from web in reply to johnhboyer@jimgeraghty And then he asks whether Indonesia has proof that Obama became a seeeeecret Muslim dual citizen.17 minutes ago from web in reply to jimgeraghtyThe McCarthy article is the same as when Colbert whispered to the camera's that there is no proof that Posey's grandmother had sex with an alligator.
Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”