printIn Part I of this post, I ventured that the president was an alien on so many levels, and that I failed to see why the formality of his birth was more central than the insanity and un-American nature of his thinking.
The saga continued today, with Orly Taitz, leader and lead attorney for the “Birthers,” being “grilled”—or shall I say shouted down—by David Shyster and the brassy, breast-bearing Tamron Hall—two dye-hard, MSNBC Obama heads.
Taitz tried to state her case, but was bellowed at by these blowhards. Now, as I stated, I am uninterested in this initiative. However, two issues caught my attention:
With my knack for detecting bogus arguments, it appeared to me that Taitz—who for all I know may well be lying—did at least present arguments. An argument can be logically sound while being untrue. Her attack dogs did not; they just shouted and offered arguments from authority. This raises alarm bells for me; tweaks my interest.
The Birthers’ lawyer claimed that the Obama birth certificate was a culmination of a report to the press by parents or relatives, and was not stamped by a hospital. If this is true, then Taitz is correct: it is possible that the certificate was a misrepresentation of Obama’s place of birth. Of course, her contention may be untrue. But she presents a case that could be investigated.
Her other, perfectly coherent, contention can easily be verified by a constitutional scholar. Taitz claims that to confer presidential eligibility on their child, both Obama’s parents would have to be American. Obama’s father was neither a citizen nor was he born in the US.
And who would object to a request for the release of the following heavily guarded documents, unless Obama’s scholarly articles were devoted to an application of Critical Race Theory?:
Obama’s Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago.
I’d sure like to read his legal articles, if any.
Tamron and Shyster offered Ann Coulter in defense of their positions: the Queen Bee had called Birthers “crackpots.” Argument from authority is no argument at all. See what I’m saying?
To their taunts to Taitz that Coulter was surely not a member of “mainstream media,” Dr. Taitz ought to have replied: “Oh yes she is.” Whatever one thinks of the “Birthers,” and I don’t think about them much at all, one thing is indisputable: Ann Coulter is a mainstream Republican.
“The secret to becoming a successful right-wing columnist,” quipped Canadian conservative Kevin Michael Grace, “is to echo the mob while complimenting yourself on your daring. That’s all there is to Ann Coulter’s craft, the rest is exploitation of the sexual masochism of the American male—he just can’t get enough of the kitten with claws.”
Barry the Bolshevik claimed he was for transparency during the campaign, so the American voter should have demanded that he open up all the records you listed. When people in positions of trust want to hide practically every record , document , writings ,etc. up to the point of being elected POTUS., look out your headed for TROUBLE, sounds like snake oil salesman to me.
If I told you give me $10,000 dollars and I will turn it into a $ 1,000,000 dollars for you, would give me the $10,000 if you knew hardly anything about me, would not let you do a background check on me? Would you do it? probably not.
But that is what the American people did with HOPE-A-DOPE, Barry, who just said trust me and I will fix everything.
Until the thinking of the American peeps changes from, “Some one else is going to take care of me,” to, “I am going to grab the bull by the horns and strive to be the best I can be, just give me the freedom and liberty that made this country great and let me succeed or fail based on my own talents or abilities”—I am afraid this country is headed for a big train wreck.
Roy,
You don’t get it. The train wreck has already happened. The locomotives have already accordianed into a massive pile of smoldering steel.
We’re in the caboose a hundred cars back sipping champagne and having a grand time. Obama has things under control, don’t you worry.
Another after dinner mint to go with your drink? “What’s that shudder?,” you ask? No worries, mate. Have another swig of the bubbly. All is well.
The craziest thing in all of this is that the American people seem to have brought this on themselves. Well, most of them anyway. I feel sorry for those whose warnings went unheeded.
As far as BHO’s birth is concerned it’s pretty obvious he wasn’t born in Hawaii. They are trying too hard to evade the question. [From the fact that the questions are being ignored it doesn’t follow that he is not American.] It was decided, rightly so, that the question of his birth could be blasted by the whores of the media and the majority of the American public would let it pass as “unimportant”.
The founders were educated and religiously tolerant Northern European MEN who established principles for limited government – which I like to think are the founding principles of America. Since then, the country has attracted those seeking freedom, skilled entrepreneurs, and (sadly) many less tuned into the founding principles. So WHAT are “American values” these days??
Unfortunately, the majority of Americans eagerly belong to one 2 rival groups of corporate-state gangsters. Republicans tend to exclusiveness, plutocracy, hypocrisy, intolerance, anti-intellectualism, torture, paranoia about “commies” and “terrorists” everywhere, and an obsessive desire to spread (somewhat sound) “American” values to the third world at gunpoint. Democrats, more honestly, denounce the “dead (and living) white males” and unabashedly insist on subservience to statism, forced “tolerance”, impoverishment, coercive “altruism” … – and they would have America become part of the third world. I may not be an alien but I sure as hell feel ALIENATED!
I’d point out that Ben Franklin predicted our current morass but Prophet Isaiah nailed it in verse 1:23 –
Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves;
they all love bribes and chase after gifts.
They do not defend the cause of the fatherless;
the widow’s case does not come before them.
According to politico.com, BHO published only one anonymous article in the Harvard Law Review, a favorable review of an Illinois Supreme Court case denying the right of an unborn child to sue its mother. Actually, that would be the right of some shyster to sue the mother as the alleged representative of the unborn child. It doesn’t sound all that unreasonable.
Liberals argue from authority and shout down opponents because they’re incapable of logical reasoning and argument. If they were capable of logical reasoning, then they wouldn’t be liberals. Most of what liberals believe is absurd, but not necessarily everything.
I thought we’d settled that having a U.S. citizen mother made BHO a citizen at birth. Is that equivalent to the “natural born citizen” of Article II? The courts would probably rule that it’s close enough for government work.
If the birthers could prove that Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetero Whatever-Else was not BHO’s mother, then they might have an issue. However, actually removing BHO would require a second American revolution, or at least a coup d’etat. My own experience tells me that the set of people who engage in legalistic nitpicking and the set of people who impose their will by force are disjoint.