More Birther News - INB4 GS

#1
T

therealUT

Rational Thought Allowed?
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
30,347
Likes
4,191
#1
Before GS gets on here and flames away with pictures, I will go ahead and present the latest news regarding Obama's status as a natural-born citizen. This morning, Drudge has a link to Alex Jones where Jones states the following:

What most people know is that the Associated Press (AP) is one of the largest, internationally recognized, syndicated news services. What most people don’t know that is in 2004, the AP was a “birther” news organization.
How so? Because in a syndicated report, published Sunday, June 27, 2004, by the Kenyan Standard Times, and which was, as of this report, available at
Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate

The AP reporter stated the following:

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
Click to expand...

This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office. Seeing that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004, that he was born in Kenya.

» AP declared Obama “Kenyan-Born” Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Click to expand...

Jones also states that he cannot provide any evidence of that exchange, between Obama and Keyes, because of the vast conspiracy between Google and the Obama Administration.

Further complicating matters, are the internet reports that Tom Hoefling sent the following email to someone:

Charles,

Your instincts are right. That exchange never happened. It was the invention of somebody on the internet, one which seems to have sort of taken on a life of its own.

Thanks for your diligence in getting at the truth.

Tom Hoefling
Chairman, America’s Independent Party
Chairman, Alan Keyes for President 2008
SelfGovernment.US - HOME
Category & forums listing - America's Party News
Alan Keyes is Loyal to Liberty

Myth: Obama denied being natural born in debate with Alan Keyes « Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored
Click to expand...

Maybe Tom Hoefling will step forward and reaffirm this statement (or, maybe, Alan Keyes will). However, anybody can easily watch the October 21, 2004 debate between Keyes and Obama, and find that this exchange is not present (of course, birthers claim another conspiracy, asserting that the exchange has been edited out of any and all videos of that debate).

Illinois Senate Debate - C-SPAN Video Library
 
#2
#2
the pointed attempt at marginalizing the birthers, combined with the inability to put the story to bed because of issues with birth certificates says to me there is something amiss with the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4
#4
The simple fact that the average joe can't even go get a dang drivers license without a birth certificate, but Obama became president without an authentic one reeks of corruption. Makes me sick. He is a liar and a failure in every sense of the word. If half the stuff I read on here is true...Lord help us all.
 
#5
#5
BigPapaVol said:
the pointed attempt at marginalizing the birthers, combined with the inability to put the story to bed because of issues with birth certificates says to me there is something amiss with the situation.
Click to expand...

1. Obama released his birth certificate. The onus now is on those making allegations to prove that it is faulty. This has not happened.

2. The birthers are making absurd and fantastical claims, like the claims made in the Alex Jones article. Google is involved in this conspiracy? C-SPAN? YouTube? In this age of information access, these birthers are actually claiming that this conspiracy is so overwhelming that every video account of the debate has been altered? I will apply Ockham's Razor in this case.

3. Did either Obama or his publisher lie about his origin in order to sell books? This appears quite possible and plausible. However, lying to sell books, while morally indefensible, is not a Constitutional barrier to the Presidency. The media often lies in headlines simply to shock the reader into reading the stories (we have an example of that this week on this very board regarding Florida Education). Further, for those who throw out the challenge to find something in print or in the media, prior to 2006, in which Obama states that he was born in the US, just pick up his book Dreams From My Father, written in 1995.

Birthers are marginalized because they have yet to provide one decent argument or one item of evidence that one conclusively make their case (and, for those making allegations, again, the onus is on them: does the presumption of innocence mean anything anymore?)
 
#8
#8
therealUT said:
1. Obama released his birth certificate. The onus now is on those making allegations to prove that it is faulty. This has not happened.

2. The birthers are making absurd and fantastical claims, like the claims made in the Alex Jones article. Google is involved in this conspiracy? C-SPAN? YouTube? In this age of information access, these birthers are actually claiming that this conspiracy is so overwhelming that every video account of the debate has been altered? I will apply Ockham's Razor in this case.

3. Did either Obama or his publisher lie about his origin in order to sell books? This appears quite possible and plausible. However, lying to sell books, while morally indefensible, is not a Constitutional barrier to the Presidency. The media often lies in headlines simply to shock the reader into reading the stories (we have an example of that this week on this very board regarding Florida Education). Further, for those who throw out the challenge to find something in print or in the media, prior to 2006, in which Obama states that he was born in the US, just pick up his book Dreams From My Father, written in 1995.

Birthers are marginalized because they have yet to provide one decent argument or one item of evidence that one conclusively make their case (and, for those making allegations, again, the onus is on them: does the presumption of innocence mean anything anymore?)
Click to expand...
This is all incorrect. There are way more than enough valid points about the dubious nature of the released birth certificate to question the document's veracity. The simple timing was enough.
 
#9
#9
therealUT said:
3. Did either Obama or his publisher lie about his origin in order to sell books? This appears quite possible and plausible. However, lying to sell books, while morally indefensible, is not a Constitutional barrier to the Presidency.
Click to expand...

you're right it's doesn't but it does cast some doubt. It also makes the Pres/his supporters look foolish when he claims to have no idea where they got the idea from and are just being racist
 
#10
#10
Surprised that the issue of outright lying, as has been Obama's MO from day 1, hasn't become a much bigger issue in the media. All presidents fabricate, but not in such a blatant way. Media is going very soft on Obama's very clear fantasyland tales about his resume.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
Birthers are idiots. I have no evidence of this, but there's more than enough valid examples of idiots who are birthers.
 
#12
#12
Weezy said:
Birthers are idiots. I have no evidence of this, but there's more than enough valid examples of idiots who are birthers.
Click to expand...
if that's your standard, you have to hate Obama supporters who have continued to hang on to the dream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#15
#15
therealUT said:
Negative.
Click to expand...
fair enough. Much of it was on the mark, but I was posting from my phone and was only addressing the lone point about the validity of the birth certificate.

If Obama released a legit birth certficate, why would he let this unquestionable untruth about his origins propagate for so long?
 
#17
#17
therealUT said:
However, lying to sell books, while morally indefensible, is not a Constitutional barrier to the Presidency.
Click to expand...

A history of morally indefensible actions is relevant in a Presidential campaign. This is more proof that Obama was not vetted by the mainstream media.
 
#19
#19
Weezy said:
Don't hate 'em, but they are idiots as well. Obama is a bad president, but it has very little to do with his birthplace.
Click to expand...
agreed. The debate about his birthplace is just superfluous fluff, but it's hard for me to completely write it off as unsupportable.

The enormous effort made in our media to completely marginalize everyone supporting the point seems very problematic to me.
 
#20
#20
Obama created the birther movement by refusing to release the document for as long as he did.
 
#22
#22
BigPapaVol said:
If Obama released a legit birth certficate, why would he let this unquestionable untruth about his origins propagate for so long?
Click to expand...

Is it possible that he may have had a suspicion that whatever he released was only going to add more flame to the fire? Is it possible that then the fire got so big that he figured that he at least had to try to douse the flames, even if the attempt had an equal chance of of making the fire even larger?
 
#23
#23
volved said:
A history of morally indefensible actions is relevant in a Presidential campaign.
Click to expand...

Should they be? George W. Bush's reckless past should not have been relevant; Clinton's weed smoking should not have been relevant, neither should his sexual trysts; Kerry's participation in Vietnam War protests should not have been relevant.

What should be relevant are the policies that these individuals espouse and their record of voting on such policies. On that measure, there is a great deal in which to disagree with Obama; I disagree with much of his policies and I wish he were not the POTUS (of course, I do not care for McCain to be the POTUS; I do not want Romney to be the POTUS).

But, the fact that the man's publishing house lied about him in an effort to sell books is not something that is relevant: of course, the things he says in Dreams From My Father, the ideas, particularly his affinity for socialism which he espoused in that book, should be relevant and one should ask Obama which of those ideas he still agrees with and which of them he has since discarded.
 
#24
#24
therealUT said:
Is it possible that he may have had a suspicion that whatever he released was only going to add more flame to the fire? Is it possible that then the fire got so big that he figured that he at least had to try to douse the flames, even if the attempt had an equal chance of of making the fire even larger?
Click to expand...

that doesn't remotely begin to explain allowing his editor to go unchecked with info that he knew to be absolutely false. Hell, that was long before his was a national name.

The bottom line: as your original post points out, the guy will say anything and everything if it means political gain, regardless of reality.
 
#25
#25
BigPapaVol said:
The bottom line: as your original post points out, the guy will say anything and everything if it means political gain, regardless of reality.
Click to expand...

This description applies to the vast majority of politicians and cannot be made out to be a specific point of contention with Obama, without also being the same specific point of contention with Romney, McCain, Santorum, Clinton, etc., etc. ad nauseum.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top