Conspiracy Theories

Ending the Birther Debate

Why Obama should have ignored the conspiracy theorists

|

As far as anyone can tell, the United States is still at war in Libya, though the important news this week concerned a former Miss America palpitated by the TSA, the wedding of a balding British kid called "Wills," and the release of Barack Obama's birth certificate, which confirmed that he was still eligible to be an unpopular president.

Obama is often accused of being too clever for the rubes he governs, as recently evidenced by this column from the chronically unfunny and uninteresting Dana Milbank (which also manages to accuse Winston Churchill of being a "simple thinker," and Neville Chamberlain a "complex" one) and an NPR interview with British historian Simon Schama. Every move America's president makes is judicious and thoughtful—if only his constituents were Scandinavian.

But one has to wonder about the president's political instincts when, for no good reason, he decides to produce a copy of his "long form" birth certificate, thus laying to rest one of the dumbest political controversies in recent memory. Here is the logic for releasing the document, according to the administration: The "birther" debate, which posited that Obama was the son of Mark Rudd and Rosa Luxemborg (or some such nonsense), was slithering into the mainstream, threatening to subsume more substantive policy debates.

Flip on a major network and one would find Donald Trump wagging his finger about the unknown history of a politician who managed two memoirs before his 50th birthday; Founder fetishist (who couldn't keep track of which Concord was the interesting one) Michelle Bachmann giving succor to the "issue" by saying that she would provide her birth certificate at the first 2012 presidential debate; the increasingly absurd Sarah Palin's consistently flirting with the issue, like when she recently told an interviewer that she "appreciates" Trump raising a long-ago resolved issue. And now the increasingly paranoid Matt Drudge, a frequent linker to 9/11 "truther" and mind control-investigator Alex Jones, is championing a book by conspiracy kook Jerome Corsi, with the elegant title Where's the Birth Certificate? Soon thereafter, the book climbed to number one on the Amazon.com bestseller list (even after the release of the birth certificate, the book is steady at number 49).

Because of the mainstreaming of this exceptionally boring conspiracy theory, an increasing number of Americans were willing to believe that President Obama might have been born in Kenya, or that his book was actually written by a not-particularly-clever ex-member of the Weather Underground (something Sarah Palin also intimated in recent interviews). But was it enough of a groundswell to matter; to effect Obama's chances at serving a second term? Well, no. And if it were, why not wait until election time, drawing more and more mainstream Republicans into the patently idiotic Kenyan conspiracy, and then dropping the "long form" certificate when it would have a bigger political impact?

It was, Obama said, time to end this "nonsense" and focus on issues that will surely hurt him with voters: an aimless war in Libya, a rudderless campaign in Afghanistan, ballooning deficits, stubborn unemployment figures. For this, serious Republican politicians (if any still exist) are surely grateful, provided their most prominent media figures don't shift instead to the ever-pressing issues of the president's college transcripts or the inevitable imposition of Sharia law in Oklahoma.

The lesson, though, is that those who want to disqualify a president on such an issue—rather than persuading voters that he should be rejected for his schizophrenic policies—will not be satisfied by the "long form" release, as the proliferation of blog posts "analyzing" the authenticity and "layers" of the released document quickly demonstrated. Indeed, many Americans have little time for the tedious realities and complexities of politics, preferring digestible conspiracy theories that explain the awfulness surrounding us in a 10 minute YouTube video. (Though many of the conspiracy mongers, rather than the casual consumers, offer needless complex connections between George Soros, the Koch brothers, Bechtel, the Carlyle Group, and the Federal Reserve.)

And the evidence-free claims that "racism" motivates all of the anti-Obama conspiracists, rather than plain old dumb partisanship, can't explain the existence of another book competing with Jerome Corsi on the bestseller list: Jesse Ventura's 63 Documents the Government Doesn't Want You to Read, currently in Amazon's top 100 bestsellers. Or a video making the rounds on MTV from Chicago-based rapper Lupe Fiasco—a semi-literate song about the "war on terror" and speculation about who blew up the World Trade Center. Fiasco is just the latest "conscious rapper," after KRS-One, Immortal Technique, and Mos Def, to argue on behalf of a conspiracy that almost makes birtherism look reasonable. As Politico's Ben Smith observed last week, it isn't very difficult to track down a "neutral" poll showing that "More than half of Democrats…said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks."

In other words, half the American people—liberal or conservative—can be convinced of something so implausible, so easily disproved that attempts by the executive to prevent stupid debate are a fool's errand. Instead of wasting time on mindless conspiracies, let's get back to having misinformed debates about issues that matter.

Michael C. Moynihan is a senior editor of Reason magazine.

NEXT: A Hundred Years of Reefer Madness

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “In other words, half the American people?liberal or conservative?can be convinced of something so implausible, so easily disproved that attempts by the executive to prevent stupid debate are a fool’s errand. Instead of wasting time on mindless conspiracies, let’s get back to having misinformed debates about issues that matter.”

    It’s beyond stupid that this should have even been considered in the first place. Obama was right to dismiss it as dumb and he had no need to comment on it further, can you blame him for choosing to ignore the subject that was obvioulsy trivial and had already been proved to be a non factor?

    I’m not a supporter of him, I didn’t vote for him, but jesus how come so many people are so stupid?

    1. This also is an excellent summary of why so many conspiracy theorists have gained traction in people not believing human actions have any effects on the changing climate. “It’s all just a big conspiracy put on by academia to try and trick less informed commoners and to steal their hard earned money” Propoganda with no merit is unfortunately just as easy to sell these days as it was during the stalin era

      1. “Propoganda with no merit is unfortunately just as easy to sell these days as it was during the stalin era”
        Belief in AGW is proof of this!

        1. AGW? I believe humans shouldn’t polute the shit out of the Earth, but to argue we’re going to turn this planet into Mars, or worse, Mercury, from CO2 of all things, is pure speculation.

          http://www.livescience.com/134…..orlds.html

          But, hey, it can’t be the Sun. That makes no sense! Why, let’s consider CO2 toxic and then create a scheme that profits off of carbon credits. Oh, no. Nothing funny going on there…

          http://wattsupwiththat.com/200…..-involved/

          1. Damn… I was hoping humans was going to turn Earth into J-lo’s vaja-ja.

          2. And yet you believe a blatent photoshop job and a very low resolution photostat are documentary evidence?

      2. AGW is an excellent example.

        I can disprove AGW with a simple scientific fact: The IR absorbtion of CO2 is less than that of water vapor.

        Yet you, and millions of other people are so gullible that you still think it is real and call those who know anything about science “deniers”.

        AGW is a perfect example of how people reject science and objective fact and choose instead to believe what self serving politicians tell them.

        1. Re: An Objectivist

          Does any other wavelength of light have a heating effect on the atmosphere? If so, how does the absorption of CO2 compare to water vapor for those wavelengths?

        2. So you disproved AGW by stating a commonly known fact about water vapor, which climate models show directly accounts for 60-70% of the GHG effect?

          Since you deem yourself one of the few who “know[s] anything about science” perhaps you would like to explain this new theory of yours. It seems to read that only the most powerful force acting on an object counts, and that all other forces can be disregarded as negligible.

          An Objectivists First Law of Physics?

          Keep “disproving” non science, you’re off to a thrilling start.

          1. If you’re smart enough to understand it read “Heaven and Earth” by Ian Plimer. If you still believe man is causing the destruction of the planet with global warming after that than you’re as dumb as the people who believe Obama wasn’t born in the US.

      3. Actually Doc it is a well written and wrong headed article. It’s a false dichotomy, either one must oppose Zero’s fascist policies OR ask about his faked bio. In fact both are about lies and deception. And I haven’t seen anyone address the videos that seem to me to show that this released document is a computer generated image with no original, more blue smoke and mirrors.

    2. but jesus how come so many people are so stupid?

      because they are gullible enough to believe that their political party will make a difference

      1. yeah this article does an excellent job of summing that up
        http://www.cracked.com/article…..cracy.html

        1. I guess we know what ‘S’ stands for now

        2. Seriously? Did it imply global warmi… I mean climate change. Did that article imply climate change is real?

      2. **Fart Noise**

    3. STFU already, you thunderous queef. Are you going for some kind of “most comments posted in a day” record?

    4. How is it stupid to wonder why the Obama campaign forged a birth certificate in 2008?

      The eligibility of the president is a real, legitimate issue.

      The only thing stupid here are the people who think that what was produced this week is evidence.

      I’m not a birther. I think Obama was born in hawaii and the original records were lost at some point.

      I just think that it shows how profoundly gullible people are that in 2008 so many of them bought the obvious forgery, and that now so many of them think that this photostat is “evidence” of anything.

      What was released this week is a black and white image laser printed on green paper. You can see the outline of a seam in the paper in the image that isn’t actually on the paper (the big thing on the left when you look at the uncropped image.)

      It would take me about a week to produce something like that, presuming I had copies of the appropriate signatures and a photocopy of a legit certificate.

      And in this digital age you think that is evidence?

      Just shows how stupid and gullible people are.

      And this is why the country is going to hell.

      People believe what the politicians tell them and don’t bother to be skeptical, or look with their own eyes.

      1. Your post does accurately portray why “the country is going to hell” but not in the way you intended.

        1. The doctor who had earlier been said to have delivered Zero is not the one who signed this document:

          http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185110

      2. Here is the video arguing that the Emperor released a fake document:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eOfYwYyS_c

    5. Doc S, remember that half the population is of below-average intelligence, and fully a third is a full standard deviation below average. And people, even the few smart ones (like all of us here, natch) are hardwired to seek patterns and explanations where none exist.

      1. And people, even the few smart ones (like all of us here, natch) are hardwired to seek patterns and explanations where none exist.

        FIFY

      2. I’ve read some truly stupid, clueless articles at Reason, but this one takes the cake.

        I’m glad O has put this to bed, because if there were an eligibility problem we’d have a full blown crisis on our hands. Thank God we’ve been spared that, at least.

        That said, this calls out for a well publicised procedure to vet political candidates for their qualifications, before they are entered as a candidate for office. And yeah, they should at least have to provide a level of documentation sufficient to obtain a US Passport.

        This whole thing is an indictment of the news media. People don’t trust the media, or most institutions nowadays, for very good reason. Moynihan and all of you “smart people” here should contemplate the crisis we would face if obama was found to be ineligible, and ponder what steps should be taken to make sure that doesn’t happen in the future. This country is changing rapidly, and it’s almost inevitable that unless thorough, well respected procedures are put in place vs eligibility we will eventually elect someone who doesn’t qualify.

        That would be a nightmare, but I wouldn’t expect a Libertarian to think about this in depth (or much else, for that matter).

    6. Obama lies about everything and the media covers up everything, so it was natural for people demanding transparency, who are reductionistically labelled “birthers” by the same Leni Reifenstahl wannabees, to think everything about his origins is a lie.

      He obviously released the document, whatever ITS origins or manufacture, when he did, to distract from his sagging polls and performance. Another deception.

    7. Doc, apparently you don’t understand that when someone attempts to hide something (birth certificate, grades, past associations) then people become suspicous. Add to that the fact that Obama is a lying SOB, and you have the reason that people are will to expect the worse.

      I hope you are not a real doctor. You don’t seem to be able to think critically.

  2. I think “palpitated” should be “palpated.”

  3. Ok this is complete fucking bullshit!!!

    Reason magazine staff have absolutely no right to be bitching about media attention being pulled away from “important news” and being directed at the birther phenomena.

    It was right here at Reason’s own Hit and Run during the heady days of the 2008 presidential election that Reason’s own Weigel drudged up every kook he could find and expose their birther conspiracies.

    For months election correspondent (spelling?) Weigel droned on and on about birther this and birther that and the whole while completely ignored the 2008 election.

      1. Nah

        It is a rare thing for reason to cut comments.

        When it happens it usually involves a law suit or drawings of Mohamed.

    1. I thought the author of this article was Michael Moynihan.

      1. At least twice this week Chief Editor Nick has also made a similar claim that the birther thing was a distraction.

        Moynihan is and was a senior editor and was well within his power to tell Weigel to report on real news and/or to fucking write real news about the election himself.

        To bemoan media distraction when it was well within your power to ignore that distraction and do nothing is pure bullshit hypocrisy.

        Is it unfair that i chose Moynihan’s article to finally explode? Sure i will give you that. I love Mike and actively seek out the articles he writes.

        Still I will not stand idly by when he and Nick post this sort hypocritical bullshit.

        1. Former Chief Editor Nick.

          1. Editor in Chief, Reason.com and Reason.tv

            https://reason.com/people/nick-gillespie/all

            Hit and Run is part of Reason.com.

            Matt runs the magazine.

        2. I love Mike and actively seek out the articles he writes.

    2. Weigel wasn’t doing it because he is a ratfucking Journolist. He just wanted to get into Orly Taitz* panties.

      I never read a thing about this chick and her “birtherism” that wasn’t written by a “Progressive”

    3. You have to understand that DC libertarians live in a liberal Democratic terrarium and easily fall into the cultural assumptions of the ruling class media with whom they socialize. That’s why they are berated by other libertarians, often unfairly, as “cosmotarians,” “Beltway libertarians” (“Craniacs,” “Kochtopus” etc).

      EVERY other issue is more important than where Mama Sotero’s placenta hit the ground. But media deception is a much bigger issue.

      Birthers aren’t really “birthers.” They are transparency advocates protesting media bias and cover up (akin to the cover up of Clinton’s sexual assaults and John Edward’s love child with a deranged stalker employee and Teddy Kennedy’s murder or manslaughter of a staffer he had probably impregnated and obviously committed adultery with, and the Kennedy administrations cover up of JFK’s adultery and possible (delegated) murder of Marilyn Monroe — not to mention Jesse Jackson, Dodd, Waters, Rangels etc financial shenanigans — i.e. their constant cover ups of major character flaws of Democratic leaders) and Obama’s lawyers spending millions to seal these records, including transcripts, client lists etc.

      1. Yeah, what Bruce said.

  4. You guys are crazy. I’ve studied the econ. theories of John Maynard Kenya and Obama is totally a Kenyan.

    1. LOL. Possibly the best comment I’ve ever read on this entire conspiracy theory.

      1. I hadn’t seen that but I heard that there’s been some confusion on the matter. That’s a funny video.

  5. Not only was Michael Moynihan born in Siberia, he was also instrumental in causing to Tower of Pisa to lean!

    1. Moynihan is a sleeper cell agent of Enver Hoxha and he recently produced an anchor baby.

      1. He is just another Obama “mainstream media” stooge who is clearly under the control of flourescent light bulbs (see Alex Jones brilliant expose)!

  6. Obama must’ve gone Birther with some calculation this was way to agitate his base and promote his most moronic critics into the mainstream opposition’s debate.

    In that measure it kind of worked but its a political-capital version of his financial schemes: short term gain for long-term pain.

  7. I disagree that this conspiracy was boring. The implications of a president suddenly found to be ineligible for the office years after taking the oath are interesting. What happens next? Is the affair a criminal offense? Do the bills he signed stand?

    What truly makes the palace intrigue here uninteresting is that the implausible discovery was never going to be sudden. There was never going to be proof positive one way just like there’s not really proof positive the other way now (you know what I mean!). And then the situtation becomes disheartening when you realize whose butt hits the big chair in the Oval once the usurper gets sent back to his birthplace.

    1. DID SOMEONE SAY TRAIN!? NO? WELL I DID!

      TRAINS!

      1. “TRAIN” It’s a 5 letter word.

        T…R…A…I…N…S.

      2. I like trains.

        But defund Amtrak NOW!!!11!1!!!!!11one!

        Or let me compete with it…

        1. The Chinatown, Bolt, and other buses already do what Amtrak does far more cheaply. $40 round trip DC-NYC. And their drivers don’t crash every year.

  8. “In other words, half the American people?liberal or conservative?can be convinced of something so implausible, so easily disproved that attempts by the executive to prevent stupid debate are a fool’s errand.”

    There were many things driving the birther issue and not all of it had to do with where BO was born. I don’t think you really have meaningful data that supports your conclusion.

    1. Please tell us about the many other things, and can I subscribe to your newsletter?

      1. Well, since you ask and, even though you did so in a snarky way, let me suggest that a lot of the fervor was people being really pleased to see someone aggressively take on BO(that’s Barach Obama for people who call themselves Episiarch). Along the same line, is that BO(see above, Episisarch), tends to act like he is above the law and above everybody else. Conservatives have been wimps and failures at being fiscal conservatives.
        Apparently, cohones are required to confront BO(see above, Episisarch) and they were missing among conservatives. Trump wasn’t afraid of BO or his derriere humping press.

        1. What the hell are you blathering on about?

        2. So it really was because he’s black?

          1. WOW! You can regurgitate the democrat’s “racism” talking point.

            1. Dude, calm yourself. Learn to take a joke.

      2. No one ever asked Michael Dukakis to reveal his birth certificate, even though neither of his parents were from the US. Indeed, no candidate for the presidency had been required to show a birth certificate ever before.

        So it’s pretty hard to argue that it didn’t start out as a cover for the refusal to accept a black president, by a small cadre of racists. Of course, then the mindless Team Red drones simply saw it as a convenient stick with which to beat Team Blue, so they grab a hold of it and flail away, not realizing where it came from.

        In short, not every birther is a racist, but that’s pretty obviously where the origin of birtherism lies.

        1. the issue caught fire because of his refusal to produce it. He fed the fire of controversy

        2. So it’s pretty hard to argue that it didn’t start out as a cover for the refusal to accept a black president, by a small cadre of racists

          Racist Hillary supporting Democrats? Because that’s where this whole thing started.

          Yes, it was picked up later by his conservative opponents, but a lot of that had to do with how Obama acted. First he releases a digital picture of a new certificate he obtained in 2007, via Daily Kos no less. Then they let FactCheck.org check it out in their offices for a little bit. He never explained why it was necessary to get a new one in 2007 when he obviously had a certified copy at one time. (Probably lost it, but why not just say so?) He spends a lot of money defending against lawsuits instead of just asking for a certified copy of the original (which obviously wasn’t a problem). It’s reasonable to believe that he did all of this on purpose to pump up the controversy, so he could make birthers look stupid at a time of his choosing, so I have no problem with it backfiring on him a little bit.

          1. The Birther Conspiracy was dreamt-up by Rahm Emanual (sp?) and the guy who actually wrote his book (ayers) in order to marginalize both a section of the Clinton Supporters and of the Tea Party.

            That is a brilliant conspiracy.

            In all honesty, I believe the Obama planners saw they were getting some traction in marginalizing the opposition, and the decision to release now is based on the loss of said traction.

        3. Indeed, no candidate for the presidency had been required to show a birth certificate ever before.

          That does kinda seem like an oversight.

        4. Indeed, no candidate for the presidency had been required to show a birth certificate ever before.

          Chester A. Arthur

          1. That was sideburnsism, a type of bigotry that has vanished along the wayside, unfortunately.

        5. No other President was known to have a non citizen father. Chester Arthur went to great lengths to hide that his was from the public.

        6. No you’re just another tired idiot Demwit whore. Since you like smears and name calling.

          Leftards have been screaming racism for years because they have nothing else. When Clinton’s multiple sexual assaults became news, novelist Toni Morrison complained that “they are treating Clinton like he was a black president” for not covering up the issue.

          Democrat defenders are whores and should be shot on sight.

          1. Wow so much wrong here…

            1. No you’re just another tired idiot Demwit whore. Since you like smears and name calling.
            F for grammar. It would have been smarter and more coherent to combine these two into one sentence.

            2. Aren’t you just smearing and name-calling him? You’re not exactly practicing what you preach.

            3. If you think Tulpa is Demwit you are either new here or a complete fucking moron.

  9. I was thinking the same thing – Obama should have let this go.

    All it was doing was making its proponents look like conspiracy nuts. Also, to the base, it was further evidence that “all Republicans are teh racist!” I doubt that anyone who thought (or thinks) Obama was born in Nairobi or Jakarta would vote for him in any event.

    …this column from the chronically unfunny and uninteresting Dana Milbank (which also manages to accuse Winston Churchill of being a “simple thinker,” and Neville Chamberlain a “complex” one…

    Winston Churchill was a better writer than Milbank could ever dream of being. I suspect this is jealousy.

    1. I hate to point out the incredibly obvious, but clearly he did this because it was starting to hurt him politically. They probably had polls showing that even independents were beginning to question his legitimacy.

      1. Ah – I hadn’t heard that. Also, that’s pretty fucking sad. I do not like Obama, but there are real reasons to dislike him – a lot of them – instead of made up BS that’s just a distraction.

        1. His the name change from Barrack, to Barry, to Barrack a reason to dislike him?

          I’m always suspicious of people who change their name

      2. Spittles Matthews was running stories on “DeBalled” about how many people, including independents, either thought Obama was not born in the US or said they were uncertain.

  10. Since we’re on the subject, has any of us ever seen Michael Moynihan’s birth certificate?

    I’m not saying there’s anything improper going on; I’m just asking questions.

    1. I have it on good authority that he has spent a great deal of time abroad, in countries where they don’t even speak English.

      1. *clutches pearls*

      2. Mostly the frozen PC land of pornography and socialism.

        1. Who knows what sort of ideas he picked up in Scandanavia? He probably shops at Ikea. **shudders**

          1. And drives a Saab. A Saab!

            1. I heard good ole American — DC! — rats ate the fancy wires in his furrin car.

    2. Luis CK is a Mexican…

      Just saying.

  11. “In other words, half the American people?liberal or conservative?can be convinced of something so implausible, so easily disproved that attempts by the executive to prevent stupid debate are a fool’s errand.”
    So, assuming the other half remain divided, the Truthers and the Birthers could unite to form the Hurr Durr Party.

  12. “preferring digestible conspiracy theories that explain the awfulness surrounding us in a 10 minute YouTube video. ”

    See you on Reason TV!

  13. Anyone been to lonewacko’s site lately? He claims the longform isn’t admissible because it wasn’t evaluated by a list of “document experts” who are “above reproach”. Funny stuff.

    1. Wow his layout is awful now.

      I wonder if he knows he picked the same color scheme as the Mexican flag?

      1. Someone call INS.

  14. Still does not answer my question:
    “Where was Barack Obama on the day that JFK was shot?”

    1. Well we know Obama was only 2 years old in 1963. Or so his birth certificate says. How convenient…

      1. JFK was going to spill the beans

    2. he was in the Book Depository but it wasn’t to aid and abet Oswald. He was there reading books on socialism 😉

  15. “As far as anyone can tell, the United States is still at war in Libya.”

    Damn you, it’s not a war! It’s a kinetic military action!

  16. Posted this earlier today, the real issue is not Obama’s citizenship but Superman’s!

    Superman threatens to renounce U.S. citizenship

    LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Superman, citizen of the world?

    The Man of Steel, in the latest issue of Action Comics which hit newsstands on Wednesday, said he intends to renounce his U.S. citizenship in a speech before the United Nations.

    In the comic, Superman never actually renounces his citizenship, he only talks about his plans to do that. But conservative commentators reacted with disgust to the new storyline, given that the fictional superhero has long proclaimed he stood for “Truth, Justice and the American way.”

    http://www.reuters.com/article…..J220110429

    1. Superman is an illegal immigrant and should be deported with the utmost haste. Stealing jobs from hardworking unionized American superheroes for less pay.

      1. HULC smash SCAB! HULC SMASH!

      2. HULC no like NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY! HULC want card check for EQUITABLE WORKPLACE! Education cuts make HULC angry! ANGRY! HULC SMASH!

    2. Does Superman Even Have Legitimate US Citizenship to Renounce?

      Two views:

      “since he was never formally adopted, Superman is officially classified as an illegal alien. By the logic of most conservatives, he does not therefore have US citizenship to renounce.”

      http://www.independent.co.uk/n…..76861.html

      “Byrne made two fundamental changes to Superman’s history that have tremendous relevance to the current “Superman renounces his citizenship” storyline. In the first, Kal-El did not travel from Krypton to Earth as an infant, to be found by the Kents in Kansas. Instead, Jor-El and Lara El took their fertilized embryo, placed it in a “matrix,” and launched that into space from the dying planet. That “matrix” carried the embryo to Earth, nurturing and developing the fetus until arrival — at which point it released it at the Kent’s touch. The Kents then presented the newborn infant as their own biological child –a conveniently nasty winter gave them the cover for an announced “pregnancy” and “home birth.” So, stripped of all the technobabble, Kal-El was “born” in Kansas, which makes him an American citizen.

      http://wizbangblog.com/content…..e-goes.php

      1. I’d think that we’d have to see Superman’s long-form birth certificate to be sure, though.

      2. Sorry to burst your bubble, minge, but Superman is a fictional character.

        If you would do a little research before posting it would save you from looking like a fool.

        I am glad to see that you have begun quoting passages that aren’t yours. In the past your copy and paste style (without quotes, italics, brackets, blockquote, or citation) made it seem as if you were trying to pass off others work as your own.

        Passing off others work as your own is known as plagiarism and is considered a serious breech of ethics (even in an informal setting such as a website comments section).

        1. I agree! Don’t let plagiarism ruin your career as it has mine!

          1. It wasn’t that face?

        2. I’m not sure what makes you look worse, that you humorously feel the need to point out that Superman is not real or that you had such a difficult time understanding my cut and pastes (underneath a headline no less) of articles with link provided in morning links were not meant to be my own.

        3. Huh, you’re kind of an uptight twat.

      3. In the original he was adopted by the Clarks, so either way he was still an American citizen.

        1. Oops, make that the Kents.

        2. If he was adopted as part of a lie is he legal?

          1. Yes.

      4. You are all forgetting one important point, Superman can not be a citizen because he is not a Human Being, he’s
        a Kryptonian.

        1. Why couldn’t a Kryptonian immigrate? That’s racist.

          1. No, He’s not from a different race, he’s a different species and not even an earthborn species.

    3. If Superman is leaving America I wonder if he will take me with him.

      Also did Superman just pull an Atlas Shrugged?

      1. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

  17. “The lesson, though, is that those who want to disqualify a president on such an issue?…?will not be satisfied by the “long form” release, ”

    Why don’t we just wait and see if people are persuaded or not? Pundits all over the place are shrieking that it won’t make a difference – let’s see what people think in a month.

    1. I don’t care where he was born. He says he was born here, so be it.
      He’s better than Hamsterking was.

  18. This subject is making debate over the GZM look sophisticated and erudite by comparison. Never thought I’d say that.

  19. Michael, your link goes to your desktop
    not-particularly-clever ex-member>>
    file:///C:/Users/Michael/Desktop/COAK.docx

  20. This will never end the birther conspiracies, but it was a good move on Obamas part. The birthers have gone so mainstream in the Republican party that they will be almost impossible for the serious candidates to just dismiss. By kicking out the main leg of the conspiracy (no long form) he left them with the really wacky parts that look like crazies baying at the moon.

    The issues that Obama should really have to answer for, like the wars, medical care, and the economy, won’t even be part of the debate while the media gives Trump and Palin a platform to make the Republicans look ridiculous.

    Time to tell Republicans “you never go full retard”.

  21. I actually disagree with this analysis. The real reason he put out the birth certificate was so we could all have an “ohh daaamn!!” moment where the GOP (or at least the extreme birthers) looked extremely stupid. As they now scramble to find a new issue to vent about, President Obama looks a bit more reasonable.

    1. WRONG!

    2. Birthers only look stupid to people who have no integrity… people who think fraud is a good thing.

      Certainly not to any genuine libertarians.

      1. Birthers only look stupid to people who have no integrity… people who think fraud is a good thing.

        Certainly not to any genuine libertarians.

        But what do true Scotsmen think of them?

  22. The problem for the GOP is that they are just as vulnerable on the “serious issues” as Obama is, due to their behavior during the Bush years.

  23. If I were to take the title of this post seriously, then I would conclude there is a birther “debate”.

    Really–a “debate”? Like the “abduction by aliens” “debate”? The Bermuda Triangle “debate”? The Protocols of the Elders of Zion “debate”?

    Jesus fucking Christ, H&R–act like you know what words mean.

    1. There is a debate since no original birth certificate has ever been produced. The one from 2008 was a blatent forgery, and the current one would be trivial to forge.

      You can’t call yourself a libertarian and support fraud.

      1. But why do you call yourself an “objectivist”?

        1. because philosophical zombie is already taken

      2. An Objectionist, have you met my friend Occam? You should check out his razor.

  24. A lot of people are just in on the joke. Pollster asks if you believe Obama was born here, just answer hell no. Screw with the pollsters. Screw with the politicians. Screw with the media. That’s pretty much what Trump was doing and will continue to do. People not in on the joke will get their panties in a bunch, which feeds the spectacle. When it’s time to get serious, these libtards won’t have any idea what hit them. Which is as it should be.

    1. Worst strategy ever.

  25. Yes, finally! Obama’s birth certificate is out and Prince William is married. Will the media and the pundits please actually talk about something important? I’m sure my pleas will fall on deaf ears…

    1. Yes, we need an article on the mystery of the chupacabras.

    2. What do you expect them to talk about? The financial crisis and the economy? Whom do you expect to do that? Alan Greenspan’s wife Andrea Mitchell? David Gregory, whose wife was a Fannie Mae lobbyist?

  26. Seriously though. Is there someone dumber than a fucking birther?

    1. Yeah, you are. Not only are you dumb, you are ignorant of the facts in the situation.

      1. Facts, like Obama was born in Hawaii?

    2. How about this guy:

      http://www.davidicke.com/

  27. I think the people laughing and pointing at the “birthers” are the ignorant rubes that let politicians get away with this.

    Whenever a politician commits a crime (including fraud) the people who attempt to call him on the crime are beset on all sides by stupid rubes laughing and pointing. “As if a president would sign an unconstitutinal law, oh, you and your conspiracy theories!”

    What created the birther issue was the forgery of Obama’s birth certificate during the campaign. IF the campaign had never released a forged certificate, nobody would be wondering why they were releasing forged certificates.

    The idea that it is trivial to “prove” obama was born in america just shows how profoundly stupid statists really are (and yes, if you think the birther thing is “conspiracy theory” then you’re a statist.,)

    What was produced this week was not an original document. It was an photostat image (that is, a 1 bit black-and-white) of some document then printed on green backed paper. This is really easy to see. IT might be from a photocopy process. The original records might be lost, I don’t know.

    But we have seen two birth certificates– one a blatent forgery, and one that doesn’t even try to be authentic because it is at best a photocopy, and would be trivial to forge. (since the evidence of forgery is lost by the low resolution of the imaging process.)

    —-

    I think obama was born in hawaii and that the records were simply lost.

    But anyone who claims there it is obvious he was born in the US, is without honor.

    And it is this lack of honor that has let the country go to hell.

    You can’t be a libertarian, say you oppose the initiation of force and then support fraud. (and if you do, you’re either so lacking in honor that you’re just plain evil, or too stupid to recognize the contradiction.)

    1. Are you seriously blaming liberals for this one?

      1. I love the intellectual dishonesty of the non-argument. “Are you seriously that stupid?”

        Just front like the person who presented arguments is saying something absurd and that way you don’t have to actually rebut them.

        I see you’ve been well trained in not-thinking.

        1. I see you’ve been well trained in not-thinking.

          Your not answering training is coming along well too 😉

      2. Objectivist these sheeple are beneath you; “rather” doesn’t even know that Hillary lawyer Philip Berg started the birther issue.

    2. No other president has ever been expected to produce a birth certificate. Why start with Obama?

      You don’t have to answer, I’m pretty sure I know why already.

      1. Previous Presidents had American parents and huge families who were all American born, and doctors and nurses and crib mates who remember them from the time they were infants.

        Not a half-sister and a step-father from Asia, an alleged biological father from Africa, and no one who has any polaroids of them as an infant in the US.

        1. And you care about all this because of a constitutional violation? A perceived lie? Or something else you’re too dishonest to admit?

          1. I care about it because cretins like you try to smear people as racists when they demand that politicuans and the media not lie. While you simultaneously round up black kids and sell them to educrat unions for Democratic Party campaign contributions. (As Obama and Durbin axed the school voucher program in DC to buy union votes.)

            I care about it because our public discourse is polluted by racist, statist morons like you who need to be flushed.

  28. Any consideration of Barack Obama should begin with an appreciation of the fact that he has always concealed virtually the entire paper trail of his existence. Practically every personal record and document from his past has never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scritiny.

    Astute observers in corridors of power and other quarters have tended to take Obama at his word, that he was indeed born somewhere in Hawaii. Most serious people in public life consider it unlikely that he was born anywhere else.

    Whether his actual birth mother was in fact the late Stanley Ann Dunham and his biological father the late Kenyan Barack Obama “Sr.” is quite another matter, one that has long been the subject of international speculation that is growing with the approach of the 2012 presidential election.

    The controversy of the true origins of the man of mystery known as Barack Hussein Obama is fast becoming less a matter of “Where?” and more a matter of “Who?”

    Whether the current president’s actual birth mother was the late Stanley Ann Dunham or some other female, and whether his actual biological father was the late Kenyan Barack Obama “Sr.” or his boyhood mentor the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis or his late “grandfather” Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate – see cashill.com among numerous other sources) or some other man, is all far less important to the future of the United States than the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

    This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that American voters believe they have the need, and the right, to know.

    The sort of information that Obama and his handlers are determined to keep from them.

    They were able to hide his past and explain away and minimize his relationships with highly controversial individuals and groups during their 2008 campaign.

    Will they be able to effectively repeat this deception between now and 6 November 2012?

    Only if you let them.

    1. Looks like most of the people commenting on this article are happy to let them repeat the deception. They’d rather feel smugly superior in their ignorance by labelling others as “conspiracy theorists” than actually have personal integrity.

      1. Keep digging. It’s funny.

      2. I live how the Honolulu newspaper was in on the act by printing his birth notice. Or did they subsequently add the deception to all the existing papers as well as the microfilm / fiche copies around the country?

        The conspiracy was well managed, far more so than anything else the Obama administration has done.

        1. The fact that Hawaii doesn’t competently keep records or originals, that Mama Sotero wanted baby Zero to get bennies in the US, Indonesia etc and told everybody he was a citizen of whatever country he was on welfare in at the time, and that the state of Hawaii issues a certificate of live birth for any kid born anywhere to anyone claiming Hawaii as a primary residence (and then runs a newspaper announcement), isn’t a conspiracy. The conspiracy is pretending that those states of affairs don’t exist.

      3. No. Most of the people commenting on this article want BO defeated legitimately via ballot, not some bullshit.

    2. Have you investigated the probability that his birth name was actually Kal-El and that he was an illegal immigrant child of two foreigners?

      I’ve seen the picture of him with the statue. Coincidence? I think not.

      1. If an out of state birth was registered in Hawaii, which was possible at the time, the birth announcements would have been placed just like normal. So the newspaper announcements prove nothing.

        1. If an out of state birth was registered in Hawaii, the birth certificate would give the city and state/country where the person was born, it would not say that the person was born in Hawaii as Obama’s does.

          1. I doubt you can prove that. I was born around the same year as Obama. My mom got my biological father listed as my father on my birth certificate, even though they had never been married, she had left him, he was 3,000 miles away, and he didn’t know she was pregnant.

            In the 50s and 60s, when people could claim kids as dependents without getting them social security numbers first, a parent could get anything they wanted on a birth certificate.

            1. Women can still name just about any man they want to as the father of their child when filling in the paperwork to register the birth. Courts often take issue after the fact when paternity suits arise but birth registrars rrarely question information furnished like this.

              Birth registrations rely on information furnished by the parent(s). So it is easy to perpetuate misspellings, wrong times and even wrong dates.

              They also require the signature of an attending physician for a birth that happened in that locale.

              So yes, you can put a certain amount of false information on a birth certificate. Place of birth is one of the harder ones.

              IceTrey, Sun Yat Sen was deliberately trying to obtain a BC that showed him as born in Hawaii, not to record the simple fact of his birth. He did so with afidavits when he was 34 YO (read your link). It is much harder to get birth records created after the fact these days when birth registration is universal and practically intantaneous in developed countries today.

              None of this creates proof that BO’s BC is a forgery or a fraudulent misrepresentation. Get back when you have some actual evidence.

              You know, burden of proof and all that.

          2. Hey even Sun Yat Sen was born in Hawaii.

            http://www.scribd.com/doc/9830…..-in-Hawaii

  29. It’s interesting that you can see two conspiracy theories going on here. The first invovles those who think Hawaii’s officials have hoodwinked eveyone into thinking that there is sufficient documentation on hand to show he was born in the United States. The second are those who think the “progressive MSM” is creating/magnifying the Birther movement to tar noble conservatives. I guess they rigged all those polls showing the significant chunks of GOPers who believe this stuff…

    1. It’s yet another Thirty Xanatos Pileup on the highway of truth.

  30. When the whole birth certificate thing first started, I looked into it further. Luckily, I have an old Army buddy who works in the Hawaii Department of Health, so I emailed him. This was his response:

    Yeah I know I heard that too bro. I wanted to check it out for myself, but they’re pretty up tight about only looking stuff up fro official busness here. I don’t have access to any actual documents but I can see where a request for an official copy was processed back in April. The one that you linked to to on the website looks real. Hell it looks just like mine bro. Maybe I wasn’t born on Oahu either lol. Its too bad that its nt true though cuz I have a bad feeling this dudes gonna get elected. There is to many lazy bitches out there who want free stuff that are gonna vote for him

    I don’t expect my post here to convince anyone of anything, but I trust my friend without question. According to him, the certificate Obama produced in 2008 was the real thing. That’s why I consider the whole birther issue a conspiracy theory, because for it to be true, then either one of the most honest men I’ve ever known is lying to me, or the Hawaiian Dept of Health is in on the conspiracy. I find neither of those scenerios plausible.

    1. There is to many lazy bitches out there who want free stuff that are gonna vote for him

      I believe your email is authentic because the language is 100% libertarian speak

  31. It is beyond reason that candidates are not made to submit documents proving their eligibility to hold the office they are seeking. Either you remove the requirement from the Constitution or you make sure they are complied with. We have better screening for minimum wage workers at the company I run.

    Besides that point though the article totally missed the main reason it is so easy for many people to believe that Obama is not an American citizen and that is the fact of his total ignorance of our Constitution, our history, our peopl, our culture or even how many states make up our union. He has a foreign sensibility in every respect and a contempt for our tradition of liberty.

    He is from my generation so I know profound ignorance of the sort he displays is not a generational thing, although I am sure he has been handicapped by the schools he has attended in that regard.

    I have said from the start that Obama is American by birth, but un-American by choice.

    1. To whom would candidates submit such “proof”? IOW, what agency or bureau is in charge of vetting candidates’ eligibility for national office?Federal Election Commission? Congressional subcommittee? Supreme Court? Can you see the constitutional problems this might cause? Those disposed to believe a candidate is ineligible will not be swayed by any “evidence” offered.

      Ultimately, a candidate’s eligibility is a political question, to be hashed out during the campaign. So stupid is the electorate, and so tired was the country of GWB and the GOP, that Obama might have captured a plurality of popular votes, if not a majority, even if he’d been found a week before the election to have been merely a naturalized citizen, or not a citizen at all.

      1. Actually it’s up to each state to decide if a candidate is eligible for that states ballot.

      2. Actually it’s up to each State to determine if a candidate is eligible to appear on that States’ ballot.

  32. Dat Obamie gonna put me up in front of a def panel an I don’t need no def panel cause I can hear real good cause I listen to the Limbaugh. An he gonna take my guns away and make me marry a gay. Well I don’t wanna marry a gay even though they dress nice and stuff. An dat Obamie blew up 9/11 to burn up his birth certificate so when he go up in front of da def panel he say “Ha I don’t have no birth certificate so you can’t make me marry a gay”. An if you are good with your thinker you can see right through dat stuff.

    1. I wished all of my remaining fans were capable of the kind of supple and subtle satire as you show here, my friend.

      Don’t stop believing!

  33. OK, those guys really seem to know whats going on over there. WOw.

    http://www.real-privacy.eu.tc

  34. How dare Obama make me look like a drooling moron! Inpeach!

  35. Looks like most of the people commenting on this article are happy to let them repeat the deception. They’d rather feel smugly superior in their ignorance by labelling others as “conspiracy theorists” than actually have personal integrity.

    Your 4.30.11 @ 3:58AM comment is so full of utter bullshit that I wouldn’t even give you the dignity of labeling you a “conspiracy theorist”.

    You’re just an moron.

  36. We’re so sorry to have inconvenienced Barack Obama(Soetoro) to actually prove where he was born and who his parents are. Americans are not “bemused”. Assuming the BC is legitimate the next important questions are: Who in our government determined Barack Obama qualifies as a Natural Born Citizen? How was that determined? Was it debated as with McCain’s eligibility? Is Barack qualified simply because he was born in the United States? If so, does that mean than an illegal from China, Mexico or the middle east can have a child become president? These question should’ve been resolved prior to the election but they will be resolved.

    1. Wow. You’re trolling, right?
      Just in case you’re not…
      Yes, McCain’s eligibility was questioned and was settled by the Senate in a bill sponsored by none other than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

      And yes, you are a citizen and a natural born one if you are born in this country. That’s per the US Constitution, so pure Constitutionalists should have no problem with that one.

      1. Yes, McCain’s eligibility was questioned and was settled by the Senate in a bill sponsored by none other than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

        No number of Senate resolutions can make a person who did not meet the criteria for becoming a citizen by birth at the time of their birth into a natural born citizen, although it might be possible for a whole class of people to have their status changed.

        McCain became a citizen at birth because his parents were both citizens which counted no matter whether the place he was born conferred that status or not. At the time, people born in the Canal Zone did not get citizenship if their parents were not US citizens.

    1. What a load of crap.

      Incidentally, we know factually that the green “safety paper” in question did not exist and was not used in 1961…

      Yes, I’m sure the officials at the Dept of Health would have gone to a museum to find a Photostat machine like the one they used in 1961 to make the only “long form” BC they’ve made in years. And God only knows where they would find a stock of authentic photostat paper to feed into it.

      Surprise, they printed out a digital image of the record book page onto the paper stock they use in 2001. Which happens to be green safety paper.

      And if some of the newspaper story images don’t show the safety paper it is easily explained by the fact that safety paper does not reproduce true (that’s why it’s called safety paper) and with some copiers and scanners not at all.

      Grasping at straws.

      Oppose BHO on the actual issues stop using bullshit based on uterr ignorance and stupidity like this.

      1. OOPS

        “…the paper stock they use in 2001.”

        of course should be:

        “…the paper stock they use in 2011.”

        1. Although they did use it in 2001. That’s when I got my copies of my Hawaiian birth certificate. And guess what, it’s on green safety paper. Just like the preznit’s.

          1. Isaac how do we know you were really born in Hawaii? Just asking questions…

            1. 🙂

  37. Thank you, Mensan|4.30.11 @ 10:15AM. Your post confirms my experience with my own birth certificate from the State of Hawaii.

    What created the birther issue was the forgery of Obama’s birth certificate during the campaign. IF the campaign had never released a forged certificate, nobody would be wondering why they were releasing forged certificates.

    On what evidence do you assert that the birth certificate posted online by the Obama campaign is a forgery? If it is a forgery then maybe so is the one I received from the State Department of Health in 2001. Thousands of people born in Hawaii have nothing except a certificate like that to prove that they are American citizens. Pleas note that the Hawaii State Department of Health oes not offer a “long form” birth certificate on their website nor do they offer any way to obtain one. They apparently only furnished the one to BHO by . It’s probably the only one they’ve made in years.

    Now, it is possible that the copy online is a forgery. It is certainly not valid for legal purposes. The only one valid for legal purposes is the one (that looks just like that) on green safety paper with a raised seal. The raised seal and, IIANM the watermark, do not reproduce when photocopying or scanning thus prevent forgeries being made (or, at least making it a lot more difficult).

    Such a certificate is all the passport office requires to prove citizenship for the issuing of a passport.

    Oh, and I believe if you check the record, what created the birther issue was a Hillary Clinton campaign worker bringing it up believing it would help her in the primary. Reason one to doubt the birther allegations – if the Clinton machine couldn’t come up with any evidence to prove it such evidence does not exist QED.

    What was produced this week was not an original document. It was an photostat image (that is, a 1 bit black-and-white) of some document then printed on green backed paper.

    WTF?? Do you think the Department of health sends you the original document? How would they ever send a duplicate if you or someone else needed one? Any such record will, of course, be a copy. When they actually used to furnish a “long form” BC it was a photostatic copy with a raised seal and a signature by an official of the department. My old long form from the Territory of Hawaii issued in 1948 had an affidavit signed and sealed by a health department bureaucrat that it was a true copy of the original document. It is an old style photostat (negative image) with a white space for the signature.

    Todays COLB simpply states that the original record exists and says the thing that appear on it (Parents names, city or town, time of birth etc).

    I won’t be as insulting as the commenter above who called you a moron but you certainly don’t know very much.

    1. +1

      Stupid fuckers.

    2. Here’s one Hawaii issued March 15, 2011.

      http://www.thepostemail.com/wp…..44×450.jpg

      1. Fair enough. You still have to request them specifically.

        Also, note that it is printed on paper with a green background, although the resolution is not fine enough to show the pattern.

  38. Oops, sorry, most of that comment was addressed to “An Objectivist|4.30.11 @ 3:58AM” not “Mensan|4.30.11 @ 10:15AM”.

    “An Objectivist”‘s comment displayed the combinations of untruths, halftruths and irrelevant facts common to conspiracy theories.

    Mensan’s comment contained some of the facts that are necessary to put the issue to rest.

  39. Um, just to continue the fun for a while – go look at the certificate and check out the name of the registrar.

    1. U K La Lee.

      LOL WUT.

      1. Apparently that is a real person. The Nordyke twins BC’s are signed by the same person.

  40. So I’m going to ask again, just for clarification purposes: is there anything fucking dumber than a birther?

    Truthers don’t count.

    1. Flat earther?

            1. Who still believes the prime-time forgery is real.

              1. His only stupid move was daring to criticize Pres. Bush. There was no forgery.

    2. “Dumb”? Some of them may actually have functioning brain cells. “Insane”? Absolutely.

    3. People who accept media lies and POTUS wagging the dog.

  41. Though many of the conspiracy mongers… offer needless complex connections between George Soros, the Koch brothers, Bechtel, the Carlyle Group, and the Federal Reserve.

    That doesn’t sound like a denial.

  42. “which confirmed that he was still eligible to be an unpopular president.”

    Actually it did just the opposite. It confirmed that Obama’s father was a non citizen. Since the definition of “natural born citizen” is “one born in the country to TWO citizen parents” Obama has just once again proven himself ineligible to be the POTUS.

    Minor vs Happersett 88 U.S. 162

    “it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

    1. Definitions are not derived from what a single individual postulated on a concept, they are derived from what most people consider the plain language of the words to mean.

      In this case a “natural born citizen” is one who is a citizen by the fact of his birth. IOW one who needs to take no further action to obtain citizenship.

      No matter how much you want the concept to be defined in the way an obscure philosopher conceived it, if the founders wanted only people who were “…born in the country to TWO citizen parents” to be eligible, they should have said so.

      There is absolutely zero record that any but a trivial number of people have ever ridden this hobby horse of yours.

      1. Oh, and I don’t recall anyone ever suggesting anything other than that BO’s father was a national of another country.

        The chosen one himself seems quite proud of the fact.

      2. “if the founders wanted only people who were “…born in the country to TWO citizen parents” to be eligible, they should have said so.”

        They did. They required the President to be a natural born citizen. It’s right there in black and white. Now I grant you that there has never been a Federal court case dealing solely with the issue of what the definition of NBC is, But in Minor v Hapersett the SCOTUS is on record in defining it as I have. If NBC equals “born a citizen under any circumstances” why even use the word “natural”? They could have just said the President must be “born a citizen”. What if Congress passed a law that said everyone with blue eyes born in France is a citizen of the US. Would you call them NBC’s and make them President? No. They would be citizens by an Act of Congress which would make them naturalized citizens. Everyone who is born with citizenship by dint of law,i.e. an Act of Congress is a naturalized citizen. They are just automatically naturalized at birth and do not have to go through any process or paperwork.

        1. Even if it is true that the founders subscribed to the view enunciated by this forgotten writer they forgot to spell it out.

          Since none of the meanings of “natural”, “born” or “citizen” suggest that they acquire this special meaning when combined into a phrase they needed to do this. Otherwise, they’re stuck with the meaning that everyone understands it to have.

          The fact except for a handful of obscure people have ever referred to it and absolutely no court opinion or piece of legislation has ever sustained it leads me to believe that it is a view held by a tiny faction of cranks.

          1. In this context “natural” means “requiring no act of man, i.e.e law”. “born” means “having been given birth to” and “citizen” means “a member of the body politic”. WTF is so hard to understand? Are you really that stupid or just willfully ignorant?

            1. All citizenship relies on law.

              Theories of law are not based on sigle individuals notions. They are based on universal understanding of the meanings of words. No one believes this narrow theory of yours or else someone would have mounted a serious challenge based on it.

              Shit even here at H&R, which is full of nutcases, no one has ever agreed with you. In fact they’ve routinely ignored you.

              I’m the only one who has ever responded to you and that’s only to see what new contortions of convoluted reasoning you can perform.

              Strangely enough on other issues you seem remarkably sensible. It’s only when you go off on this hobby horse of yours that you look like a nut.

              1. You’re completely wrong. Someone born in the country to two citizen parents can be nothing but a US citizen. That requires no law. It is you who is rejecting the definition of natural, not me. As for only a few people holding this opinion you’re wrong about that too. I suggest you learn to use Google, there are tons of us out there.

                http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

                http://puzo1.blogspot.com/

  43. Should be interesting to see how that turns out dude.

    http://www.real-privacy.eu.tc

  44. Yet somehow these people who can’t be convinced of a fact directly in front of their face are correct in their economic policies!

  45. That’s a strange bit to pull out of Fiasco’s song that, on the whole, strikes me as more liberty promoting than conspiracy mongering.

    1. It reads like a frickin’ Hit & run who’s who!

      “the war on terror is a bunch of bullshit”
      “The school was garbage in the first place”
      “Gaza strip was getting bombed, Obama didn’t say shit”
      “Complain about the gloom but when’d you pick a broom up?”
      He’s almost a goddamn liberaltarian!

  46. Intercourse.

  47. So what happens to that one army guy who refused to take orders because he said BO wasn’t the true commander in chief?

  48. We’re all circle-jerking about how irritating it is to be even tangentially associated with Alex Jones and the like. Reason should start serving beer.

  49. Hey birther dimwits, Osama Bin Laden is dead and Barrack Obama is the man who nailed him.

    You’ll probably be seeing a lot of the picture that says, “Sorry it took so long to get you a copy of my birth certificate. I was busy killing Osama Bin Laden.”

    Biyatch.

    1. But why would we believe that he did it just because Zero says he did.

      Among other curiosities they say they thought he lived in this compound because it was so odd (high walls, burned its own trash) and it was built in 2005.

      So they have known about it since 2005?

    2. It’s obviously a fake. OBL died in December of 2001 from severe kidney disease.

  50. If Obama had released his birth certificate when McCain did before the election this would have been all over with before the election. Obama chose to show it for the political purpose of making those who question him as conspiritory nuts, by the way the scientific community is now trying to claim all anti global warming people as conspiritory nuts and that it is a mental problem. If you can’t win the argument then claim the opponent is the problem not the issue. Now thats a conspiracy birthers and AGW deniers snookered into a corner by Obama

  51. “Indeed, many Americans have little time for the tedious realities and complexities of politics, preferring digestible conspiracy theories that explain the awfulness surrounding us in a 10 minute YouTube video.”

    That is exactly it. Most of what is wrong with America has been implemented with the full support of the people. You don’t need a conspiracy, just unlimited democracy.

  52. Re.: “In other words, half the American people?liberal or conservative?can be convinced of something so implausible, so easily disproved that attempts by the executive to prevent stupid debate are a fool’s errand.” The fact that something like 75% of Americans believe a supernatural explanation of the existence of life on Earth is ample proof of the gullibility of an otherwise intelligent and reasonably well-educated populace.

  53. In my opinion it’s just one step short of the “one party democracies” many dictators and so-called communist countries employ.

  54. I can disprove AGW with a simple scientific fact: The IR absorbtion of CO2 is less than that of water vapor.

    http://www.wholesale-order.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.