Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » WHAT A HOOT!
  • WHAT A HOOT!

    Filed at 6:19 am under by dcobranchi

    The morans at World Net Daily are still banging the drum about President Obama’s supposed ineligibility to be president due to his allegedly not being born in the US. That birth certificate we’ve all seen and the birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspaper must have been clever forgeries, I guess.

    UPDATE: OTOH, I completely agree with one of the plaintiffs.

    “The whole idea is that America cannot allow an individual to serve as president who isn’t qualified. It destroys our Constitution. It’s the bedrock of our nation,” he said.

    I just wish we’d have come to that conclusion about 8 years ago.

    23 Responses to “WHAT A HOOT!”


    Comment by
    COD
    March 3rd, 2009
    at 8:38 am

    Speaking of idiots…John Stewart eviscerated CPAC last night.
    thedai...-party . It’s funny because it’s all true…


    Comment by
    ElectricBarbarella
    March 3rd, 2009
    at 8:52 am

    correct me if I am wrong, cuz you know us homeschoolers are just the stupid on this…

    Didn’t he have to prove his eligibility **before** being able to announce his candidacy? And if not, didn’t he have to provide this proof at some point in time during his run? Forget the fact that he already did provide this proof, I was just wondering, you know–stupid and all–cuz it seems to me that you’d have to prove you are eligible before being allowed to take any position.

    And this so would not happen if our Prez was a white guy. Talk about underlying racial tones. Sheesh, I thought we came a long way from that. And I love the one quote in the article where the guy doesn’t mention, first, his children or home or anything like that; but instead mentions *first* “my guns”.

    Skeery shit.


    Comment by
    Rob
    March 3rd, 2009
    at 1:37 pm

    Reminds me of all the liberals who STILL refuse to accept Bush v. Gore.


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    March 4th, 2009
    at 11:05 am

    How?

    Nance


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 4th, 2009
    at 11:50 am

    Reminds me of all the liberals who STILL refuse to accept Bush v. Gore.

    I doubt there were too many liberals who did not believe that the SCOTUS had ruled in favor of Bush In fact, I’d be willing to bet that not a single “liberal” anywhere in the country refused to acknowledge the fact of that ruling, even if we did question the impartiality of the judges who so ruled. I’d say that is completely dissimilar to the folks on the right who refuse to accept the fact that the birth certificate exists.


    Comment by
    Rob
    March 4th, 2009
    at 2:09 pm

    Yeah, it all comes down to whether you wish to claim them as your own, of course.

    Then:
    Gore won the popular vote. Statewide recounts would have changed the results if the supremes hadn’t shut them down. So many dissenting justices nullify the results. The “don’t tase me bro” guy was demanding Kerry come clean about how Gore threw the election because both of them were in the skull & bones society. Don’t tell us about the electoral college, or the constitution, or how supreme court decisions work, or how we’re goofy nutcases who are wrong about key facts.

    Now:
    Obama was born in Kenya. There’s something smelly about being born 36 decades before the date on your “short form” birth certificate you give to the media. There’s been a coverup at high levels so nothing would stand in the way of getting the messiah elected – 5 lost lawsuits prove it. Don’t tell me about no Hawaiian newspaper in 1961.

    Great songs come from having dissimilar verses singing the same tune.


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 4th, 2009
    at 2:51 pm

    Awww. What pretty strawmen you built.


    Comment by
    ElectricBarbarella
    March 4th, 2009
    at 6:14 pm

    oh, do we have our very own conspiracy theorist who actually believes the lawsuits have any merit?

    Cool.. I like conspiracy theorists–with a little sherry and soy sauce. 🙂


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 4th, 2009
    at 6:23 pm

    I thought it was fava beans and a nice Chianti.


    Comment by
    ElectricBarbarella
    March 4th, 2009
    at 9:01 pm

    no… I hate beans and chianti… it’s sherry and soy sauce..

    or if you really want a good flavor–jim beam black and BBQ 🙂


    Comment by
    ElectricBarbarella
    March 4th, 2009
    at 9:04 pm

    wait, I just caught something.. a decade is 10 years right?

    so if he said “being born 36 decades before the date on your “short form” birth certificate”, that would make the person now 360 years old?

    Uhh, dude, your argument just diededed… 🙂

    And no amount of fava beans, chianti, sherry, soy sauce, jim beam black, or BBQ sauce will make it come back.


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    March 5th, 2009
    at 9:32 am

    Here’s a hopeful thought I had about this while driving along last night. (Makes you afraid to drive in FL again, doesn’t it? 🙂 )

    Maybe Rob is right. Maybe part of what Rob is saying is that the fraction of Rs who believe this crap is so small as to be laughingly dismissed.

    Which is how I felt about Ds who not only hated the politically-motivated decision but went on and on and on about what to do about it. The thing to do, obviously, was to get on with the peaceful transition from one President to the next and plan for the next election. The sane among us knew that. After enough bitching and moaning to get it off our chests, we dealt with the fact of Bush’s presidency.

    Those Ds who could not move on were such a small fraction of our population as to be laughingly dismissed.

    Rob, could that possibly be what you were thinking? (She asked hopefully.)

    Nance

    P.S. Maybe Obama being 360 years old means he is really wise. 🙂


    Comment by
    Rob
    March 5th, 2009
    at 4:14 pm

    Nance mostly pegged it. My point is, most any demographic has it’s own goofy nonsense brigade. I don’t think I’ve met any of them on this board. It seems valid to compare them to each other, but it doesn’t seem valid to compare them to the mainstream members of the group to which they claim membership.

    Of course I meant years when I said decades.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    March 6th, 2009
    at 9:59 am

    Still doesn’t make sense — there are loons who claim Obama is 36 years older than he obviously is?


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    March 6th, 2009
    at 10:33 am

    Btw, I don’t buy comparing the Bush-Gore vote to Obama’s birth certificatel. More analogous would be either comparing losing Dems in Bush v. Gore to losing Rs in Franken v Coleman (two close elections with allegations of funny business both ways, dragged out in the courts and undermining rather than elevating the whole system.) Or Dems in the CBS national guard document forgery to Rs in the birth certificate story (dubious documents exploited for dubious motive.)

    Here’s the thing. I agree there are reasonable folks of integrity both liberal and conservative, also laughable and even dangerous wackos on both wings. But you don’t get to be in that former group unless you are honestly disturbed when prominent voices who agree with your politics turn out to have been involved in anything fraudulent and/or lunatic fringe, which for Rob might include, say, serious witchcraft (Jindal exorcism) and active anti-woman witch-hunting (like Palin’s pastor) and of course anti-evolution nonsense. Not to mention the disturbing evidence already coming to light against the former administration. . .


    Comment by
    Rob
    March 6th, 2009
    at 4:25 pm

    “Still doesn’t make sense — there are loons who claim Obama is 36 years older than he obviously is?”

    Sorry – my post was poorly worded. I’m referring to Daryl’s mention of the Obama birth certificate we’ve all seen. It was issued by Hawaii in June 2007. Obama was born in 1961, the piece of paper that “everyone has seen” came off someone’s laser printer a couple of years ago. My math was wrong – the birth certificate is 46 years older than he is, not 36.

    Anyway, it keeps the goofies loud, because still nobody has seen his original birth certificate – the one they give ya at the time you’re born. The crazies’ err when they believe absence of evidence is evidence of absence. “Why wouldn’t he show us the real one, unless there isn’t one, or it sez Kenya on it?” They shout out.

    As far as prominent voices involved in lunatic fringe stuff, I don’t see how you can mention Palin’s pastor without mentioning Obama’s pastor – isn’t that about as apples to apples as one can get? Daryl and I have already gone the rounds here about Obama’s long standing friendship with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers.


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 6th, 2009
    at 4:42 pm

    My math was wrong – the birth certificate is 46 years older than he is, not 36.

    My original birth certificate doesn’t have a name on it. My parents didn’t name me until several days later. If I ever run for President, would I have to be listed as “blank” “blank” Cobranchi?

    And, BTW, I think you’ve still screwed up the ages quoted above. 🙂


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 6th, 2009
    at 4:43 pm

    And, finally, the original birth certificate may not even exist. They do get lost on occasion. That’s why you’re allowed to get official copies from the agency that registers live births.


    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    March 6th, 2009
    at 4:45 pm

    And I just saw that the “Birthers” case was laughed out of court today. The judge threatened to sanction the plaintiffs’ attorney.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    March 6th, 2009
    at 6:14 pm

    To Rob — my point exactly. Conservatives rant on about Obama’s pastor without understanding that the witch-demonizing Palin pastor was rant-worthy for all the same reasons, and that when you rant about one as disqualifying but defend the other — without even seeing the comparison — you are not a reasonable moderate but an wingnut ideologue.


    Comment by
    JJ Ross
    March 6th, 2009
    at 6:16 pm

    And what about Franken v Coleman btw, Rob?


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    March 7th, 2009
    at 6:39 pm

    factch...a.html

    The birth certificate is real. It’s as real as anything gets.

    “Concerned” Rs may persist in pushing this nonsense but, even when presented in the most moderate sounding way, it is a lie.

    Nance


    Comment by
    Karen
    March 9th, 2009
    at 12:00 pm

    I didn’t get a birth certificate, official or unofficial when either of my kids were born. Both states made me pay for to get them. The current copy of my birth certificate in my file is decades younger than I am. The certificates for both of my kids are several years younger than they are.

    Based on the deniers’ logic, I couldn’t prove anything about any of us by our certificates either. (I bet a lot of them are in the same boat too.)