Palin's Statement on the Birth Certificate is Fine... And Sorta Empty. Which is Feature, Not a Bug.

If you care, what she said pretty much tracks with my own statements: No, I don't believe he was born in Kenya, no, I don't believe there is some massive conspiracy, but yes, people have a right to know these things for a fact and not a belief, and yes, he's being sketchy about this for whatever reason, and yes, people have the right to ask questions and demand proof.

I think it's an empty thing to ask for proof since the thing is already well-proven. But no one else has to accept my personal evidentiary standard. And given that this mystery (well, not-really-a-mystery) is entirely within Obama's power to solve by signing a simple form requesting that Hawaii release his long form, I think it's fair to ask him to do so.

Here is my problem with beating up on Palin for this: A lot of the people who will beat up on her are the same sort of people who say the Republican Party needs to be open to moderates, and toss moderates a rhetorical bone here and there, and stuff like that.

Which I agree with, actually.

But the deeper point they are making is that politics is not about Simon Pure purity on questions. They are advancing the idea that politics is about coalition-building, doing what is necessary to attract 51% to your flag, and that those they consider too hardcore about conservative principles are doing the party a disservice by elevating philosophical integrity and ideological coherence above the vagueries and punts often necessary to negotiate a rough consensus.

Which, again, I agree with.

So what did Palin do? Well, what she did here was toss a rhetorical bone to the 25-30% of the country which is very much interested in this birth certificate question, while not nearly embracing the theory itself. She offered, in other words, a sort of vague stab at consensus -- let's agree that these questions are fair game and punt on the more divisive question of whether the theory has any merit -- which is what what people like David Frum are always urging when it comes to appeasing moderates.

Well, look: The exact same principle applies to both moderates and conservatives. If we're supposed to overlook the frequent leftward deviations of, say, Lindsey Graham, as necessary (it is asserted) for winning an election and building a coalition, can it really be honestly contended that we must suddenly become Simon Pure on other issues?

Because that's what I think is animating this. There is a desire by some that Sarah Palin firmly reject the birth certificate theory -- and not just the theory, but deem all inquiries or suspicions as de facto illegitimate -- and thus demonstrate her philosophical integrity and ideological coherence.

Hey, she's a politician. She's supposed to avoid making strong statements that alienate one wing of the party or the other. Guys like David Frum make their rent by beating up on other Republicans for not being open to a bit of ideological fudging and philosophical slack on some issues.

But now we're going to demand that everyone in the party adhere strongly to one side of this issue?

You mean: There's a litmus test for Republicans now? Really? Gee, every time I hear about litmus tests people like Frum freak out about an attempt to "purge" the party. But now we're suddenly in favor of them?

Convenient, isn't it, that some will resist litmus tests except when they stumble across a litmus test that's personally important to themselves.

What happened to all that talk of giving our politicians a bit of leeway to define the rhetorical space they think they can win in? Apparently that gets tossed out the window as regards this issue.

My theory about politicians is pretty simple: They lead from the middle. Not from the front, usually, as many strong ideological conservatives demand. Such people want to see their pols out in front on every issue, making the strongest possible case for this issue or that -- especially when it comes to the unpopular positions, the positions the movement needs the most rhetorical effort on.

I don't buy that. That's a way to lose votes, generally. You talk and talk and talk up the positions where you're already winning and people need precious little converting, you offer a fair amount of talk for the positions where you're almost but not quite winning, and you throw your base a rhetorical bone here and there on the issues that are losers and would take some seriously heavy rhetorical lifting to ever change the public's mind.

You punt on those. You say enough to show you're on the right side of things and then you pretty much drop it. You leave the heavy lifting for the activists and the pundits and the polemicists. The people who don't have to worry about securing 51% in a personal referendum on themselves every two or four or six years.

You don't lead from the rear, simply echoing whatever the public says; the public catches on to that, and deems you a flip-flopper and weak leader. You get somewhat closer to the front, but not too close to it. You lead from the fat middle, surrounded by lots of people.

And I think people like David Frum would generally agree with that. And I think when it comes to issues where he wants the GOP to have a more moderate/liberal take, he urges this sort of thing. He beats up on Republicans for being "too conservative," too out in front (on the conservative side of things) in the debate.

But when Palin does pretty much the same thing with what is, unfortunately, a minor but still possibly damaging wedge issue, apparently the rules suddenly change and now Palin is demanded to be a powerful rhetorical force for knocking down this conspiracy theory and repudiating it and educating the Republican base and.... you know, all the things Frum generally disapproves of when someone is inclining towards the conservative side of things. Suddenly the rule shifts from being "be careful about wading into divisive issues about which a consensus does not exist in the GOP" to "take on a divisive issue in the GOP and help form a clear and coherent consensus for one position."

Nah. To hell with that. I apply the same rule on this Frum insists upon as regards moderate-skewing positions: Toss 'em a bone. A little for you on the right, a little for you in the middle, now let's move past this and talk about the stuff that truly unites 90% of us and commands 60+% support in the general voting population. And talk about that stuff some more, and more, keep talking about that stuff, and leave this other stuff, this more divisive stuff, to a simple statement that bridges the ditch between the two wings. Check that particular box and move on.

Political parties that want to advance an ideological agenda are in the business of pushing weird ideas on the apolitical and uninformed. I call these ideas "weird" just because they do seem weird to anyone who hasn't bought into them. Reagan's (Laffer's) idea that you could cut the tax rate and yet take in more revenue from taxes? That's a weird idea, when you think about it. It's counterintuitive. Turns out, it's right (at least under certain conditions -- at some point you fall off the Laffer curve and will start taking in less revenue), but it's weird.

This idea is now not so weird to the public, as they've seen there's a good bit of truth in it. But in 1980? Weird.

If all you care about is winning elections, you can construct a platform devoid of any "weird" ideas and simply play exclusively to the apolitical, uninformed middle, never ever disturbing them with a weird idea, always just telling them what they already believe. Of course, this makes the party a nonideological one, one without any real agenda to advance. And so neither party ever really abandons its own weird ideas. Though they tend not to talk those ideas up during election campaigns.

I think those who want this Birth Certificate Conspiracy Theory to go away are bothered by the fact that this is a decidedly weird idea. And they realize, intuitively, that each party can only present so much weirdness to the public and still be elected. Each party has a Weirdness Quotient they dare not go too far above, for fear of being rejected as, well, too weird.

Newt Gingrich constantly pounded on the Democrats for their weirdness. His rhetoric was filled -- deliberately, of course -- with the words "strange," "weird," "bizarre," etc., in describing liberals' beliefs and agenda.

So I understand those who are very, very annoyed about the Birth Certificate thing. To them -- to me, actually -- it seems like a very poor expenditure of that limited stack of Weirdness Cards we can play in an election cycle. If we're going to be weird about something, such people say (and me along with them), let's play one of those limited, precious Weird Notion cards on something more substantive, something more important to the party, something that we maybe could possibly win on, if not now, then maybe ten years from now.

A weird idea like a fully human, fully ensouled life begins at conception -- which is deeply weird to anyone who hasn't already bought into it.

But the thing is -- as commenters are always pointing out to me, and they're 100% right -- it's a futile effort to try to pound the party into the specific, poll-tested, media-friendliest shape you want it to be in. As commenters kept telling me when I objected to people yelling "Obama's a Muslim!" at Palin rallies -- "What are you going to do? You can't control these people. Stop just dwelling on the fact they're a little emotional and maybe not so politically savvy. Just accept it -- you/we are savvier than them, and nothing's going to change that. Accept that the party consists of a lot of different sorts of people, with differing degrees of savviness and different political hot buttons, and stop berating people over the fact they call out weird stuff at Palin rallies. That's going to happen, and you can't change that, and the only thing you're doing by dwelling on it is giving the story more legs."

And you know what? I think, damnit, they were right. Including about all my worries that people might, maybe, be too strident at health care town halls.

People are people. We're people, we're not a coordinated marketing campaign. Even if it's desirable that we change each and every single person in the party to the media-savvy, slickly-answering, poll-aware sort of people we'd love to have the media interview, it's impossible to do that.

And so we should shut up about it. It is, as they say, what it is.

So I think this whole effort to beat down the Birth Certificate people and either get them to drop their suspicions -- or at least keep quiet about them -- is futile, and, being futile, a big waste of time and energy. Time and energy better put into other things.

And furthermore -- I think some believe this Birth Certificate thing is a lot more damaging to the party than it really is. The public won't tolerate too much weirdness from a political party or their activists, but they do accept some. After all, the Democratic Party flirted with Trutherism -- a conspiracy theory a hell of a lot weirder than suspicions about fudging a birth certificate -- and the Democrats had our lunch in 2006 and 2008.

Would it be better if the party didn't spend it's Weirdness Markers on this particular theory? Yeah. But is it going to kill us if we do? No. It's not going to kill us. It's barely even going to hurt us.

So what the hell do I care if Palin throws a bone to the Birth Certificate people? (Who make up a big chunk of our base, bear in mind.)

Am I morally outraged? Intellectually outraged? Well, let me see: the left has given soft-to-middling support for the theory that George W. Bush and his cabal of Ruthless Jews bombed the United States of America for either an oil pipeline in the Caspian or to give Israel the room to murder Palestinians. The media now routinely "vets" private citizens for voicing an opinion contrary to Obama's. Sarah Palin was savaged by a bloodthirsty liberal media, which did not mind at all that one conspiracy theory -- Trig Trutherism -- persisted in many salons on the left.

In other words: No. No outrage here. Sorry, fellers, I'm all tapped out.

A while ago I was in New York City and was talking to a girl, an educated, professional chick. Cynical and savvy. Politics came up, and she alluded to the birth certificate thing.

"You buy into that?" I asked. Not judging, not outraged, just genuinely curious. I always like to know how politics looks in the "real world." You know, not online, surrounded by like-minded partisans and the occasional indefatiguable troll-bot.

"No," she shrugged. "I don't care if it's true or not. I just want them to bring this asshole down."

That's sort of my attitude, really. Call me a cynical bastard, but I'm really kind of past giving a shit if it's true or not. (FYI: It's not true. Ask me if I care.)

And I think that girl's attitude is representative of most of the people that could be brought together for an anti-Obama coalition.

I don't think anyone who's made up their mind to vote against Obama in 2012 -- presidential elections are referenda on the incumbents, after all -- is going to really care if this candidate or that tossed some small-potatoes vague rhetorical support to a birth certificate conspiracy theory.

No one's going to say, "Well, the jobless rate is still at 9%, but you know what? Sarah Palin once said that a high elected official should turn over a document that proves his eligibility for the Presidency, and so they've lost my vote."

I just don't believe that. I think the Birth Certificate Conspiracy Theory is as wrong as it is, ultimately, inconsequential. For either side.


By the Way: Both sides of this should prepare for disappointment.

For those who are really into this theory, and want prominent officials to embrace it to mainstream it and give it legs: Not going to happen. It's too weird. Too much effort for too little payoff. (Zero payoff, in fact.) Apart from a few politicians in very safe conservative districts, who can afford to play with this stuff without consequence, not going to happen. No one running statewide or nationally is going to get too close to this.

For those who want their politicians to stand firmly against conspiracy theories and overheated imaginations: Not going to happen. Too large a bloc of the conservative base buys into this to give them the finger.

If you didn't like Sarah Palin's answer -- because it wasn't strong enough in either direction -- get ready for a lot of disappointment, because Sarah Palin's answer is going to be the basic default generic answer for almost all politicians on the right.

Hell, it's become my default answer, and I'm not running for anything. It's a political fudge that allows people to get along without breaking out into rhetorical violence.

So am I compromising my core beliefs to make people kind of like me...?

Oh dear. There's some politics going on at a political website. Film at 11.

And no one should be too upset to see professional politicians plying their craft, either.


Posted by: Ace at 01:24 PM



Comments

1 let the flaming and pointless arguments begin

Posted by: Ben at December 04, 2009 01:59 PM (wuv1c)

2 Word.

Posted by: leoncaruthers at December 04, 2009 01:59 PM (PH0UW)

3 Could it be possible Obama was born in Sarah Palin's vagina?

I'll put my top investigative reporter on it.

Posted by: The Atlantic Magizine at December 04, 2009 02:02 PM (wuv1c)

4 The time for questions about the Birth Certificate was two years ago. Even if he releases it and he was born in Kenya, then what? Kick him out? This is a non issue, why? Because it was a non issue two years ago.

Posted by: Picric at December 04, 2009 02:03 PM (79sej)

5 Oh well, we're back to "purity" and "litmus tests" again.

Is it too much to ask that Republicans actually vote with Republicans more than 80% of the time?

Is it too much to ask that Republicans actually be conservative and not liberal?

As for Sarah Palin, what I noted on this same topic earlier was the people who "harped on her statement" are mostle Palin haters to begin with.

She could strip naked and invite them for a free quickie and they would rag on her.

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 02:04 PM (CDUiN)

6 Maybe Barack war born on the missle that his the pentagon?

Posted by: Ben at December 04, 2009 02:04 PM (wuv1c)

7 hit, not his
shoot

Posted by: Ben at December 04, 2009 02:05 PM (wuv1c)

8 My facebook little green army man identity is bazooka man. I wonder what Ms. Sarah's could be?

Posted by: sTevo at December 04, 2009 02:05 PM (QrgNK)

9 was not war.
damnit i totally screwed that up

Posted by: Ben at December 04, 2009 02:06 PM (wuv1c)

10 Palin should be focused on tax cuts, how to create jobs, fighting the health care monstrosity and the ineptness of BHO's admin. If they can't event do a state dinner correctly how in the hell can they "manage" our health care. Sarah should pound away at the competency of the dems and should start calling them what they are; socialists.
Sure, she can acknowledge the skepticism on the birth stuff, but she should and must attack on the other issues. I would craft a new "contract with America" set of principles and some concrete actions that should be taken. Finally keep it on facebook and work with selected blogs/media...ignore the MSM.

Posted by: John at December 04, 2009 02:06 PM (6FYZ6)

11 I heard if you get Obama to say his name backwards he will be forced back to the 5th dimension where he was born.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 04, 2009 02:06 PM (SqAkN)

12 Continuing along this line, I wonder why the little green army men never had the locker pin-up girl as part of the set.

Posted by: sTevo at December 04, 2009 02:07 PM (QrgNK)

13 No one's going to say, "Well, the jobless rate is still at 9%, but you
know what? Sarah Palin once said that a high elected official should
turn over a document that proves his eligibility for the Presidency,
and so they've lost my vote."


You didn't read the comments on Gabe's thread, did you?

Posted by: HeatherRadish at December 04, 2009 02:07 PM (NtiET)

14 The circle of stupid is now unbroken. Sarah Palin is blowing the birther dog whistle. You'll never see a better demonstration of political cynicism mixed with blinding stupidity. Or not depending on if you are total idiot or not, which of course I am.

Posted by: Charles Johnson at December 04, 2009 02:10 PM (mka2b)

15 Somebody asked her a question and she answered it.I have no problem with her answer.I also have no problem with people digging into Zero's past,even if they are looking for the wrong thing they may find something useful.

Posted by: steevy at December 04, 2009 02:10 PM (V1Fi9)

16 The birth certificate issue ranks right up there with the story that nobody can remember Obamas time at Columbia.

Posted by: Neo at December 04, 2009 02:11 PM (tE8FB)

17 How wars start

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 04, 2009 02:11 PM (xxgag)

18 Liar.
The premise? The Frum bashing? The 9/11 truth thing? No:
A while ago I was in New York City and was talking to a girl, an educated, professional chick. Cynical and savvy.
In all seriousness, very good article.

Posted by: The Q at December 04, 2009 02:11 PM (pfStM)

19 Here is my problem with beating up on Palin for this: A lot of the people who will beat up on her are the same sort of people who say the Republican Party needs to be open to moderates, and toss moderates a rhetorical bone here and there, and stuff like that.
Which I agree with, actually.
Uh oh....
{ducks for cover}
So begins the great debate on party purity circa last week of September, 2009.
For the record, My theory about politicians is pretty simple: They lead from the middle, is a spot-on take.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 02:11 PM (pLTLS)

20 15 I mean alot of people are starting to actively dislike the man.They are more willing to question his motives and his past now than before the election.Yeah they have it bass ackwards but that's American for ya.

Posted by: steevy at December 04, 2009 02:12 PM (V1Fi9)

21 Great write up Ace. Seriously.

One criticism though;
And furthermore -- I think some believe this Birth Certificate thing is
a lot more damaging to the party than it really is. The public won't
tolerate too much weirdness from a political party or their activists,
but they do accept some. After all, the Democratic Party
flirted with Trutherism -- a conspiracy theory a hell of a lot weirder
than suspicions about fudging a birth certificate -- and the Democrats
had our lunch in 2006 and 2008.

I think it is clear that a plurality of leftists are troofers based on the numbers we have seen. And I would argue that we bring this up every time they try to delve into this birth certificate business. Something along the lines of, "Yes there are people who believe that Obama hasn't demonstrated enough evidence that he was born in the US. I am not one of those people, but I have to say it does not much bother me that they are raising these concerns. But you know what does bother me? That a significant portion of the Democrat party believes that there was a conspiracy behind the 9/11 attacks that involved not Islamists, but Jews or the Bush administration."

Posted by: 18-1 at December 04, 2009 02:13 PM (7BU4a)

22 It is nothing more than another reason for people who do not like Palin not to like Palin. Bluntly, even if she said nothing for the next 18 months, those same people would make up an excuse not to like her.

Posted by: Mallamutt at December 04, 2009 02:13 PM (V9SYy)

23 The only people that care about the Birth certificate issue are left wing assholes trying to make anyone that opposes anything Obama does look either racist or crazy.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 04, 2009 02:13 PM (SqAkN)

24 Bad font color...ack

I think it is clear that a plurality of leftists are troofers based on
the numbers we have seen. And I would argue that we bring this up every
time they try to delve into this birth certificate business. Something
along the lines of, "Yes
there are people who believe that Obama hasn't demonstrated enough
evidence that he was born in the US. I am not one of those people, but
I have to say it does not much bother me that they are raising these
concerns. But you know what does bother me? That a significant portion
of the Democrat party believes that there was a conspiracy behind the
9/11 attacks that involved not Islamists, but Jews or the Bush
administration."

Posted by: 18-1 at December 04, 2009 02:13 PM (7BU4a)

25 What the hell is a Trig?
Come to think of it - who the hell is Sarah Palin?

Posted by: Charles Gibson at December 04, 2009 02:14 PM (pfStM)

26 I was born in Alabama. Does this mean I can now run for president?

I was sent this video about the climate-gate scandal. The CBC's Rex Murphy pounding the truth. I am not used to hearing the truth when watching the news. My bs alarm did not go off even once.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at December 04, 2009 02:14 PM (tzcjs)

27 A good answer for Sarah would be "Yeah, it's weird that the President of the United States won't produce a birth certificate, or college transcripts for that matter, but these are not issues I intend to pursue. Now, let's talk about Energy Independence."
Which I guess is sort of what she said. Because Obama should rightly be mocked for this, but there shouldn't be a witch hunt over it.

Posted by: Mark in Portland at December 04, 2009 02:14 PM (+45yf)

28 ace -- not sure if that essay makes we want to hit the donate button again or start touching myself right here at work. Either way... good times ahead.

Posted by: mr.frakypants at December 04, 2009 02:14 PM (PonvG)

29 Great post, Ace. She threw those that believe in the BC controversy a bone. Period.
Though I believe there is some shred of truth to it, it was YOU, Ace, that got me to understand it was an issue that was going no where. No court in the land was going to throw an election of the people, by the people and for the people (that's ACORN's role, ya know) regardless of the evidence, or lack thereof.
It is just not a viable strategy to get rid of this marxist.

I suspect, in time, he will hang himself with his own misdeeds, or the electorate will finally wake up and see the man for what he is. And this is now starting to happen.

And that Ken Jennings shit that Scott Baker just dumped at Gateway should remove all doubt as to what an f-ing radical 52% of the voters forced down our throats. They can't be gone soon enough.


Posted by: Derak at December 04, 2009 02:15 PM (q7Mml)

30 It is nothing more than another reason for people
who do not like Palin not to like Palin. Bluntly, even if she said
nothing for the next 18 months, those same people would make up an
excuse not to like her.

Posted by: Mallamutt at December 04, 2009 02:13 PM (V9SYy)
Based on the post election interviews from 2008, these intellectual giants would just blame Biden and Obama's verbal mistakes on her.

Posted by: 18-1 at December 04, 2009 02:15 PM (7BU4a)

31 who was it that said trust but varify, anyone....anyone....? it seems we are just trusting here. i think of it as just another reason not to trust these people.

climategate anyone? people trusted the data, wanted to verify, they wouldnt let them and poof.... oOOoooooo thats why they didnt want it verified, i see parallels here

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:17 PM (3hUc/)

32 Amen Ace!

Posted by: Cubachi at December 04, 2009 02:17 PM (SXzw8)

33 In other words: No. No outrage here. Sorry, fellers, I'm all tapped out.
Read theBS with the safe schools czar. It'll fill you back up.
As for this kerfluffle... I gotta admit I don't understand how this is even an issue. But then again I'm not a birther.

Posted by: Entropy at December 04, 2009 02:18 PM (IsLT6)

34 I would have summed this kerfuffle as Meh, what time is the SEC Championship game?

Posted by: toby928 at December 04, 2009 02:18 PM (PD1tk)

35 This was such a pleasant subject when it was dead.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at December 04, 2009 02:18 PM (RkRxq)

36 At least Barack isn't a son of Abraham like Eric Cantor, if you get our drift.

Posted by: The Democratic National Commitee at December 04, 2009 02:18 PM (wuv1c)

37 Good point and well executed, Ace.
This is really a non-issue that never would've gotten as far as it did if The Vapid One had done what everyone else would've done, which was provide concrete, unassailable proof that he was born in America. It really gives the impression that he has something to hide.
But about your decoding of the message that wins, conservatives can influence moderates, simply due to the fact thatmoderates have no concrete values. They're easily swayed and tend to run with whichever crowd seems to be the largest at the time. What else explains their move to the right after Clinton, then to the left after Bush, now back to the right undr Obama? Throw in the fact that we'll be eviscerated for whatever policy we support, because we're eeeevvillll, we may as well dig in our heels and promote some truly conservative ideas. If we couch those ideas as beneficial to everyone, we'll win.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at December 04, 2009 02:19 PM (ZGhSv)

38 "As for this kerfluffle... I gotta admit I don't understand how this is even an issue. But then again I'm not a birther."
Have you met anyone that was? I haven't, I am starting to think they do not even exist except in the minds of the MSM. I have met truthers in person, birthers not so much.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 04, 2009 02:19 PM (SqAkN)

39 Palin needs to show us her birth canal to prove that Trig is really her son.

Posted by: pajama momma at December 04, 2009 02:19 PM (275r1)

40 39, i'll take that job

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:22 PM (3hUc/)

41 On the subject of the so-called "purity test," I posted this at FrumForum and got next to no useful responses:
Which of the ten points specifically do you feel are bad positions? Which do you feel are clearly unsupported by a majority of Americans?
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obamas stimulus bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run health care;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
( We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
Lets take the other side of each:
(1) Larger government, more national debt, bigger deficits, and higher taxes.
(2) Government-run health care that obliterates the current market-based system.
(3) Elimination of energy markets in favor of a cap-and-trade system of carbon limits.
(4) Card check, eliminating the right of workers to a secret ballot in union elections.
(5) Amnesty for illegal immigrants without regard to assimilation, rather than a reformed and workable system of legal immigration and assimilation.
(6) Defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan, if thats the price of avoiding sending more troops.
(7) No effective action to contain the nuclear threats of Iran and North Korea.
( Repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, so that decisions by any state on gay marriage become binding on all states.
(9) Unconcern with Federal funding of abortions or Federal regulations leading to rationing of health care to the elderly and infirm.
(10) Ever-increasing restrictions on gun ownership, without concern for the Second Amendment.
Which of those last ten items is a real crowd-pleasing winner, much less something Conservatives SHOULD stand for?

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:22 PM (7AOgy)

42 Is Obama a Kenyan? Damned if I know, but I do see that actual America is an alien culture to him.

What outrages me is my kid has to show a birth certificate to play Little League, but it's somehow beneath the dignity of someone wanting the highest elected office in the world to present his/her bona fides.

Pony up the documents and be done with it.

Posted by: Vet Missing Parts at December 04, 2009 02:22 PM (qPu42)

43 Ace is so hot when he's defending Sarah.
But seriously. Well said.

Posted by: Darcy at December 04, 2009 02:23 PM (+Z6FM)

44 I often marvel at how people IGNORE all of Sarah Palin's accomplishments. They act like she has none and is popular for no particular reason other then people identify with her. Please share these FACTS.1. Sarah took on corruption in her own party and risked her career in politics doing it. Name one politician who has done this that is currently serving. By the way, has Obama asked Charlie Rangel to step aside? NO, they are in the same party after all.2. Sarah cut the budget in the Alaska which is unheard of. She saved money when the oil money was flowing in so now when the oil price dropped they are not cutting police or education or raising taxes to balance the budget. How are New York and California doing by the way on their budgets? How is Obama doing with his deficit projections? 9 trillion right?3. Sarah TOOK ON THE MOST POWERFUL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD, the big oil companies to make sure Alaskans were getting a fair shake and SHE WON. Has Obama bucked the big labor unions in a similar fashion? Or the trial lawyers?4. Sarah negotiated a natural gas pipeline deal that will result in the largest construction project in North America which will produce REAL JOBS and will provide CLEAN energy to the lower 48. Has Obama ever...oh never mind, its obvious he has not done anything like this and neither has anyone else who currently serves.

Posted by: Dan at December 04, 2009 02:24 PM (KZraB)

45 I am going to say that,I don't believe he was born in Kenya either and I say that with the key word being..."believe"....because just like everyone else, I have no proof to go by, so I must believe.

I also believe that the Kenyan's, Cubans, Venezualians and every other tin pot dictatorship on the planet did not funnel tens of millions of dollars into Obama's campaign simply because they had the credit card security functions disabled.

I suppose I should also believe that man made climate change is happening because in ALL cases, there has been a desire for some to exclude proof and for others, well, we pound sand because "believe" is all we got.

Proof is not a dirty word unless it is attached to politics apparently.

Posted by: Drider at December 04, 2009 02:25 PM (HaJD9)

46 Stuiec, I don't seea problem with any of those. Good items.

Posted by: Truman North at December 04, 2009 02:25 PM (e8YaH)

47 A non-issue brought up by those that want to bash Sarah with any stick they can find. 2010 thru 2012 are going to be very interesting years.

Posted by: Bosk at December 04, 2009 02:26 PM (pUO5u)

48 She offered, in other words, a sort of vague stab at consensus -- let's agree that these questions are fair game and punt on the more divisive question of whether the theory has any merit -- which is what what people like David Frum are always urging when it comes to appeasing moderates.


So you're calling Palin a punt?

Posted by: CoolCzech at December 04, 2009 02:26 PM (QECjC)

49 At least Barack isn't a son of Abraham like Eric Cantor, if you get our drift.
Posted by: The Democratic National Commitee at December 04, 2009 02:18 PM (wuv1c)
Interesting item in the Telegraph today about the battle between the Muslim and the Jew. (In the boxing ring.)
The delicious revenge of multicultural Britain is that todays Union Jack is a slender brown-skinned lad called Amir, who takes his shoes of to pray. You can hear the tea spluttering from Eastbourne to Westmoreland!
Amir Khans opponent, Dmitriy Salita, is equally exotic. A tough-nut Jewish New Yorker, by way of the Ukraine, who is so pious that he wont enter the ring until the sun has gone down on the Sabbath. Whats a Jewish boy from London to do? Who shall I cheer for? Brit or Yank? Will I pass the cricket test? Do I care?

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:26 PM (7AOgy)

50 I actually like the way she triangulated the issue off to the media scrum that descended on her personal life and history. Why didn't they do they same to Barack? Asking questions about Barack's documents is far more benign and pertinent then questioning her children.

Posted by: Jean at December 04, 2009 02:27 PM (6Njk9)

51 @50, yeah i was just wondering that someone said this issue shoulda been settled two years ago, by whom, the media.lololololol who should have settled this? the american people? yeah, cus we getthe answers to the questions we ask...PLEASE!!!!

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:30 PM (3hUc/)

52 Great post, Ace. And I thought her response to the question was very reasonable. Personally, I don't give a rat's ass about the birth certificate, but I'd pay good money to see that bastard's Oxy and Columbia records. Of particular interest would be the name under which he enrolled and what nationality he claimed. I've always thought that's where the red meat would be.

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 02:30 PM (9Wv2j)

53

Too.Many.Words.

Pictures, plz. Comic book style explanations I can understand..

Posted by: Tinian at December 04, 2009 02:31 PM (7+pP9)

54 Sorry Ace, but there is NO proof of birth.
The problem with releasing a certification is not removal from office, courts have a term for it meaning once he is in he's in, but no chance of reelection.
Mearly concealing his teaching, student and birth records calls attention, Why?

Posted by: Serfer62 at December 04, 2009 02:31 PM (HLCnI)

55 I agree with Tinian, at least a pic of Sarah and a gun

Posted by: Jean at December 04, 2009 02:32 PM (vb5IK)

56
Why stop any lines of attack on an opponent? Make them use time and resources to defend against it. This is exactly what was and is being done against Palin. The left fights MMA style while insisting the right can only arm wrestle. And too many on the right agree.

Posted by: Flying Monkey at December 04, 2009 02:32 PM (Oxen1)

57 I think it was simple: Sarah answered the question. She should not have, she should have changed the subject. But, she clarified on Facebook -- and this is IMPORTANT -- compared it to the questions asked about Trig.

Now, think about this, Trig Trutherism got a lot more play in the MSM than the BC. Moreover, it has nothing to do with anything vis-a-vis qualifications for office. Nothing at all, just a tabloid story. There's even a major blogger (I use the term loosely) who still peddles it.

If this comes up again, her parry is Trig Trutherism.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 04, 2009 02:32 PM (T0NGe)

58

I gotta run some errands so I can then have a drink.

I'm too sober to read all of what Ace said.

Posted by: Tinian at December 04, 2009 02:33 PM (7+pP9)

59
I don't want to give a litmus test.

I just wanna make sure our candidates are not playing for the other team.

Posted by: a.k.a. at December 04, 2009 02:33 PM (z37MR)

60 Stuiec, I don't seea problem with any of those. Good items.
Posted by: Truman North at December 04, 2009 02:25 PM (e8YaH)
Those are the items in the draft resolution that some RNC national committee members have proposed for the RNC national convention. This is the dreaded "purity test" that has the Left and the RINOs like Frum all up in arms.
Note too that the proposal is that someone seeking RNC support would only have to sign on to seven or eight of the ten points to be deemed worthy of Republican support. I thought the standard of purity in America was 99 and 44/100ths percent, not 70 or 80 percent.
The term "purity test" is a propaganda ploy to paint Republicans as inflexible. But when you look at what happened to Congressional Democrats in their civil war over abortion funding in ObamaCare, you can see that ideological rigidity is part and parcel of the Democrat Party.

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:33 PM (7AOgy)

61 The problem with releasing a certification is not removal from office, courts have a term for it meaning once he is in he's in, but no chance of reelection.
Posted by: Serfer62 at December 04, 2009 02:31 PM (HLCnI)
An ineligible person can never be "in". The oath is invalid if the person is ineligible, just as a minor's signature is meaningless and non-binding.
This point seems to escape many, even though we saw glimpses of this sort of idea when John Roberts administered the oath a second time because of a minor flub on the first go-round. being ineligible would have rendered all of those oaths invalid and meant that the person had never actually assumed the office.

Posted by: neurosculptor at December 04, 2009 02:34 PM (5Lv7g)

62 Mallamutt: "Bluntly, even if she said nothing for the next 18 months, those same people would make up an excuse not to like her."

Exactly. I can see it now: "Palin's got nothin' to say over ______? Some 'leadership.' What a ditz!"

There's no end to the abuse that can be fabricated. The object of Palin supporters or of those simply offended by the tactic is to not be cowed by the disingenuity, not accept the premise, and mercilessly mock and expose those who make an unwarranted charge. IOW be the good kind of moron who would gladly sport an AoSHQ T-shirt.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 04, 2009 02:35 PM (50S+L)

63 Abamo ..................ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh you have tricked me again Palin! I will see you in 7 years and I will have my revenge!

Posted by: Obamaplix from the 5th Dimension at December 04, 2009 02:35 PM (SqAkN)

64 44
I often marvel at how people IGNORE all of Sarah Palin's
accomplishments. They act like she has none and is popular for no
particular reason other then people identify with her. Please share
these FACTS.

1.
Sarah took on corruption in her own party and risked her career in
politics doing it. Name one politician who has done this that is
currently serving. By the way, has Obama asked Charlie Rangel to step
aside? NO, they are in the same party after all.

2. Sarah cut the budget in the Alaska which is unheard of. She saved money when the oil money was flowing in so now when the oil price dropped they are not cutting police or education or raising taxes to balance the budget. How are New York and California doing by the way on their budgets? How is Obama doing with his deficit projections? 9 trillion right?

3.
Sarah TOOK ON THE MOST POWERFUL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD, the big oil
companies to make sure Alaskans were getting a fair shake and SHE WON.
Has Obama bucked the big labor unions in a similar fashion? Or the trial lawyers?

4. Sarah negotiated a natural gas pipeline deal that will result in the largest construction project in North America
which will produce REAL JOBS and will provide CLEAN energy to the lower
48. Has Obama ever...oh never mind, its obvious he has not done
anything like this and neither has anyone else who currently serves.

Posted by: Dan

Oh no she didn't. She has no experience, is divisive, completely stupid, is a nirther, a creationist and my butt buddy Andrew says she faked a pregnancy.

Posted by: Charles Johnson at December 04, 2009 02:35 PM (mka2b)

65 God dammit that should read Amabo. I can't spell worth crap.

Posted by: Obamaplix from the 5th Dimension at December 04, 2009 02:36 PM (SqAkN)

66 The one issue I have in here is:

I can't believe no one but Congress has "standing" to ask for the freaking thing in court. Or, at least, no one from the opposition. "Opposition party in an election" should be enough. "Same party in the primary" should also be enough.

(I don't expect to find anything useful on there other than something trivial, "Father's Religion:" or similar.) But this smacks of anti-transparency for no real reason.

Posted by: Al at December 04, 2009 02:36 PM (0lyUI)

67 >>>Sorry Ace, but there is NO proof of birth.


What? Oh you mean American birth.

Is there any proof that Barack Obama's mom ever went to Kenya? During this period? Any proof at all?

No?

You guys can make up whatever assumptions are necessary to sustain your theory but don't get all huffy because I refuse to indulge you in these made-up premises.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:37 PM (jlvw3)

68 Mearly concealing his teaching, student and birth records calls attention, Why?
Posted by: Serfer62 at December 04, 2009 02:31 PM (HLCnI)
I have little doubt that Obama was born in Honolulu, as flying from Hawaii to Kenya with a newborn was no small endeavor in 1961.
But I still think it is reasonable to ask to see the original birth certificate -- not the bureaucratic record of registration of live birth, the real hospital certificate. It's one of those things we should expect to see from a Presidential candidate, especially one promising "unprecedented transparency." His college transcripts should also be part of that transparency.
And what is entirely amazing to me is that in the wake of the shootings in Washington state, the New York Times was able to post a collection of the original documents pertaining to an obscure clemency matter in Arkansas. How is it that the life story of Barack Obama remains so free of actual documentation?

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:39 PM (7AOgy)

69 Those are the items in the draft resolution that some RNC national committee members have proposed for the RNC national convention.

Now, if we could only find candidates among our racist party that could possibly pretend to believe in some of this outlandishcrap, we may be able to fool enough dumb typical white people into voting for us!

Posted by: Rip Van Michael Steele at December 04, 2009 02:39 PM (e8YaH)

70 There's no end to the abuse that can be fabricated.

This is so true and cannot be said often enough.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (T0NGe)

71 Thank you for the praise.

Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)

72
Personally, I think Obama was not born...

but hatched from an egg.

An evil egg.

Posted by: a.k.a. at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (z37MR)

73 stuiec has it right. The Dems are every bit as fragmented as Republicans. It's just not the narrative anyone will run with.
So where does that leave us? Shooting ourselves in the foot talking about litmust tests, checklists, and birth certificates that were a moot point November 4th of 2008.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 02:41 PM (pLTLS)

74 The SEC championship game is at 4:00 EST.





Somebody asked that up thread. I'm just here to help.

Posted by: Jack M. at December 04, 2009 02:41 PM (Ncr1R)

75 now that puss AllahP will be mad at you Ace.

Posted by: redrock at December 04, 2009 02:41 PM (VSWPU)

76 Thank you for the praise.



Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.

I think we have our t-shirt contest winner!

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 02:41 PM (9Wv2j)

77 Well if they ever make a movie about his birth certificate will they show it on airplanes like they did that conspiracy 911 movie "Loose Change"?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 04, 2009 02:41 PM (SqAkN)

78 Grandma did get run over by a reindeer in Tarboro, NC

H/T Barking Moonbat

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 02:42 PM (CDUiN)

79 "There's no end to the abuse that can be fabricated."

Hey, that's a great name for my new book. Thanks.
James

Posted by: James Carville at December 04, 2009 02:42 PM (mka2b)

80 >>>I have little doubt that Obama was born in Honolulu, as flying from Hawaii to Kenya with a newborn was no small endeavor in 1961.

Why on earth would a pregnant woman travel to a third-world country for the last two weeks of her pregnancy.

All the stuff that has to be believed (without proof) to get to the conclusion -- a conclusion that ultimately rests on this really lame technicality in the law that 1, probably has been changed by the courts because it makes no sense as written and 2, could be changed by congress in three seconds -- it's too much.

Too much has to be assumed, postulated, speculated, asserted without evidence, all to set up this perfect storm of odd circumstances to force a ticky-tack technicality in a poorly-drafted law.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:42 PM (jlvw3)

81 Persisting with this issue is embarrassing and discrediting even if Obama was hatched from the anus of Big Bird. I can't get over how stupid and tone deaf many people are.

Posted by: angry mob member #50352 at December 04, 2009 02:43 PM (sv8gV)

82 Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)
Who let Teh One pose as ace?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 02:43 PM (pLTLS)

83 Standing ovation.

Posted by: paranoid polly at December 04, 2009 02:44 PM (r7Vc3)

84 54: I think there's proof of birth. If Obama hadn't been born we wouldn't be in this terrible mess.

Unless . . . he was built . . .

Forget about his birth certificate, you morons: demand his X-rays! And a gene test! Is the President an android? We have a right to know!

Posted by: Trimegistus at December 04, 2009 02:45 PM (GbmcL)

85 81
Persisting with this issue is embarrassing and discrediting even if
Obama was hatched from the anus of Big Bird. I can't get over how
stupid and tone deaf many people are.

Yeah, you are right. People should just STFU on this. I'll say that the next time someone asks.
Thanks,
Sarah

Posted by: Sarah Palin at December 04, 2009 02:45 PM (mka2b)

86 70 There's no end to the abuse that can be fabricated.and why is that, cus there are questions that are and have been asked over and over again with no answers. i mean hell, beck keeps asking questions and gets no answers. this is the no answer administration. i put the blame on the "birther" issue right at the feet of the admin. where it belongs. until then i say go wild

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:45 PM (3hUc/)

87
Why on earth would an educated American woman marry an angry muslim communist and allow her child to go to a madrassa in Indonesia?

Posted by: a.k.a. at December 04, 2009 02:46 PM (z37MR)

88 Can somebody explain again why the Obama birth certificate (not the COLB) is not be be mentioned. Nation security I suppose.

Posted by: Neo at December 04, 2009 02:46 PM (tE8FB)

89 ace: "Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself."

I'm mostly impressed about the talking to a girl bit. You shouldn't bury such a conquest in an extended post. Kinda diminishes the import.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 04, 2009 02:46 PM (50S+L)

90
...even if Obama was hatched from the anus of Big Bird.

This is EXACTLY what I was thinking!

Posted by: a.k.a. at December 04, 2009 02:47 PM (z37MR)

91 Why on earth would an educated American woman marry an angry muslim
communist and allow her child to go to a madrassa in Indonesia?

Emphasis added. There's your answer.

Posted by: grognard at December 04, 2009 02:47 PM (v0kvW)

92 being ineligible would have rendered all of those oaths invalid and meant that the person had never actually assumed the office.
Seems to me that I have read legal opinions to the contrary -- that even if a real problem were brought to light, it would not automatically change anything at this point.

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 02:47 PM (9Wv2j)

93 @81, so i guess when a question is asked, and you dont get an answer, you should stop asking? wow, glad you werent my parent

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:47 PM (3hUc/)

94 Is there any proof that Barack Obama's mom ever went to Kenya? During this period? Any proof at all?
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:37 PM (jlvw3)
That question reminds me of the story of Obama's grandmother Sarah, who during the campaign was a Christian just like Barack, but who recently had her fare for the hajj to Mecca paid by the Saudi government. The truth about events in 1961 in Kenya seems pretty elusive.

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:48 PM (7AOgy)

95 <i>What? Oh you mean American birth.
</i>

No. No proof of birth, period. Until I see some DNA samples, I'm going with gene therapy experiment gone wrong at a Transylvanian laboratory owned by George Soros.

Posted by: Adriane at December 04, 2009 02:48 PM (0U2C0)

96 Look people, when we get a question we don't want to answer we simply ridicule the question indefinitely. It's one of my rules. Trouble is it only works for Democrats, but WTF?
Saul

Posted by: Saul Alinsky at December 04, 2009 02:48 PM (mka2b)

97 Come on people give it up. You all know I was born in a manger on a warm starry night in Hawaii. My coming was foretold a long long time ago.My mother, caring for me tenderly in a 450 square foot studio apartment, was visted by three wise menbearing gifts. Bill Ayers brought with him some C4, Frank Marshall Davis brought with him his signed copy of Mao's redbook, and Saul Alinsky brought a bullhorn and some commie leaflets.

Posted by: Obama at December 04, 2009 02:49 PM (SqAkN)

98 I really don't care about Obama's stupid birth which as far as I'm concerned was a dark, dark day anywhere it happened and under what god.
I want conservatives to not adopt the suppositions of the left: Birthers are crazy, the earth is dying from man-made-warming, the right to privacy, 6 year olds should be taught about homosexuality, Obama is a great speaker, Michelle is beautiful and graceful, it's just about sex,the war is about oil, Pelosi is sane, the military is stupid, Reagan was senile, the poor get poorer to make the rich richer, we had to have TARP, ad infinitum...
I don't have a problem with anyone agreeing with the left on these issues if they really agree. I have a problem with conservatives agreeing to them because because they didn't recognize they were being manipulated by the left into accepting group-think.
I refuse to accept thenotion that we can't talk about issues because we have accepted the left's premise on the issue. That leads to apologising and looking weak and stupid. They continually redefine the argument. We have to define it and not be so god-damned defensive.

Posted by: dagny at December 04, 2009 02:50 PM (LPJv2)

99 Is the President an android?

An android would have a better jump shot. He's human fail all the way through.

Posted by: toby928 at December 04, 2009 02:50 PM (PD1tk)

100 stupid saul alinsky

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:50 PM (3hUc/)

101 I finally found a white guy Obama didn't hate:

http://tinyurl.com/yzz3e93


Posted by: momma at December 04, 2009 02:51 PM (penCf)

102 Lefty blogs:"Hey guys! Lets go over to AoSHQ and watch them try to resurrect that horse so they can beat it todeath again!"

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at December 04, 2009 02:51 PM (RkRxq)

103 Christ, that's long. Good, though. Ace been thinkin'.
My disappointmentment is that when last night I said this could make an opening for LGF to go soft Trig Trutherist, to portray Andi's "just asking questions" as Palin-justified (by Allah's willful/trolling misreading of Palin's non-endorsement of Birtherism), Charles didn't do it.
Allah did it himself, around page 13 of the comments to his story.
So my "At least Allah's only almost as gone-wrong as Charles" lost its "almost." He's not crazy like Charles, so what he's become is worse.

Posted by: oblig. at December 04, 2009 02:52 PM (k5ILr)

104 Upding..UPDING.

Posted by: LGF Refugee at December 04, 2009 02:52 PM (qmecx)

105 100
stupid saul alinsky

Posted by: sliderblaze

Stupid is as stupid does. Neener neener neener.

Posted by: Saul Alinsky at December 04, 2009 02:52 PM (mka2b)

106 Why on earth would a pregnant woman travel to a third-world country for the last two weeks of her pregnancy.
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:42 PM (jlvw3)
What airline in 1961 would let a full-term pregnant woman onto a series of flights that would have totalled maybe 20 hours in the air? It doesn't make sense.
But Mr. Transparency seems hell-bent on keeping all documentary evidence about his early life a deep, dark secret. What, like knowing he was a C- college student would lead to impeachment hearings?

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:52 PM (7AOgy)

107 Ace...you're right, no proof of American certificate.
#61...Sorry dude, but the courts do ignore things like fake certificates once a person attains office. I suppose it might be different if it was pursued immediately but notice that even the rceptive judges postponed judication for months. After a year forget it.
But again, a fake BC guarantees no relection and a severe blow to the Kommiecrates.
The oath of office is not a factor hinging on the BC.

Posted by: Serfer62 at December 04, 2009 02:53 PM (HLCnI)

108 Too much has to be assumed, postulated, speculated, asserted without
evidence, all to set up this perfect storm of odd circumstances to
force a ticky-tack technicality in a poorly-drafted law.




I think the hiding of all the records has more to do with his Indonesian status then it does anything else. Not his birth.

Posted by: paranoid polly at December 04, 2009 02:53 PM (r7Vc3)

109
I still say Obama refuses to release his original LFBC because it states his race as Caucasian

Posted by: bulwark at December 04, 2009 02:53 PM (jvrmc)

110 Does the long form have religion on it? I still think that is what they don't want us to see.

Posted by: dagny at December 04, 2009 02:54 PM (LPJv2)

111
Ace,

Another beautifully written post.

The only points I'd like to make are:

1. To broaden your point about "not a coordinated marketing campaign," people need to learn how not to be embarrassed about stuff other people do because of what yet other people might think. Nobody needs to concede embarrassment for others' behaviors/beliefs. Hell, nobody even needs to defend or address others' embarrassing behaviors/beliefs. To be led down that path is akin to forfeiting an argument.

2. The "leading from the middle" stuff makes a great deal of sense when evaluating how we got here, but I think you may be making the mistake of statically scoring the electorate. I am betting that the kenyan princess is and will continue to be such a disaster that the aggregate change in mood will be toward seeking class, love for this country, and competent leadership in the next few elections over the more ideological items that were fought and refought since '92.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 02:55 PM (Ce+tv)

112 at 102 this is what you get when unemployment is at 10%

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 02:55 PM (3hUc/)

113 My disappointmentment is that when last night I said this could
make an opening for LGF to go soft Trig Trutherist, to portray Andi's
"just asking questions" as Palin-justified (by Allah's willful/trolling
misreading of Palin's non-endorsement of Birtherism), Charles didn't do
it.

Ons small distinction - the Constitution of the US of A does not give a hairy rat's dewclaw about how many children a VP candidate has before assuming either the office she was vote into, nor assuming the one that she was voted into being the designated replacement thereof ....

Posted by: Adriane at December 04, 2009 02:55 PM (0U2C0)

114 Grandma did get run over by a reindeer in Tarboro, NC
H/T Barking Moonbat
Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 02:42 PM (CDUiN)
Grandma was murdered by a reindeer in Sweden.

Posted by: stuiec at December 04, 2009 02:56 PM (7AOgy)

115 109 I hadn't thought of that. Good. Hmmmm. No guilt votes.

Posted by: dagny at December 04, 2009 02:56 PM (LPJv2)

116 Dagny, not only no guilt votes, but not a guaranteed AA landslide either.

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 02:58 PM (9Wv2j)

117 I still say Obama refuses to release his original LFBC because it states his race as Caucasian

Bingo. I totally agree with you.

Posted by: paranoid polly at December 04, 2009 02:58 PM (r7Vc3)

118 115 I really thought it was because under religion it said "muslim" but I bet you are right. It says caucasian. Son of a bitch...

Posted by: dagny at December 04, 2009 03:00 PM (LPJv2)

119 >>>The "leading from the middle" stuff makes a great deal of sense when evaluating how we got here, but I think you may be making the mistake of statically scoring the electorate. I am betting that the kenyan princess is and will continue to be such a disaster that the aggregate change in mood will be toward seeking class, love for this country, and competent leadership in the next few elections over the more ideological items that were fought and refought since '92.


I don't think so. What you are describing, pretty much, is an ideological shift in the country towards the right in response to a failed Obama presidency, which means a contender would be leading from further right... but that just means the contender would be leading from the NEW middle. The middle would just have shifted 5 degrees to the right.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:00 PM (jlvw3)

120 I think there's something similar to the Laffer curve at work in the party principle vs. consensus tension. If the party waters itself down too much to get consensus, it ends up losing more votes than it gains by driving away its base and making itself largely indistinguishable from the other side to moderates. If it adheres too inflexibly to its ideologies, it will lose more votes than it gains by driving away too many moderates. So the question to ask is, where are we on this curve? That will determine the direction we need to move the party to gain a larger portion of the electorate.
All that being said, I consider myself very firmly a party principle advocate. I vote for a party because I want them to do something, or not do something. If the sense I get from its leaders is that they're saying anything to get elected, I look to their past performance. In Texas, the primary Republican candidates for the governor's race are Hutchinson and Perry. I'm not voting for either one, because from my perspective, they've made themselves liberal-lite in their past performances. To me, I'd rather a democrat pass liberal policy than have a republican pass liberal-lite policy, because it makes the democrats own the results of their those, intead ofgiving themthe cover of bipartisanship.
One of the reasons I have followed Palin is that her past performances indicate that she will make principled stands against cronyism (regardless of party affiliation) and that she speaks plainly and relatively honestly. When she starts sounding like a polished politician, I will no longer be paying attention to what she says. It won't matter any more, as it reflects poll-tested pablum, rather than what she'll actually do when in office.
Okay, I'm over my word count. I'm outta here.

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at December 04, 2009 03:01 PM (pZEar)

121 He's a liar, and everything he says is a lie, especially any sentence beginning with the word "I." I would not be surprised if the birthers were right. If that makes me a birther, I can live with that.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 04, 2009 03:01 PM (Vhl5i)

122

Dangy


yeah, early 1960's civil rights act still in doubt racism still strong father nowhere to be found young white girl thinking about her child's future

Posted by: bulwark at December 04, 2009 03:01 PM (jvrmc)

123 stuic: "What, like knowing he was a C- college student would lead to impeachment hearings?"

The real fear is Brand Obama would be seen, tangibly, to be average -- his magnificence the construct we all know it is. That's the most damaging thing and the very fact that surely gives him and his protectorates cold chills.

I guess if one were to speculate, one could argue that the voluntary release (as a consequence of public pressure) of a proven BC would only empower further investigations and demands that Obama release other historical records; i.e. the records that show his ascent via affirmative action or worse as opposed to merit. IOW, do not under any circumstance let that first domino fall.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 04, 2009 03:02 PM (50S+L)

124 look I am a huge Palin fan but this little episode with the tacit birther support kills her for me. I do like your analysis and it does make sense but it seems to me that her support is akin to truthers stating they are "just asking questions."

I would love nothing more than to fully support her again but for now I am leery.

Posted by: hueydiamondpooty at December 04, 2009 03:02 PM (Uod0o)

125 When Dagny speaks, I listen.

Posted by: Old Sailor at December 04, 2009 03:03 PM (/Ft4q)

126 Obama was only to show so much leftist leg because conservatism had been partly discredited by 2008.

How do you think Obama would have fared when conservatism was winning, like in 1988?

The more conservative the country as a whole, the more conservative you can expect the nominees of BOTH parties to talk.

Bill Clinton? Ring any bells? Famously broke with his party's left for a "Third Way" that supposedly fused some conservatism with the basics of the Democratic agenda.

You may say, "Well that was talk." Well, maybe it was. People get elected on talk. They get reelected, or not, based on actions.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:03 PM (jlvw3)

127 Daaaaaaaaaaaaamn!
Talk to the hand, Bagdad!

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 03:04 PM (pLTLS)

128 This is the best take I've read so far on Palin's comments. I knew right from the get go exactly what she meant, I can sum it up like this: Those who question have every right to do so, I (Palin) don't personally believe it but I don't condemn those who do, they have a Constitutional right to voice themselves much like Sullivan does.

It's that simple, for goodness sakes. Nobody is pushing these comments except you all and Allahpundit.

So damn silly.

Posted by: The Mexican at December 04, 2009 03:05 PM (D6FdK)

129 Ok I admit it, I have a little bit of the "birther" inside of me, afterall, he has not produced a slew of information. Plus the fact that he is a lying cockholster pussy doesn't help either, and his wife looks like chewbacca humping an ewok. Childish? Maybe, but withoout a littlehumor, I would be pulling my hair out, this fucking idiot is succeeding on destroying our country.....

Posted by: Todd at December 04, 2009 03:05 PM (LLOGQ)

130

His student records would state if BHO would tell his status of In State, Out Of State or International Student.

If that makes me a birther, so be it.. I think there are better things to fight him on and better uses of energy than dwelling on the answer Sarah Palin gave.


Posted by: Dave C at December 04, 2009 03:06 PM (qmecx)

131 being ineligible would have rendered all of those oaths invalid and meant that the person had never actually assumed the office.Seems to me that I have read legal opinions to the contrary -- that even if a real problem were brought to light, it would not automatically change anything at this point.
Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 02:47 PM (9Wv2j)
Then you are saying that the oath of office is not legally binding and worthless to even entertain. Why did Roberts administer the oath a second time if the binding nature of the first time was in question?
My point is that, if one is ineligible to take the oath, then the oath is invalid - as Roberts assumed the first oath he administered was. I don't see any logical way around this.

Posted by: neurosculptor at December 04, 2009 03:06 PM (5Lv7g)

132 and that those they consider too hardcore about conservative
principles are doing the party a disservice by elevating philosophical
integrity and ideological coherence above the vagueries and punts often
necessary to negotiate a rough consensus.
Which, again, I agree with.


In other words you think that such people are stupid. The only way is to have a compromise and these idiots won't accept it thus screwing the implementation of their conservative principles even more. Thus the less you are "hardcore" on this principles the farther you are from the agenda that allow for their maximum implementation. I guess the only way to really win the battle is to stop giving a crap about your objective at all.



Posted by: AlexD at December 04, 2009 03:07 PM (pmM68)

133 So good it deserves being said again.
128
This is the best take I've read so far on Palin's comments. I knew
right from the get go exactly what she meant, I can sum it up like
this: Those who question have every right to do so, I (Palin) don't
personally believe it but I don't condemn those who do, they have a
Constitutional right to voice themselves much like Sullivan does.

Posted by: Dave C at December 04, 2009 03:08 PM (qmecx)

134 To be a "birther" in the classic sense don't you have to want a production of the documents? She never called for this.
Entire Palin is a birther nontroversy >>>> Moot

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 03:09 PM (pLTLS)

135 Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 03:04 PM (pLTLS)

Yeah, that was sweet. Even Yahoo's got it front center this afternoon. What a freakin' putz that guy is.

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 03:10 PM (9Wv2j)

136 someone already said it here but, would it surprise any of you if the birthers had it pegged? i kno i wouldnt be

however it is a lot of fun to say, wheres the birth certificate, always gets a chuckle

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 03:11 PM (3hUc/)

137 >>>I do like your analysis and it does make sense but it seems to me that her support is akin to truthers stating they are "just asking questions."

So what?

Look, I experience something like the same political pressures. This blog, I hope you understand, is political, and not just as regards the news.

I believe, firmly, in evolution. Or, let me put it a different way: Whether I believe in evolution is irrelevant; what I know for a fact is that evolution is the only scientific theory I've heard to explain speciation, that is, a theory that does not include at its core *magic.*

So evolution may be completely wrong. But it does have the advantage of being scientific, having to do with natural processes, and not relying on, at its heart, supernatural intervention. Evolution may be completely wrong, but what would have to replace it would be ANOTHER theory that relies upon natural, and not supernatural, forces.

Now, I'm pretty sure of those beliefs. Damn sure, actually. I'm more sure of that than I'm sure that global warming alarmism is bunk.

You hear me talk about it much?

No.

It's impolitic.

I'm just saying, we're all doing politics in the game of politics. Don't hold it against a politician that she too is pressured this way and that by political considerations.

You know, if you're married, you and your spouse may disagree on a bunch of things, politically. What do you do? Well, you probably avoid those topics, much of the time. Because the marriage is more important than convincing your spouse of this or that point.

Being right is important. Creating harmony is important too.

You can say this is cynical, or pandering, or whatever else. It may be that. It's also another thing: It's life. It's another thing: It is the way it is.

What did George W. Bush say about teaching evolution and creationism? He punted. He said something like "I don't see what the big problem is of teaching another theory in school."

That bothered me. The answer, you see, is wrong.

But there are sometimes more important things than being right.



Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:11 PM (jlvw3)

138 This was a home run post Ace, from my point of view. You nailed what I have been thinking the last 24 hrs, before my pitiful gray matter could organize all of those impulses into something half as coherent as you have done.

Your point that the movement cannot afford to "purge" from either side is right on the money, and I suspect you are on target about Frum and his ilk also. The shrieking for absolute condemnation from one side, coupled with absolute sell-out compromise from the other side, boggles the aforementioned gray matter.

Sarah Palin did just fine with this little stink bomb that was thrown at her, she still smells like a rose to me. Her usefulness to our mutual cause to save America from the assholes who are destroying it is undeniable, as a candidate or as a force of nature propelling other candidates, maybe both.

As of now, my erection of respect for you has risen to near-Cialis overdose levels. If it lasts more than four hours, I may have to call a doctor, or suffer permanent damage. Goodonya and Gospeed, brother.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:13 PM (f67UM)

139 Thank you, Ace. I was arguing this last night over on HA, is a touch frustrating.

I hate the litmus test aspect, and wholly agree wrt feature/bug.

Posted by: Amused Observer at December 04, 2009 03:13 PM (Uy/AI)

140
All this talk about mysteries is giving me a clue.


A raging clue.

Who wants to follow my clue?

Posted by: a.k.a. at December 04, 2009 03:14 PM (z37MR)

141 131 I'm just saying that I assumed the same thing you are saing, but remember reading months ago that, once he took the oath of office, the issue would need to be decided by the Supremes or by Congress or something. That it would not result in him being instantly not the pres any more. Probably on some legal blog, I can't find it now.

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 03:14 PM (9Wv2j)

142 Why on earth would an educated American woman marry an angry muslim
communist and allow her child to go to a madrassa in Indonesia?


Communist whores will do strange things.
I do not believe that Ozero was born in Kenya, and have observed that most of the people pushing that particular theory are bat-shit crazy. That said, I think there are other things in the record that he is trying to hide, and releasing the long-form as some demand would just bring about more questions about his travel records, college transcripts, theses, and so forth. My suspicion is that those documents would reveal him as an America-hating nutjob as a young man, and not a terribly bright one to boot; this would put the lie to all the leftist hagiography surrounding him. The leftist fucktards would hate to have to admit that he was an underqualified poster child for diversity/affirmative action and no brighter than they have derided the evil Boosh for being.

Posted by: Charles Gibson at December 04, 2009 03:14 PM (OS2KR)

143 >>>In other words you think that such people are stupid. The only way is to have a compromise and these idiots won't accept it thus screwing the implementation of their conservative principles even more. Thus the less you are "hardcore" on this principles the farther you are from the agenda that allow for their maximum implementation. I guess the only way to really win the battle is to stop giving a crap about your objective at all.


Huh?

No, I'm saying what I always say: Some of you mistakenly believe a party to be all about ideology, where I am sure, based on history, it is largely about building a coalition of 51%, many people in that coalition often having DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED IDEOLOGIES, and very often the only way to keep those people in is to resort to vagueries and platitudes and evasive non-answers.

The thing is, you guys seem as incapable of swaying me on key points of disagreement as I am incapable of swaying you, and yet you always posit "Well we'll just convince everyone, and then we can go forward all on the same page.'

Fine, do it here. See if you can actually forge this consensus on all ideological sticking points. If the project shows signs of working I will reconsider.



Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:15 PM (jlvw3)

144 Obama is trying to please both his parasitic , left wing constituents and responsible Americans . . . give it up Obama it's a hopeless task.

Posted by: rplat at December 04, 2009 03:18 PM (G1ArL)

145 LOL, damn those drunken scandi elks killing grandma:

From that linked story:

The European elk, or moose, is usually considered to be shy and will normally
run away from humans. But Swedish Radio International says the animals can
become aggressive after eating fermented fallen apples in gardens.

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 03:18 PM (CDUiN)

146 Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 03:14 PM (9Wv2j)
I hear you, and I don't doubt that you saw what you claim on legal blogs. Personally, I have rarely seen as much inconsistency adn poor logic as from lawyers and legal academics. It's embarrassing to read, often.
My point was that Roberts' need to readminister the oath (over a mis-stated word or two) stands in direct contradiction to much of what many legal types are arguing over the binding nature of the oath and the possibility of an ineligible person to have been able to even take the oath, to start with. It's like a 10 year old signing a contract. It is just invalid. Lawyers might argue around this, but they have to rape logic and common sense to do it (not something lawyers are averse to, of course).

Posted by: neurosculptor at December 04, 2009 03:18 PM (5Lv7g)

147 142 Out damn sock!!!!

Posted by: mcassill at December 04, 2009 03:19 PM (OS2KR)

148 Of some interest, over in the thread about this at HotAir, Treacher has been bathing in sweet sticky troll blood, all night and into today. Man is he fun to watch.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:20 PM (f67UM)

149 @137

I love you, ace. Shhh. Don't tell my husband.

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 03:20 PM (sey23)

150 "You buy into that?" I asked. Not judging, not outraged, just genuinely curious. I always like to know how politics looks in the "real world." You know, not online, surrounded by like-minded partisans and the occasional indefatiguable troll-bot.
"No," she shrugged. "I don't care if it's true or not. I just want them to bring this asshole down."
..
And I think that girl's attitude is representative of most of the people that could be brought together for an anti-Obama coalition.

Sound's like she's already a commited member of the anti-Obama coalition and a like-minded partisan rather than a member of the apolitical "center".


If we're going to be weird about something, such people say (and me along with them), let's play one of those limited, precious Weird Notion cards on something more substantive, something more important to the party, something that we maybe could possibly win on, if not now, then maybe ten years from now.
True, that.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 03:22 PM (/DCgw)

151 Well put, Ace. Nice post.
For what it's worth, here's another formerly weird idea that we ought to revive: That we're fighting a global war on terror. That if we don't defeat them in Baghdad we'll have to deal with them in Boston or Boise. That a lot of isolated incidents (like Little Rock and Fort Hood and Albany and Lackawana and a dozen places I can't recall right now) make none of them all that isolated anymore.

Posted by: FireHorse at December 04, 2009 03:24 PM (Vl5GH)

152 I have convinced people of things on this blog like... I dont' want to say "Never" but let me say it's close to never.

I have rarely -- I can't remember a single time -- had someone tell me "I believed the exact opposite of what you say, but after I read your post, I now agree with you."

I just don't see this happening. I have been blogging for six years and I have a pretty good resevoir of goodwill and I'm pretty smart and a pretty effective writer and yet I cannot remember a single time someone told me I'd actually changed their mind.

More often it is like the praise I get here -- somone said something like "This has been bothering me for 24 hours and you encapsulated why." In other words, he already sort of agreed with me; he was having trouble announcing his position in words, though, and I did that for him, and now he knows more why he agreed with this position *ALL ALONG.*

I say this because I think some people have a very, VERY wrong idea of what the limits of political persuasion really are.

I will say it until I am dead: Sometimes, rarely, commenters convince me to change my mind. (See town halls, for instance, or TARP; but note that was less about convincing me and more about watching events unfold.)

I also rarely convince you guys of anything.

Convincing people to believe the oppsosite of waht they believe is very, very difficult, and successful very, very rarely.

Ergo any strategy that just relies at its essence of "just convincing people we're right" is invalid and doomed. Obviously the strategy must INCLUDE that. Obviously. But also, obviously, the strategy must include a Plan B. What happens when, as is inevitable, you fail to convince more than 3-5% of people to change their midns? What next?

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:25 PM (jlvw3)

153 124 look I am a huge Palin fan but this little episode with the tacit birther support kills her for me. I do like your analysis and it does make sense but it seems to me that her support is akin to truthers stating they are "just asking questions." I would love nothing more than to fully support her again but for now I am leery.

I call total BS concern troll. No 'huge Palin fan' would drop their support of Sarah over this. What a crock.

Posted by: Steph at December 04, 2009 03:26 PM (5bx6q)

154 Jebsus, ace is getting all kinds of love here. Ladies keep the panties on! Save it for his VH1 reality show Real Chance of Love with ace

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 03:27 PM (pLTLS)

155 124
look I am a huge Palin fan but this little episode with the tacit birther support kills her for me.


Uh, no you're not. Huge fans don't abandon someone over "little episodes".
Disingenuous, much?

Posted by: Derak at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM (q7Mml)

156 Mountain, meet molehill. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Posted by: Rex at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM (1wE/v)

157 flenser,

Oh, I guess you can get an implication that she's in the center from my writing, but I didn't say that, and don't mean that.

No, she's a conservative.

What I meant was: Well, she's not hardcore and she's not following political blogs all the time. She keeps up, yeah, she reads politics. I'm just saying I consider her more representative of the population than, say, the 200 most prolific commenters here.

I didn't mean to imply centrist. I think that was obvious by her calling Obama an asshole.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM (jlvw3)

158 eh, girls are easily impressed

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM (3hUc/)

159 it would be funny if obama was also revealed ot be a birth certificate truther

Posted by: B35toMotherGaston at December 04, 2009 03:30 PM (94Ssm)

160 "She could strip naked and invite them for a free quickie and they would rag on her. "

Bunk!

Posted by: MAJHAM@GTMO at December 04, 2009 03:30 PM (qXVP6)

161 I do this with my mom and brothers and friends and stuff. Many of them lean right, so I'm not saying they are objective or independent. I am just curious as to what the world looks like to someone that doesn't follow politics hour-by-hour.

You know?

I just offer that anecdote as reinforcing the intuition I have that people really don't get all bothered that a political party's adherents might indulge in a conspiracy theory or two.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:30 PM (jlvw3)

162 It's a non-factor. HueyDiamondPooty is not a "huge Palin fan". And I'm only here one last time to state:

I don't care. I'm sticking with Sarah, and no one is dissuading me.

Posted by: Pipe Barackage at December 04, 2009 03:31 PM (Z9IOH)

163 Whether you think it's true or not, you have to wonder why it's THE ONE THING YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT. AP & Ed spend all day, every day, pointing out Obama's lies and evasions and general lack of transparency. Why is this the thing we're supposed to assume he's being 100% honest about?

Posted by: Jim Treacher at December 04, 2009 03:33 PM (GrDz5)

164
I call total BS concern troll. No 'huge Palin fan' would drop their support of Sarah over this. What a crock.

Posted by: Steph at December 04, 2009 03:26 PM (5bx6q)

I second that emotion. Bullshit.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:33 PM (f67UM)

165 building a coalition of 51%, many people in that coalition often having DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED IDEOLOGIES

I don't think you can really do that, or should want to.
The "big tent" describes the idea of people with lots of different but not mutually incompatible ideas working together for their common good.
If Peter ispassionately commited to "reproductive freedom" and Paul is equally committed to curtailing abortion, then they don't belong in the same party.
People who are commited to expanding the size of government don't belong in the same party as those commited to shrinking it.
If you do somehow win an election wth a coalition of the diametrically opposed, you're bound to lose the next one, because you are bound to piss off at least some of them once you actually have to start doing stuff. You haven't assembled a governing coalition.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 03:34 PM (/DCgw)

166 The important thing about this girl, actually, is that she's the kind to roll her eyes at byzantine conspiracy theories, and enjoys (as I do) noting that much of the world is dumb gullible or crazy, and yet she just sort of tactically embraced it as a convenient club to beat on him with.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:34 PM (jlvw3)

167 I'm mostly pleased with what I think is the "center" of our coalition, though I think as moderates come onboard it might drift leftwards. I am not currently even worried about the effects of purity tests and such. I think they're the natural reaction to people who are more against something than for something but are brought together to fight that first something.

The Dems have no purity test to speak of. You don't really HAVE to swear allegiance to abortion, PC, gay marriage, unions, big government etc...you just have to swear allegiance to one of those.

Blair's Law is just the logical end result of community organizing.

What was my point? Oh yeah: HORNS.

Posted by: tachyonshuggy at December 04, 2009 03:35 PM (YRjsF)

168 flenser you continue not to get that someone like me, for example, can be with you 90-100% on eight issues and almost opposite you on 2 issues. (Out of the top ten.)

You continue to sort of imply that anyone who's "conservative" agrees on ten for ten.

They don't.

It is rather obvious where there is 90% consensus in the Republcian party and where there is merely 60% consensus. You seem unduly determined to push the 60% consensus as hard as the 90% consensus.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:36 PM (jlvw3)

169 Most voters are not party members, even the registered ones. Nor are they clearly ideological in any sense of the word. People like what they like, they want to like what their friends like, and they want to believe that their fellow citizens won't act to put an intolerable burden on them.

The trick appears to be how to keep your party's political positions tight enough to hold the actual ideological voter while projecting the People-like-me-and-the-kind-of-people-I-want-others-to-think-I-am image you need to get the votes of the lazy.

My suggestion? Burn the current media to the ground.

Posted by: toby928 at December 04, 2009 03:36 PM (PD1tk)

170 I also rarely convince you guys of anything.
Well, duh People here probably already have a clear stance on the issues. We're not the ones needing convincing. The independents are the ones that tend not to give a rip about politics on a deeper level.
I think I brought this up here before but I'll say it again as I took it as a very good sign (caveat: some say I'm reading too much into this. fair enough). When it came out that Angelina Jolie apparently had some not so choice words for the President, I hopped over to Perez (here me out). His readers are dumber than cow shit and I'm pretty sure most of them wouldn't even know how to come in from the rain. But I started reading the comments--they were very anti-Obama for many reasons. Ranging from healthcare, unemployment, deficit, the war. These dumbasses are concerned and this is virtually a 180 turn from what his website looked like a year ago. I liken these people to the lunatics in Ziegler's video that thought Palin thought the US had 57 states. Buyer's remorse came a bit early for these folks.
Food for thought.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 03:37 PM (pLTLS)

171 158
eh, girls are easily impressed

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM

And Brian, apparently.

As of now, my erection of respect for you has risen
to near-Cialis overdose levels. If it lasts more than four hours, I may
have to call a doctor, or suffer permanent damage. Goodonya and
Gospeed, brother.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:13 PM

Posted by: Y-not still hearts ace at December 04, 2009 03:37 PM (sey23)

172
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:15 PM (jlvw3)

??? Not really sure who are those "you guys" you speak of. It's quite simple really. In any are in life the more you're "hardcore" on something, the more you care about something when it doesn't lead to some maniacal obsession the fuller you will accomplish that. Yet you seem to think the more people are hard on principles the less likely they will accomplish their maximum possible implementation. I think this is what you mean by "vagueries and punts often
necessary to negotiate a rough consensus" . This "rough consenus" thing is important why exactly? At war say it's important because it provides the maximum realisation of current goals whatever they may be. The more hard you are on those goals the more you shoud crave for such compromise.

Or maybe you think there other things more important than these principles. For example if I date a hot liberal goal I may cut back on arguing with her cause good sex is more importamt for me than trying to change her mind. If that's the case then what are those goals which you think triumph "principles" and are sabotaged by their implementetion?


Posted by: AlexD at December 04, 2009 03:37 PM (pmM68)

173 If my husband disagreed with me on politics I would hit him with a 4 iron.

Posted by: dagny at December 04, 2009 03:39 PM (p+yYc)

174 My suggestion? Burn the current media to the ground.

Breitbart's working on that.

Posted by: mcassill at December 04, 2009 03:40 PM (OS2KR)

175 Its not about litmus tests. Its about having something others WANT to identify with. (As an internet marketer) I view the Republican party as nothing more than a BRAND. The conservative ideals of limited government, federalism, and low taxes are winners. Delving into conspiracy theories - be they true or not - makes us look like rubes. Palin fucked up, and its not the first time.

Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 03:40 PM (wU9Cz)

176 @119 ace

I don't think so. What you are describing, pretty much, is an
ideological shift in the country towards the right in response to a
failed Obama presidency, which means a contender would be leading from
further right... but that just means the contender would be leading
from the NEW middle. The middle would just have shifted 5 degrees to
the right.


:-) Beggar questions much, Ace? :-)

It's funny you presuppose that "seeking class, love for this country, and competent leadership" is a shift to the right. I happen to agree, but my point was that I think upcoming elections will hinge more around these ostensibly non-ideological issues than around the guns vs. butter and pro-choice/pro-life contests of the past.


I also conflated a couple of things in there. My big mistake was failing to draw the distinction between the managers and leaders and leaving my ideas less than half developed.

I would argue that Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43 were all of the manager mold. Their opponents, Perot, Dole, Gore, and Kerry were, as well (I leave Dukakis off this list because his candidacy was not credible). I view 1990 through 2001 as rudderless years for the country. For most of the Bush presidency, we were "led" by the GWOT under President Bush's management.

I cannot consider any of these candidates and presidents "leaders" in the sense of making a case for what we should be doing and why. I think that the general public's non-response to when President Bush got on TV and made his case about ESCR was enough for him to chalk-it-up as pearls before swine.

The kenyan princess ran on leadership. Anyone with half a brain could have told you that he couldn't lead even just himself out of a wet paper bag, but hopeandchange is in the same mold as Calgon's "take me away" ads, and a sizeable chunk of the population falls for that crap.

I think Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America is another fine example of running on leadership but being too small to deliver on the promise.

In less than a year of this disasterous administration, the country has already been damaged to the point that we need an actual leader to right things again.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 03:40 PM (Ce+tv)

177 I have rarely -- I can't remember a single time -- had someone tell me "I believed the exact opposite of what you say, but after I read your post, I now agree with you." I just don't see this happening. I have been blogging for six years and I have a pretty good resevoir of goodwill and I'm pretty smart and a pretty effective writer and yet I cannot remember a single time someone told me I'd actually changed their mind.

I think it does happen that people change their minds as a result of something they've read, but rarely in a sudden "Eureka!" moment followed by a admission that a mind has been changed.
I know I've changed minds. I would not bother arguing with people otherwise. But I see that change in a subtle way, in the way they gradually start adapting things I've said and dropping things they used to say.So I'm sure you are influencing people and changing minds even if its not always immediately obvious to you.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 03:41 PM (/DCgw)

178 This could be a real issue for conservatives except for one thing: it's Sarah Palin. As a lifelong NYC resident I know of no person, living or dead, that provokes such rabid Pavlovian hatred in both the downtown/upper west side liberal fake-hipsters and in the trad Demo strongholds of the boroughs as Sarah Palin. Not GW Bush, not Reagan, Glenn Beck, Rush - no one. Not even close.


Posted by: gjz at December 04, 2009 03:41 PM (GdqSP)

179 good job Ace

And fwiw I'm one of those conservatives who thinks the 'birther' issue is unproductive, but a pox on any who would restrict the freedom of speech of those raising it.

Posted by: DaMav at December 04, 2009 03:42 PM (QNU76)

180 Good post Ace. My belief is that the bastard's birth. Certificate will prove. He's a bastard.

Posted by: Steve. Poling at December 04, 2009 03:42 PM (IKxIk)

181 I firmly believe that Obama is proof of extraterestrial life.

Posted by: Carl Sagan at December 04, 2009 03:45 PM (gbCNS)

182 163
Whether you think it's true or not, you have to wonder why it's THE ONE THING YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT.

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 03:46 PM (sey23)

183 163
Whether you think it's true or not, you have to wonder why it's THE ONE THING YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT.

Sorry about that miss-post.

We're also not supposed to talk about LGF or about any resemblance M'chelle bears to a space-creature.

Hot Air has some odd rules, but I assume they are because Michelle (the one who doesn't look like a wookiee) Malkin is "legitimate" and trying to stay so in the eyes of the MSM so she'll still get on the tube. Nothing especially wrong with that. She's photogenic and an articulate spokesperson, so it's helpful to have her on the tube... but it makes HA a less fun place to visit.

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 03:49 PM (sey23)

184 Ace totally changed my mind about V. I wouldn't have watched anything on ABC.

Not the same? Well I try.

Posted by: Amused Observer at December 04, 2009 03:50 PM (Uy/AI)

185 171
158
eh, girls are easily impressed

Posted by: sliderblaze at December 04, 2009 03:29 PM

And Brian, apparently.

As of now, my erection of respect for you has risen
to near-Cialis overdose levels. If it lasts more than four hours, I may
have to call a doctor, or suffer permanent damage. Goodonya and
Gospeed, brother.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:13 PM


Posted by: Y-not still hearts ace at December 04, 2009 03:37 PM (sey23)


I thought that formulation was pretty funny, didn't you?Might as well make use of those Cialis commercials I am forced to watch while eating dinner every damn day.

Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 03:50 PM (f67UM)

186 Well, Ace, your post pretending to do a Wonkette (and that other dumb slut) sex blog is still my favorite but this is now my favorite post where you don't rub your junk on strangers.

Posted by: Basic, b v at December 04, 2009 03:51 PM (SL3qo)

187 Ace should have broken that down into chapters.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at December 04, 2009 03:53 PM (muUqs)

188 flenser you continue not to get that someone like me, for example, can be with you 90-100% on eight issues and almost opposite you on 2 issues. (Out of the top ten.)
I'm not sure why you continue to say things like that.
For one thing, because there's little evidence that its true. For another, because poking people with pointy sticks is not a great way to convince them that you are right. As between you and me, the person seemingly determined to pick a fight is you. My approach to politicsis always that its purely business, not personal. But you seem to take disagreement over tactics and strategy as a personal attack on you. That's not how it's intended.

It is rather obvious where there is 90% consensus in the Republcian party and where there is merely 60% consensus
I don't know about that. Can you cite some polls? I'm not sure there is90% consensus on what we should do about anything, other than opposing the Dems agenda.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 03:55 PM (/DCgw)

189 Delving into conspiracy theories - be they true or not - makes us look like rubes. Palin fucked up, and its not the first time.
Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 03:40 PM (wU9Cz)

She didn't f*ck up. She was asked a question and she answered it. You may not like the answer she gave, but then, no matter how she answered it, I'm sure you would have the same reaction.
If you feel her answer makes you look like a rube, Sarah ain't your problem.

Posted by: Steph at December 04, 2009 03:55 PM (5bx6q)

190 163 JT for the win!

Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 03:57 PM (9Wv2j)

191 >>>We're also not supposed to talk about LGF or about any resemblance M'chelle bears to a space-creature.

Not strange.

LGF is a forbidden topic because, I assume, MM and AP and EM have decided on a policy of "no blog wars." Further, from experience, I can tell you LGF stuff tends to overwhelm a thread in a very off-topic way.

THe Michelle Obama stuff is banned because one guy says she looks like a Klingon (mean, but okay), then someone else says Chewbacca (mean, and now sort of coming close to the line) and now someone else decides to top that by saying she looks like a gorilla (mean, and now inarguably playing on age-old racial stereotypes and nasty put-downs that discredit the speaker -- and the forum where it's permitted).

Since the people who go to "gorilla" ALWAYS, ALWAYS express shock and surprise and claim they need it explained to them why "Klingon" is okay but "Gorilla" is not, AP et al have decided that's not worth explaining to racist-type guys why racism is no longer cool in 2009 for the ten billionth time. And hence they shut down the topic early, before it gets to gorilla.

Which it always does. (And thanks for bringing it there, you guys who bring it there, and then pretend you don't understand why you can't say it or why anyone could possibly object to it.)

I do the same thing, just not as firmly enforced nor with as bright lines. But I chew people out badly for breaking the rules.

Allah avoids such ass-chewings by imposing a flat ban, which is a good policy, because it avoids the tensions and hurt feelings that sometimes happen here when I decide lines have been crossed and it's time to start yelling at people.

So those are the reasons.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 03:59 PM (jlvw3)

192 >>>I'm not sure there is 90% consensus on what we should do about anything,

90% consensus on partial birth abortion.

60% for outlawing abortion in almost all cases.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:00 PM (jlvw3)

193 No cite. The numbers are close enough.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:01 PM (jlvw3)

194 NOW inarguably playing on racial stereotypes, I meant.

Not "not."

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:01 PM (jlvw3)

195 71
Thank you for the praise.





Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)
Yes you are ace! Upding! Upding! Upding!

Posted by: Ace's Sharmuta at December 04, 2009 04:02 PM (sYxEE)

196 Michelle Obama is the most beautifulest woman I have ever seen.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at December 04, 2009 04:02 PM (GrDz5)

197 Ace you have convinced me on several issues before. Not ones I held the opposite view on before but ones where I mostly disagreed. Of course I didn't post and say that at the time because in the heat of an argument it's hard to honestly evaluate the other side's ideas (that and I'm mostly a lurker).

You can't expect to totally change people's opinions but you can shift them slowly and eventually convince them to mostly agree with you. I'm not saying it happens all the time or that you can convince everyone just that it's possible.

Then again perhaps I'm just some sort of weak willed follower sheep type.

Posted by: Xombozo at December 04, 2009 04:04 PM (7bDII)

198 @189 I can understand her particular take on this issue with the trig truther bullshit, but entertaining conspiracy theories is exactly what makes you look like
Andrew "Milky Loads" Sullivan in the first place.

Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 04:04 PM (wU9Cz)

199 71
Thank you for the praise.





Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)

ace, please put up your brilliant photo of a garbage barge going to Staten Island called "Overnight Bay" so that I can praise you some more!

Posted by: Ace's Sharmuta at December 04, 2009 04:05 PM (sYxEE)

200 Related topic
The line for Sarah's SaturdayBooksigning in DC (Fairfax BJ's Store) started at Noon Friday.
I'll see how long it is tonight, maybe

Posted by: Cromagnum at December 04, 2009 04:07 PM (rRlh2)

201 @198 Underdown
I can understand her particular take on this issue with the trig
truther bullshit, but entertaining conspiracy theories is exactly what
makes you look like
Andrew "Milky Loads" Sullivan in the first place.

So, exactly who is "entertaining conspiracy theories?"

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 04:07 PM (Ce+tv)

202 >>>I'm not sure why you continue to say things like that.

>>>For one thing, because there's little evidence that its true. For another, because poking people with pointy sticks is not a great way to convince them that you are right. As between you and me, the person seemingly determined to pick a fight is you. My approach to politics is always that its purely business, not personal. But you seem to take disagreement over tactics and strategy as a personal attack on you. That's not how it's intended.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with anyone.

But your answer seems to be -- you just said it -- that if two people are in a party, and one has x belief, and one believes opposite-x, one of them SHOULD NOT BE IN THE PARTY. Because that will lead to ideological incoherence.

So, for the tenth time, I have pointed out that YES, I could be on the opposite side of you (I have no idea of your opinion) on evolution, but that is NOT A REASON to boot me out of the party if I support you on 8 of your other ten big ticket items.

You just keep saying "Well, the party can only have one position, you can't fudge on these things, it leads to ideological confusion and lack of clear agenda, the disagreeing people should leave or get with the program."

It's what you said, dude. You seem to assume -- seem; it does seem to be a key assumption -- is that you can easily boot people like me out on evolution because obviously that means I'm not with you on the other ten points.

Not true. I am with you on 8 of ten points. If you want to boot me out over two sticking points that I think can be fudged -- if you are in fact going to insist on a litmus test -- well, I guess you lose me, and everyone else like me.

Hope you have replacements ready to go.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:07 PM (jlvw3)

203 71
Thank you for the praise.





Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)

Remember ace, you have a lot of power and you must use wisely

Posted by: dum-dum, ace's banned conscience at December 04, 2009 04:08 PM (sYxEE)

204 Not true. I am with you on 8 of ten points. If you
want to boot me out over two sticking points that I think can be fudged
-- if you are in fact going to insist on a litmus test -- well, I guess
you lose me, and everyone else like me.



Hope you have replacements ready to go.





Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:07 PM (jlvw3)
If you agree with me 75 percent of the time, you should vote for me. If you agree with me 100 percent of the time, you should see a psychiatrist - Ed Koch

Posted by: kbdabear at December 04, 2009 04:10 PM (sYxEE)

205 Holy shite. This may be the best post you've ever written, Ace. I am in awe.

Posted by: Emily M. at December 04, 2009 04:11 PM (EShwS)

206 I dont' even insist on much fudging on the last two points. I support the conservative mainstream orthodoxy (such as the pro-life position) even where I disagree, because 1, you cant' fight city hall and 2, it's probably best for the party, and that helps me on my other issues, and 3, it's not super-important to me.

But if you want to say "leave the party if you disagree, we cannot afford the ideological incoherence you bring," whatever.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:12 PM (jlvw3)

207 205
Holy shite. This may be the best post you've ever written, Ace. I am in awe.

Posted by: Emily M. at December 04, 2009 04:11 PM (EShwS)

Ace has a bunch of sycophants telling him how great he is. I don't need sycophants to tell me how great I am, I already knew it

Posted by: Cahrsel Jhonsno at December 04, 2009 04:14 PM (sYxEE)

208 Perfect. I have impressed many of the chicks and apparently gave one dude an erection.

Let me kiss some more female ass: Women put more emphasis on consensus. Men put more on being right and achieving coherence. (Overall: Obviously, people break from the mean.)

I think Republican men can learn a bit from Republican women on the need, sometimes, to keep the family together.

All this stuff about fighting endlessly to get to some perfectly-polished ideological coherence... 1, it's not going to happen, 2, you'e going to lose a lot of people if you insist on pushing everything to the limits that way, 3, chicks dig me and you should want them to dig you too.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:16 PM (jlvw3)

209 @201

by saying:
I think the public, rightfully, is still making it an issue.

She entertains the possibility that there is indeed a conspiracy in a Jesse the body Ventura sorta way. I dont care either way about the issue but do YOU think its helping her cause? She's got the base locked up already.

Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 04:18 PM (wU9Cz)

210 She wasn't saying the birthers have a point. She was saying they have a right.

Big difference.

Posted by: grognard at December 04, 2009 04:20 PM (v0kvW)

211
Perfect. I have impressed many of the chicks and apparently gave one dude an erection.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:16 PM (jlvw3)



Lol It took awhile, but that was funny.


Posted by: Brian72 at December 04, 2009 04:20 PM (mlT+O)

212 You pretty much nailed it, Ace. Palion fielded the question well, without stomping on anyone's toes. It was a good call by her, and it shows that someone out there is thinkin about real unity in the GOP. As opposed to pledges of unity at the podium, and political games and tattle-tales going to the Lamestream Media behind the scenes. (That would have been the McCain camp last year, especially after they all got the jealous jitters over Palin two weeks after the convention.)

Posted by: exdem13 at December 04, 2009 04:21 PM (lYKj1)

213 3, chicks dig me and you should want
them to dig you too.





Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:16 PM (jlvw3)
If Sharmuta leaves me for you I could handle that ace, but you'll never take Iceweasel away from me.

Posted by: Cahrsel Jhonsno at December 04, 2009 04:22 PM (sYxEE)

214 "Perfect. I have impressed many of the chicks and apparently gave one dude an erection."

Don't flatter yourself, it was your wild anecdote about talking to a girl that did it for me.

Posted by: Basic, b v at December 04, 2009 04:22 PM (SL3qo)

215 We make good head time to ace, too!

Posted by: Thai trannies at December 04, 2009 04:22 PM (sey23)

216 Okay, the awe is gone now, but it was still a damn good post.

Posted by: Emily M. at December 04, 2009 04:23 PM (EShwS)

217 Housekeeping! You want peeelow? You want sucky sucky?

Posted by: grognard at December 04, 2009 04:23 PM (v0kvW)

218 90% consensus on partial birth abortion. 60% for outlawing abortion in almost all cases.

Yes, but what I meant was, what's the consensus for scrapping SS, or Medicare, or the IRS, or going to war with Iran, or any of the many non-abortion related matters which preoccupy the party. For that matter what's the consensus for scrapping Roe, which would not outlaw abortion at all?

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 04:23 PM (/DCgw)

219 What ace said ...
BTW, I don't believe his citizenship is Kenyan, but I do believe there's something embarrassing on that birth certificate.

Posted by: Warden at December 04, 2009 04:24 PM (QoR4a)

220 @210

I dunno... I think her original statement that people have rightfully been making an issue of it is pretty clear. I read "rightfully" not as "they have a right" to but that they are "right" to do so. Maybe I'm misreading - it's tough to gauge intent from text.

Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 04:25 PM (wU9Cz)

221 3, chicks dig me and you should want
them to dig you too.
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:16 PM (jlvw3)


How long does this swelling last?

Posted by: ace's ego at December 04, 2009 04:25 PM (sYxEE)

222 190 163 JT for the win!
Posted by: Peaches at December 04, 2009 03:57 PM (9Wv2j)

He should have is own blog...

Posted by: Indian Outlaw at December 04, 2009 04:26 PM (8zsWd)

223 ace @ #152: That's the nature of persuasion. In fact, the definition of persuasion as I learned it in school was the process of creating, reinforcing or changing someone's awareness, attitudes, opinions or actions. And most of it is in the "reinforcement" part, and just a sliver is in the "actions" part.

Posted by: FireHorse at December 04, 2009 04:26 PM (Vl5GH)

224 And just when I thought you were going the way of Allahpundit, Ace. An excellent read.
I think the "litmus test" is merely more of an outreach for SOME form of conservatism in the GOP more than a purity test... After President Bush, Senator Graham, Ms. Scozzafava, etc, it is hard for a conservative to feel as though the theoretically "conservative" party even speaks the same language as the conservative voter.
Hence why I don't see the parallel quite so strongly to a "litmus test."

Posted by: SlightlyAjar at December 04, 2009 04:27 PM (oqVXp)

225 How long does this swelling last?

Posted by: ace's ego at December 04, 2009 04:25 PM

Consult a physician if it lasts longer than 4 years

Posted by: Bill O'Reilly's ego at December 04, 2009 04:27 PM (sYxEE)

226 BTW, I don't believe his citizenship is Kenyan, but I do believe there's something embarrassing on that birth certificate.

Posted by: Warden at December 04, 2009 04:24 PM

Doctor's note: The infant, although born without ears, received a double elephant ear transplant upon delivery.

Posted by: Obama's birth certificate at December 04, 2009 04:28 PM (sey23)

227 So, exactly who is "entertaining conspiracy theories?"

I don't think she said anything controversial either - for a normal person. But she's not treated normally. I really like Sarah. But all she had to do was *mention* the birther thing and its "como esta, bitches!" from the media. They'll report that fact - context and actual content of her remarks NOT REQUIRED.

Posted by: gjz at December 04, 2009 04:29 PM (GdqSP)

228 Good God! Hot Air's commentators are nucking futs; All of a sudden Palin is toxic for a statement that was neither a confirmation or a denial of birtherism. Reminds me of the Ron Paul incident and he was automatically labeled as a Troofer.

And Ace's post? Spot-freaking On.

Posted by: vai2112 at December 04, 2009 04:29 PM (pkOAj)

229 Tom Marr on the radio here thinks Obama won't show the certificate 'cause they listed his religion as muslim. Very possible.

Haven't read all the comments yet so forgive me if anyone has already typed this.

Posted by: Bill in Baltimore at December 04, 2009 04:29 PM (kIG9q)

230 Ace, such strong statements of beliefs and positions. It's like I don't know you anymore!

Posted by: Allahpunter at December 04, 2009 04:30 PM (sYxEE)

231 I dont' even insist on much fudging on the last two points. I support the conservative mainstream orthodoxy (such as the pro-life position) even where I disagree, because 1, you cant' fight city hall and 2, it's probably best for the party, and that helps me on my other issues, and 3, it's not super-important to me. But if you want to say "leave the party if you disagree, we cannot afford the ideological incoherence you bring," whatever.

Of course you said in the first paragraph that you don't disagree, that you are willing to go along with conservative mainstream orthodoxy (such as the pro-life position). So you're not bringing any ideological incoherence. I pointed out that a hypothetical person who was passonately commited above all elseto keeping abortion legal would be an odd fit for for the Republican party. So I'm still left wondering why you pick these needless fights over positions which, you keep telling us, you don't hold.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 04:30 PM (/DCgw)

232 When times are good, the voters want to hang with the cool kids. When times are rough, they want the tough guys to beat someone's ass for them.

Posted by: toby928 at December 04, 2009 04:31 PM (PD1tk)

233 Good God! Hot Air's commentators are nucking futs; All of a sudden
Palin is toxic for a statement that was neither a confirmation or a
denial of birtherism.


Nonsense, not the commenters just the Palin trolls. Which, admittedly, at times includes AP.

Posted by: Amused Observer at December 04, 2009 04:32 PM (Uy/AI)

234 Great post, Ace. Agree with most, but not all of it.
"No one's going to say, 'Well, the jobless rate is still at 9%, but you know what? Sarah Palin once said that a high elected official should turn over a document that proves his eligibility for the Presidency, and so they've lost my vote' "
We are in a fight for that squishy center of the country. The ones who voted for Barack for reasons like the crease in his pants. Because they were tired of hearing their liberal friends mock Bush (and by extension, them) at cocktail parties and at dinner and they were getting beat down by the war themselves.Because he seemed articulate, and because Bush did not articulate conservative principals well. Because he seemed hip and edgy, and for once they wanted to be at one with the elites and the Hollywood crowd that praised him. Because he told them what they wanted to hear and they really, really wnated to believe he would govern as a moderate. I could go on and on.
These are precisely the type of people who may live their lives in a conservative manner for the most part but are a bit intimidated by the PC behemoth (as Wizard of Ozish as it may be) and are almost, in a sense, looking for an excuse to cut and run from a GOP candidate.
This particular "wierd card" is so wierd that it alone, without any other wierd cards tossed in,provides that excuse or 'cover'. These people emote for the most part rather than think this stuff out. And it won't be reported fairly in the media. Any 'birther' associations will be played up and trumpeted as much as 'truther' associations with any liberal or Democrat were and are downplayed."I can't vote for Palin, she's associated with those crazy people who think Obama was born ina terrorist's hut in Somalia. Birthers, they call them, or something like that."
We are talking about decent people, friends and neighbors who have good hearts and serve on their local PTA, but who pick up talking points from Katie Couric and Whoopi. Hard conservative edges scare them, as do wierd cards. As tempting as it is to say, "To hell with them, we don't need these people", the truth is that there are not enough of the type of people who frequent this site to elect a conservative candidate.
I think we are on the same page, but I see this particular card as being made of Kryptonite to someone like Palin's Superwoman.

Posted by: RM at December 04, 2009 04:32 PM (1kwr2)

235 226
BTW, I don't believe his citizenship is Kenyan, but I do believe there's something embarrassing on that birth certificate.
Posted by: Warden at December 04, 2009 04:24 PM

Don't go pokin' around askin' questions, I never touched that bitch!

Posted by: Franklin Marshall at December 04, 2009 04:32 PM (sYxEE)

236 Might as well make use of those Cialis commercials I am forced to watch while eating dinner every damn day.

What are we -- chopped liver?

Posted by: KY his and hers ads at December 04, 2009 04:32 PM (sey23)

237 >>>Yes, but what I meant was, what's the consensus for scrapping SS, or Medicare, or the IRS, or going to war with Iran, or any of the many non-abortion related matters which preoccupy the party

There's NOT!!! I wouldn't call a single one of those a leading issue. Three of them -- scrapping two hugely popular programs, one scapping a very unpopular but as it stands necessary collections agency -- are toxic.

Who the heck really contends strongly for those thngs? People on free republic, maybe, and Ron Paul, but what politician?

There is no appetite for War with Iran, either. If that's to be done, it's to be done FDR style. FDR promised to keep us out of WWII -- promised! -- and of course planned to get involved all along.

And then he let Pearl Harbor happen as a "back door to war."

(Kid-ding...!)

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:34 PM (jlvw3)

238 Ace, since your actually reading this post, Please make sure that one of the staff posts A College Football and Knitting thread tomorrow. Big games, much trash talking and tears to follow.

Posted by: toby928 at December 04, 2009 04:34 PM (PD1tk)

239 Underdown at December 04, 2009 04:04 PM (wU9Cz)

Putting words in my mouth is lame. Never said I entertained eitherconspiracytheory. Not a birther or truther. I just took what she said in the spirit that she said it. People have a right to believe whatever the hell they want. No skin off my nose either way. And, it certainly isn't going to be the downfall of either party...or Sarah. Politicians on both sides of the aisle have said a hell of a lot worse, but not too many conservatives have been as nasty as the left has to Sarah.

Posted by: Steph at December 04, 2009 04:36 PM (5bx6q)

240 238
Ace, since your actually reading this post

Mr. ace is not reading the posts. I read them for him.

Posted by: ace's intern at December 04, 2009 04:36 PM (sey23)

241 I'll admit I skimmed the post. However, Ihope I got the gist and I pretty much agree.
I've been lumped in with birthers before, even though I'm not sold on the entire idea. It's the duck and weave of the whole thing that bothers me. Also, why don't we have some procedure in place to ensure that our candidates actually fit the requirements?
Disagreements between party members are normal. If we kicked out everyone who didn't agree, there'd be no party. That doesn't mean we should put up with the members who are obviously not there for people whom they represent. What's the use of an elected offical who always bats for the other team?

Posted by: soulpile at December 04, 2009 04:38 PM (gH+Hj)

242 RM,

At the heart I don't think people will care all that much, because, in the end, there's a simple question: "Well, why doesn't he just release the birth certificate and be done with it?"

There is nothing like that with regard to Trutherism.

I just think it's mostly a shrug.

You are right -- this does hurt us. It is a weirdness we don't need. I said as much.

My contention is that it doesn't hurt us MUCH, and my other contention is that you are NOT, repeat NOT, going to convince the 40% (or whatever) of the party that believes in this stuff to see it your way, so your best possible option is to fudge it and forget it.

You are fixated on the optimal solution: We just drop this entirely. I am telling you it will not be dropped. Read the comments in any thread where this comes up. Intensity is too high and there are too many people with that intensity.

So, stop thinking about the optimal solution. It is unavailable. Look for the next-least-bad soluton instead.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:38 PM (jlvw3)

243 As they say: Politics is the art of the possible.

Cuts both ways. Moderates invoke this a lot to explain why we need to tack to the left here or there.

Well, sometimes we need to tack the other way, too.

Until most people in the party see this as the fantasy it is -- it is basically this big magical "UNDO" button on the election, where somehow we just get the right document to come out and presto, Obama's not president; life just doesn't work like that -- we have to find some way to agree to disagree, to agree on something and punt the rest, and to try not to get all up in each other's business so damn much we hate each other.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:41 PM (jlvw3)

244 242, Ace, I am endlessly amazed at the folks who continue to fight the birth certificate fight even when people straight up tell them the truth. Even if you are right, there is no jurisdiction for this legal fight. The courts and legislature aren't going to run with this separation of powers hot potato, and even if you DO win on THAT end, you will only have made Preisdent Obama's ideology stronger for having made the One a martyr, rather than letting his ideology be shown for the awful wreck it is to the American people... a lesson that likely won't last a decade but I'd consider it a better boon than the birth certificate win.

Posted by: SlightlyAjar at December 04, 2009 04:42 PM (oqVXp)

245 The entire premise of Ace's argument is pretty much nonsense. It equates three things as being equal: 9/11 Truthers, Trig Truthers, and the Nirthers.

They are not even close to being the same. 9/11 Truthers are insane nuts who will never accept any "proof" to dissuade them from their theories, er, "questions". Trig Truthers at least started with a premise that was physically possible, then proved how insane and nuts they are by refusing to accept the proof that was provided when Trip came along. These people are just plain insane nut jobs. The fact that they are functionally literate and can support themselves doesn't change the fact that they're crazy.

The closet comparison with the Nirther "conspiracy" is the John Kerry military records "cover-up". It's a controversy that could be cleared up very easily if the person with authority simply allowed the records to be released. End of story. Oh, sure, there would still be some nutjobs who would claim the records were forgeries, but you'll always have those people around any story.

John Kerry refused to sign the form 180 that would allow the media access to his unfiltered military records. He never did sign it as far as I know, even though I have read many claims that he did. Why?

And the bigger question which pertains to today: why is it that the media went through every scrap of paper related to George W. Bush's military career (after he did sign the release forms) to such an extent that we all know he had a dentist appointment in Alabama on a Saturday, but nobody to this day knows why it took Kerry 6 years after his "tour of duty" was supposed to end before he got an honorable discharge?

That's the real story behind Obama's birth certificate. Not that he doesn't have a copy. Most people his age probably don't have an original copy of their birth certificates. The real story is why won't he allow it to be released and why does the media simply not give a shit?

Palin made the same comparison that Rush did when he described what he has to go through in New York to avoid being taxed there. Remember Ann Coulter being accused a few years ago of voting in a district she no longer lived in?

Why? Why does Obama get such a pass on something that would be so easy to clear up? And why is it only the people who wonder why he gets a pass considered just as nutty as 9/11 Truthers and gay men obsessed with a womans vagina?

Posted by: Jaynie59 at December 04, 2009 04:42 PM (YjQWV)

246 Trust, but verify.

Posted by: Ronald Reagan at December 04, 2009 04:43 PM (lozih)

247 @227 gjz
But all she had to do was *mention* the birther thing and its "como esta, bitches!" from the media.

Are you and Underdown afraid that Governor Palin's standing is harmed by her failure to bash birthers?

Is her standing harmed more by her refusal to birther-bash than it was by the bikini photoshops, the Trig-is-her-granddaughter crap, or the Tina Fey skits? What imprudent things did she do or say that brought those on her?

If you want to worry so much about what third-party people think about what she says or how she is misrepresented, then that's your neurosis. Suffer it quietly or heal yourself, but don't try to spread it to me.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 04:43 PM (Ce+tv)

248 I think she has the political mind that Obambee was credited with.

Just as her book tour hype starts to fade she makes on small comment that gets everyone all worked up on both sides of the fence. a 2000 comment over on HotAir about this very thing. It sells books.

She firmed up her base and I believe gave a clear message for the future.
I take away from this that when she runs in 12' there will be none of this insider crap of "we won't mention that because the press will get us on it" crap that went on in the last election. Nothing is off the table me thinks, and the mud will be slung....

Posted by: TheGarbone at December 04, 2009 04:44 PM (DpCj+)

249 Ace, do you have groupies?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at December 04, 2009 04:44 PM (muUqs)

250 Ace, good post. This is exactly the template conservatives should follow. "No, we don't believe it, but if he's so transparent, he should produce the long-form birth certificate." Exactly. Eventually, the real long-form birth certificate will be released, and we will all find out what he has been hiding.

Posted by: Onlooker at December 04, 2009 04:45 PM (M3hG/)

251 @239

Wah I was referring to Palin not you!

Posted by: Underdown at December 04, 2009 04:46 PM (wU9Cz)

252 For what it's worth, here's a anecdotal account of Obama claiming to have been born in Mombassa.

http://tinyurl.com/yj9ladj

I don't consider this to be evidence or proof of anything, but it is just another of those things that begs the question.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 04:46 PM (ou+hP)

253 Off topic:
I'm about to go meet Marco Rubio at a reception. Got any questions I should ask him???

Posted by: Indian Outlaw at December 04, 2009 04:46 PM (8zsWd)

254 But your answer seems to be -- you just said it -- that if two people are in a party, and one has x belief, and one believes opposite-x, one of them SHOULD NOT BE IN THE PARTY. Because that will lead to ideological incoherence.
No, I said that even if such a party were to somehow gain power, it would not and could not be a governing coalition because it would still have no consensus about what it should actually do, and that it would therefore quickly lose power.It would help matters if you'd respond to the points I'm actually making here. I've made zero mention of "ideological incoherence", at least on this thread.

So, for the tenth time, I have pointed out that YES, I could be on the opposite side of you (I have no idea of your opinion) on evolution, but that is NOT A REASON to boot me out of the party if I support you on 8 of your other ten big ticket items.
And for the eleventh time, I'm pointing out to you that it all depends onhow feverently we hold our respective views on e.g evolution. Impllicit in what you're saying is "of course I care about evolution, but there are others things I care about more and this keeps me in the GOP even if I agree with it on x,y and z". This would be those eight out of the isues you mentioned.
But everybody has ahierarchy of values. There are people who vote GOP even though they disagree with iton eight out of ten big issues, because the remainder are so important to them.
These are remarks about politics in general, not about you personally.

Posted by: flenser at December 04, 2009 04:46 PM (/DCgw)

255 It's not just jurisdiction. It's that the law they say disqualifies is obviously misdrafted -- their whole case rests on the premise that Congress INTENDED to strip the citizenship of any child born to any american under the age of 18 who married a foreigner and gave birth overseas.

They didn't. The law was poorly written. And Congress can change it at any time.

I doubt that's even what the law MEANS anymore, either. I am guessing it has been modified since then, either by congress or the courts.

And I mean -- all this speculation and all these assumed premises are only there to get you to the point where this daffy interpretation of a ticky-tack misdrafting of a law takes vindictive effect.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:47 PM (jlvw3)

256 71
Thank you for the praise.





Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)


Yes, you are so awesome we're changing our name to capitalize on your awesomeness

Posted by: ace wigs at December 04, 2009 04:48 PM (sYxEE)

257 @256

Us, too.

Posted by: ace boots at December 04, 2009 04:49 PM (sey23)

258 I am guessing that 70% of Palin's base of support buys into this to one degree or another. If only to the extent of "Hey, Mr. Open and Transparent, release the fucking documents already and stop being an obstructionist prick."

So what's she going to say?

I don't think she's a lightworker. I think she's a politician. That's not an insult. This is, instead, her chosen profession.

Politicians do politics.

Google it.



Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:50 PM (jlvw3)

259 JT @ #163: Let's assume that the "birthers" (as they're being called) are right. Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that Barack Obama was ineligible to become president. Think it through: What then?
Under these assumptions, we're facing more than a goof or an oversight that slipped through a crack. For an ineligible candidate to get his name on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia (and in Puerto Rico and Guam for primaries) only to have none of 53 elections commissioners or anyone in any news media organization notice is proof of either extraordinary corruption or unfathomable negligence. Either way, our system would be deemed broken. If this were truly the case, what then?
And what about Obama himself? Contitutionally eligible or not, 66 million people voted for him. It would be more practical to rush through an amendment that would retroactively make him eligible to serve as president than it would be to remove him from office.
So, hypothectically, Obama remains in power but the entire electoral system as we currently know it is trashed. Is this what you really want?

Posted by: FireHorse at December 04, 2009 04:53 PM (Vl5GH)

260 71
Thank you for the praise.



Damn I am so smart sometimes I scare myself.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 02:40 PM (jlvw3)

When ace falls in water, ace doesn't get wet. Water gets ace

When ace does pushups, he doesn't lift himself up. He pushes the world down

ace's tears cure cancer. Too bad he never cries. Ever

If ace is late, time better slow down

ace's icy stare alone can stop global warming

Posted by: Top Ace Facts at December 04, 2009 04:55 PM (sYxEE)

261 Okay, so there's nothing amiss with the birth certificate. Great. I'm glad to hear it. Then there should be no problem with Obama releasing it. But all he's released is the state of Hawaii Certification of Live Birth, which is not a birth certificate at all, and could have been obtained by someone born on Neptune. So why is the birth certificate such a deep, dark, super-secret, cloak-and-dagger, eyes-only, enigma wrapped inside a mystery? Anyone who wants the "Birthers" to shut up and go away has to answer that question. And nobody has. They just resort to bigoted sneers about yahoos. And that doesn't get us anywhere. Oh - I guess that's the point.

Posted by: Wat Tyler at December 04, 2009 04:58 PM (LiLOu)

262 Politicians do politics.



Google it.
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:50 PM (jlvw3)


ace's hot comebacks can melt steel

Google it

Posted by: ace o'donnell at December 04, 2009 04:58 PM (sYxEE)

263 255 It's not just jurisdiction. It's that the law they say disqualifies is obviously misdrafted -- their whole case rests on the premise that Congress INTENDED to strip the citizenship of any child born to any american under the age of 18 who married a foreigner and gave birth overseas.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 04:47 PM (jlvw3)
Congress has no say in what 'natural born' means. Congress was only given power (in the Constitution) to make laws regarding naturalization.
But, the question is pretty straightforward, how many American dual citizens were there in the 18th and 19th centuries? The War of 1812 revolved about this question, to a good extent, and not in the way that the "dual citizens can be President" crowd seems to think.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 04:59 PM (A46hP)

264 261
Okay, so there's nothing amiss with the birth certificate. Great. I'm
glad to hear it. Then there should be no problem with Obama releasing
it. But all he's released is the state of Hawaii Certification of Live
Birth, which is not a birth certificate at all, and could have been
obtained by someone born on Neptune.

So if he does, he'll still be POTUS.

Didn't we learn anything from the Monica Mess?

Posted by: kbdabear at December 04, 2009 05:00 PM (sYxEE)

265 @239 Wah I was referring to Palin not you!

Sorry if I misunderstood. Have you actually seen the interview all of this mess came from?It was a damn good interview where her views on immigration were a heck of a lot more important. Context matters.
http://tiny.cc/PZfIv

Posted by: Steph at December 04, 2009 05:02 PM (5bx6q)

266 208 Perfect. I have impressed many of the chicks and apparently gave one dude an erection. Close, not quite there. Underalls still in check.
An important point to remember: talk to a progressive for five minutes. Then come back. This purity/litMUST testdebate will seem so ridiculous. Just keepin' perspective.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 05:03 PM (pLTLS)

267 @259 FireHorse

So, hypothectically, Obama remains in power but the entire electoral
system as we currently know it is trashed. Is this what you really want?

I don't think the kenyan princess is ineligible. I think there's some embarrassing stuff on his long-form birth certificate, and I would love to be able to throw it in the faces of the assholes who support this piece of shit.

That said, if it ever comes to the situation you describe, then there will be a shooting war in this country.

And who will bear the blame?

The blame belongs to the one who ran for an office he is not eligible to hold.

The blame belongs to the one who went to great lengths to hide the evidence that he is not eligible to be POTUS.

The blame belongs to the one attempting to remain in an office he is not eligible to hold.

And, it will be open season on any sonofabitch stupid enough to lift a finger to defend retaining him in office.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 05:03 PM (Ce+tv)

268
And what about Obama himself? Contitutionally
eligible or not, 66 million people voted for him. It would be more
practical to rush through an amendment that would retroactively make
him eligible to serve as president than it would be to remove him from
office.

So, hypothectically, Obama remains in power but the entire electoral
system as we currently know it is trashed. Is this what you really want?

Posted by: FireHorse at December 04, 2009 04:53 PM (Vl5GH)

It is my opinion that these 66 million people are IDIOTS. Likewise the government officials who were responsible for placing Obama's name on the ballot without valid proof.

If the system *IS* trashed, then it's trashed, regardless of whether or not people are aware of it. The only question is whether or not we want to know the truth, or hide from ourselves the notion that the system doesn't work because it is infected with too many IDIOTS !

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:03 PM (ou+hP)

269 En Fuego!

Posted by: that guy that shouts enfuego! at December 04, 2009 05:04 PM (PD1tk)

270 JT @ #163: Let's assume that the "birthers" (as they're being called) are right. Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that Barack Obama was ineligible to become president. Think it through: What then?
Then he wouldn't be President (though he still made it as Precedent) and succession would happen as if the President had just died. Nothing that this nation hasn't faced before. No big deal.

And what about Obama himself? Contitutionally eligible or not, 66 million people voted for him. It would be more practical to rush through an amendment that would retroactively make him eligible to serve as president than it would be to remove him from office.
Retroactive laws and amendments don't pass the smell test. Not allowed.
As to people having voted for him ... so what? We don't live in a democracy. The whim of the people is not binding and our nation is not to be moved by it. That was the whole point of making us a Constitutional Republic, right?

So, hypothectically, Obama remains in power but the entire electoral system as we currently know it is trashed. Is this what you really want?

Posted by: FireHorse at December 04, 2009 04:53 PM (Vl5GH)
If he's ineligible, then he's out. Period. If we don't have the guts to follow our own law, then this nation is finished and it is best to acknowledge it and start construction of a nation that will live by the rule of law. Ochlocracies (as we have now become) are not pleasant places to live in.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 05:04 PM (A46hP)

271 from the legal treatise the Law of Nations, written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.

Barry's dad was a British subject.



Posted by: ccruse456 at December 04, 2009 05:05 PM (3pv79)

272 Ace,
I'm 1/367th done with your tome, but it looks great so far. I think you needmore And furthermores.
Seriously, though, I concur. If there's a litmus test for conservatives, it's not hating onSarah. This lady is about as savvy as they come, andso bashing her just seems weird to me given her very reasonable positions.

Posted by: braininahat at December 04, 2009 05:06 PM (k6Bis)

273 I am just curious as to what the world looks like to someone that doesn't follow politics hour-by-hour.
That would be that elusive 6% of the population that is undecided about anelection up until they realize they don't recognize any of the names on the ballotand vote for the first name in each race just so they can sport an "I Voted" sticker on their shirt and then go walk around the mall and hang out at starbucks as if to say look at me I voted did you?

Posted by: x11b1p at December 04, 2009 05:09 PM (ejoAx)

274 Ace, Gabe, DrewM et. al. refuse to acknowledge a point I keep trying to make. Every time I ask one of them this question, all I get back in return is "crickets."


*I* am adopted (1965). I have TWO birth certificates. The original, with my real father's name on it, and the current, with my adopted father's name on it. One of the birth certificates tells the truth, and the other is a lie. The state officials who issue birth certificates will certify the lying one as true.

This is a common practice in all states in the case of adoption.

My point is that you cannot TRUST state officials to tell you the truth about a birth certificate. They are REQUIRED to lie about it.


Any comment Ace ?

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:09 PM (ou+hP)

275 Speaking of truthers (but somewhat O/T), I just got kicked in the gut reading a friend's Facebook post where she says she's "learning a lot" from Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory show.

Yes, she's an Obamabot (and therefore clearly missing some grey matter), but SHE GRADUATED FROM PURDUE UNIVERSITY, you know, that place chock-a-block full of engineers who modeled the 9/11 crashes!

It's taking everything I have to not post a comment on her page.

Geezus. What is this world coming to?

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 05:15 PM (sey23)

276 Yourpoint is irrelevant. Why should anyone comment directly about it?

Posted by: braininahat at December 04, 2009 05:18 PM (k6Bis)

277
It's taking everything I have to not post a comment on her page.

Geezus. What is this world coming to?


Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 05:15 PM (sey23)

This sort of thing used to befuddle me too. How can a nation function with so many idiots ? I finally realized, people are basically competent at what they do to earn a living. But outside their area of knowledge and experience, a whole lot of people are really stupid.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:19 PM (ou+hP)

278 My point is that you cannot TRUST state officials to tell you the truth
about a birth certificate. They are REQUIRED to lie about it.

You didn't ask me, but I am curious if you think that whatever rules that are in place that require these officials to lie about the father (in cases of adoption) would also require them to lie about Obama's place or date of birth (the two things that are relevant to his qualifications for presidency)? Or do you think that who his father is/was is somehow germane to his eligibility to be president? I haven't followed all of your posts.

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 05:20 PM (sey23)

279 276
Yourpoint is irrelevant. Why should anyone comment directly about it?

Posted by: braininahat at December 04, 2009 05:18 PM (k6Bis)

It is apparently irrelevant in your opinion, but not in a good many other people's opinions. But just for the sake of argument, let's say your right and it is irrelevant. Would this be the first irrelevant thing discussed on this blog?
Hmmm ?


Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:21 PM (ou+hP)

280 Here is why I give those questioning Obama's birth a break.

If Sandy Berger was not caught and a year later some peon govt worker on a hunch alleged a former National Security Director stuffed top secret papers in his socks in order to protect Clinton regard to fault for 9-11, this would be considered an outlandish conspiracy theory. I guess they would call the conspiracy theorists Stuffers.

Posted by: polynikes at December 04, 2009 05:23 PM (Cqgus)

281 @275 Y-not
Speaking of truthers (but somewhat O/T), I just got kicked in the gut
reading a friend's Facebook post where she says she's "learning a lot"
from Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory show.

Engage in Cognitive Resonance.

Pile-on. Feed that fire. Next time you see her in person, suggest that if she doesn't get the truth out there in time, she might become a victim for what she already knows.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 05:23 PM (Ce+tv)

282 You didn't ask me, but I am curious if you think
that whatever rules that are in place that require these officials to
lie about the father (in cases of adoption) would also require them to
lie about Obama's place or date of birth (the two things that are
relevant to his qualifications for presidency)? Or do you think that
who his father is/was is somehow germane to his eligibility to be
president? I haven't followed all of your posts.


Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 05:20 PM (sey23)

It is widely believed that Obama was adopted by Soereto, his mother's second husband. As states do not release pre-adoption birth certificates, they also don't confirm that adoptions occurred.
My point is this. State officials Words and computer printouts are NOT GOOD ENOUGH to establish that Barack Obama was really born in Hawaii. The ONLY thing that is good enough is a signed statement by a credible witness that saw Obama being born. In other words, a doctors signature on a birth certificate.



Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:24 PM (ou+hP)

283 Sorry. Here's his name. "Lolo Soetoro."

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:27 PM (ou+hP)

284 Congratulations, Ace, for not denigrating researchers. Good post.



"I don't care if it's true or not. I just want them to bring this asshole down."

Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:09
Point made doesn't require response since the counterpoint is depleted interest.






Posted by: maverick muse at December 04, 2009 05:30 PM (+CLh/)

285 Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:24 PM

Got it. Thanks.

Yeah, I think it is bizarre that Obama won't authorize the Hawaiian officials to release his documents and kind of scary that (apparently) no one has "standing" to make him (or any candidate, one is to assume) do so. But I think Obama is just being a prick. We all know his mom was knocked up, we all know he sees himself as the first "Pacific" president, and he even ran on (initially) a platform of having special insight into Muslims because of his upbringing, so I really don't see what he's hiding. I thnk he's just doing it because that's how he operates. Because he's a sociopath.

Posted by: Y-not at December 04, 2009 05:31 PM (sey23)

286 I guess they would call the conspiracy theorists Stuffers.

Posted by: polynikes

Good form.

Posted by: maverick muse at December 04, 2009 05:33 PM (+CLh/)

287 >> Please make sure that one of the staff posts A College Football and Knitting thread tomorrow. Big games, much trash talking and tears to follow.
Message received, including speculation on bowl bids, projections for tomorrow's games, and Heisman stuff.
It'll be compelling. And rich.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 04, 2009 05:35 PM (WvXvd)

288 >>> Any comment Ace ?


None. As they say, you cannot reason someone out of a position they weren't reasoned into in the first place.

I am tired of the "negative evidence" offered to me, the "it could be this way because there is no proof it isn't this way" evidence.

At some point you have to put up positive evidence establishing one or more of your premises.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:36 PM (jlvw3)

289 How about you get off my nuts about lobbying me to believe in a theory for which you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever (and a fair amount of evidence against you)?

And I will leave you alone, as I am trying to do, to believe what you want to.

Feel like I'm on the other side of ClimateGate here. "Trust us, we really believe this and you should too!"

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:38 PM (jlvw3)

290 Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:09
Point made doesn't require response since the counterpoint is depleted interest.


Posted by: maverick muse at December 04, 2009 05:30 PM (+CLh/)

As Ace mentioned, the Laffer curve is counter intuitive until you actually look at what is happening, then it becomes obvious.
The Birth certificate issue is also like this. Once you look at it, it becomes obvious that this isn't right. All i'm asking is for people to at least acknowledge that they understand this one point.
The so called proof, isn't good enough because it relies on the testimony of people whom you cannot trust to tell the truth on these type issues.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:41 PM (ou+hP)

291 Something else to bear in mind about the birth cert flap: trying to "win" on a technicality is stupid, unless you are doing it to stay out of jail (or worse). You can't eliminate opponents that way, and you can't make yourself look better that way.

Remember how awesome it was when the Republicans tried to get rid of Clinton on a technicality? Bin Laden was very thankful, I'm sure.

Posted by: K~Bob at December 04, 2009 05:41 PM (WtrwW)

292 fmmph!

Posted by: ace's nuts at December 04, 2009 05:42 PM (sey23)

293
I am not asking you to believe any "birther" theory. I am merely asking you to confirm or deny my point that state officials will lie about birth certificates.

I cite as evidence my own personal case.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:43 PM (ou+hP)

294 192 >>>I'm not sure there is 90% consensus on what we should do about anything, 90% consensus on partial birth abortion. 60% for outlawing abortion in almost all cases. The science is settled!

Posted by: Moron at December 04, 2009 05:47 PM (gbCNS)

295 This is why I hate conspiracy theories.

And this is a conspiracy theory, in one critical respect.

When someone buys into a theory such as this, they begin postulating all these reasons no actual evidence exists to support them. Forgeries, fraud, lying officials in Hawaii, inconvenient birth announcements placed for odd reasons, etc.

And they become sure all that evidence exists and can be had, if only we "dig" enough and put enough "pressure" on officials to get at the truth.

And then what happens is you have nice guys like me, who chicks dig, minding my own business, saying "Okay, believe that if you want, but just leave me out of it."

But see, they *can't*, because the fact I shrug at this makes me a silent enabler -- after all, it is the failure of people like myself to get involved and demand answers that allows this massive fraud on the Constitution to continue -- so they really do need me to kinda spread the message, and they start to resent me for failing to do so, etc.

And that's natural, and I understand that's how it works. I don't blame people for that.

But it turns into -- as they say -- this thing where the LESS evidence there is, the MORE evidence, it must mean, that there was a conspiracy to destroy th evidence; and the less evidence there is, the MORE important it is for people to get on board and believe it (without evidence) because only when a critical mass of people believes it can we pressure the evidence out of its hiding places, etc.

It's just a no-win situation to argue in these cases.

At heart you are making several huge assumptions based on nothing but faith, or gut, or... I don't know, some other impulse that is not empirical, and I'm asked to join you in making this leap of faith. And I decline, and always will decline.

I bought into one conspiracy theory in my life -- the JFK assassination thing -- and I later learned it was all bullshit and I will not go down that road again. What I learned about conspiracy theories -- from the JFK thing, again -- is that there are always enough nagging questions and odd circumstances to "prove" whatever you want, including that Vice President LBJ did a deal with the New Orleans Mob to kill the Kennedy brothers.

There is ALWAYS enough stuff like this in any situation that with the addition of imagination, supposition, and a political axe to grind, you can have a pretty decent case for anything you like.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:48 PM (jlvw3)

296 This is exactly my point. Gabe won't admit this. DrewM won't admit this, and apparently Ace won't admit this either.

(that state officials routinely lie about birth certificates.)


You can always say "No they don't." Then I can send you copies of proof that they do, and then you can argue with the two pieces of paper.


Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:48 PM (ou+hP)

297 >>>I am merely asking you to confirm or deny my point that state officials will lie about birth certificates.

If you say so, in that one particular case, okay.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:49 PM (jlvw3)

298 There is ALWAYS enough stuff like this in any
situation that with the addition of imagination, supposition, and a
political axe to grind, you can have a pretty decent case for anything
you like.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:48 PM (jlvw3)

You aren't arguing with me about this stuff. My main point has always been that what is accepted as positive proof is NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

As i've mentioned, there is a movement afoot in my state to require a original birth certificate SIGNED by a WITNESS before someone can get on the ballot.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:51 PM (ou+hP)

299 If you say so, in that one particular case, okay.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:49 PM (jlvw3)


Halleluia ! Finally a little intellectual honesty ! But why must you believe that it happened only in one case ? My understanding is it is routine in all cases.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:54 PM (ou+hP)

300 Enough bothering you for one day. I think you do a great job and I hope you continue to do so. Ace Of Spades HQ is my favorite website and i'm always talking it up to other people I know.


Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 05:56 PM (ou+hP)

301 117
I still say Obama refuses to release his original LFBC because it states his race as Caucasian

Bingo. I totally agree with you.


Posted by: paranoid polly at December 04, 2009 02:58 PM (r7Vc3)





Who would care about that? Besides, I've never seen a BC that lists the race of the child, only that of each of the parents.As many others do, I say that it's the identity of the father he's trying to hide. Think it though. He has invested so much in his father's identity and ethnicity. 'Dreams from My Father.' For the world to find out that someone else is his father--or that his mother did not know who the father was for sure--would be...I can't think of a word.
If he hides the BC he can forget about it and hold onto the illusion of exotic parentage. Because if Davis is his daddy, he's just another half black man.

Posted by: baldilocks at December 04, 2009 05:57 PM (hQp43)

302 I remind everyone how this snowball started:

Some people "proved" the short form on the internet was forged.

Thus proven, a motive was needed. "Perhaps he was born in Kenya," it was speculated, which made sense. Would explain the forgery.

And so "Was born in Kenya" became a provisional, tentative conclusion based on the premise that the short form was forged. Which was proven.

And then... it was quickly disproven. It wasn't forged. It was completely disproven, utterly discredited.

And yet this provisional tentative conclusion persisted despite the fact that the premise that gave birth to it, upon which it depended, had been discredited out of existence.

So this conclusion now needed evidence to support it. Huh? Wait -- the conclusion was only there because we thought we had this evidence; now that the evidence is gone, so too should be gone the conclusion.

But no, the conclusion survived, now neeeding a new sub-structure of evidence to prop it up, and now we hear about the long form and officials creating real but fake short forms, etc.

Stop. Stop. Stop.


There are two sorts of people who buy this:

1. The innocents who have no idea how this started. They came late into this game. They weren't there at creation, as I was, to see this Kenya birth thing spun out as a motive for the "proven" forgery of the short form. So they don't know the inglorious beginnings of this theory.

2. The non-innocents who DO know this history, who bought into it from the beginning, and who saw their theory blow up in their faces, but still have a mixture of pride and anger invested in the game, and so who want to just keep trying with new theories and new offers of evidence to prove that initial mistaken conclusion they liked so much.


Again, like ClimateGate: First global cooling, now it's global warming... the premises shift but the conclusion -- we must impose world socialistic government control on industry and procreation -- always manages to stay the same, despite changing (sometimes radically so) "evidence" supporting that conclusion.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 05:58 PM (jlvw3)

303 ace, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but when New Jersey and New York had a NON-CITIZEN on their Presidential ballots (not a non-natural born citizen, but a guy who is not even an American, in any sense) then it is clear that no one is checking anything - not in those states, and as it turns out, not in any other states, either. That's pretty friggin' pathetic and should make blood shoot out of everyone's eyes. Then, for the courts to slam any voting citizen as not having standing to demand that those states and entities must check what the law says they must check (because the courts have decided that no one is harmed by having ineligible people in federal office - while they grant standing to every imbecile who bitches that standardized tests are secretly biased against his cultural environment ... and odd looks constitute "harm" in the workplace) just goes to a sort of crazy that you used to have to go to the USSR to experience.
We are being killed by political correctness - which is all this is and why it wasn't handled back during the campaign. It will be a very painful death, too. That's okay, though. There will be a monetary disaster and states will secede to form a decent nation that follows the rule of law and respects the American creed. This nation, however, is pretty much toast.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:01 PM (A46hP)

304 Halleluia ! Finally a little intellectual honesty ! But why must you
believe that it happened only in one case ? My understanding is it is
routine in all cases.

It depends on State law. They do that here in SC as well.

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 06:01 PM (CDUiN)

305 >>>ace, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but when New Jersey and New York had a NON-CITIZEN on their Presidential ballots (not a non-natural born citizen, but a guy who is not even an American, in any sense) then it is clear that no one is checking anything - not in those states, and as it turns out, not in any other states, either.

Oh, that is plenty clear. We have hear a Constitutional prerequisite which the Courts (and Congress, I guess) are telling us is uneforceable by anyone, which makes no sense.

What if there was some dispute if a candidate was 34 or 35 years old at the time of inauguration. It happens. Overseas birth, sloppy records... it is a constiutional requirement you must be 35, but it seems the courts are telling us that no one on earth has the power to actually enforce this. It's all the honors system or something.

I agree about that. I'm not sure what the solution is. Bear in mind, if you establish a panel, that panel can be used by vindictive partisans to disqualify people you like... Sarah Palin, for example, was born in Idaho, but could easily ahve been born in ALaska (where her parents moved when she was 3 months old).

Now-- Alaska wasn't a state then, so, I don't know, one could imagine some kooky liberal partisans making up a new "rule" that if you're not born in an American state you can't be a natural born American citizen.

Not saying that's not a good reason to NOT have a panel examine and rule on Constitutional requirements, just saying, any panel can be abused.

But yes, I am a bit perpelexed to find one part of hte constitution -- an important part -- is apparently dead-letter because no one in the universe has the legal right to enforce it.

All that said -- there is not one shred of evidence Mrs. Obama was anywhere but Hawaii when her son was born and wishing with all your might won't change that fact.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:07 PM (jlvw3)

306 Ace left out a catagory. Those people that heard about the whole brouhaha and took a look and found stuff that didn't make any sense and so were intrigued and wanting to get to the bottom of the truth.

The supposedly forged birth certificate simply opened up inquiries into the issue. People not getting sensible answers fueled further inquiry and speculation. As more bits and pieces come out, people finally conclude that there is SOME kind of hanky panky going on. Not really sure what it is, but theres a whole lot of smoke.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:09 PM (ou+hP)

307 There are two birth announcements in Hawaiian papers announcing his Hawaiian birth.

It is posited his mom did this for other reasons. Not to make him eligible for the presidency. Just to create some kind of paper trail to establish his citizenship. (Apparently she didn't consider an easier way to establish his citizenship -- just don't fly to Kenya when she's about to drop with Obama.)

Well, two things: 1 I find that glib and very unlikely, and 2, that means Obama is the luckiest guy in the world. A guy born in another country, but whose mom just happened to coincidentally create a paper trail to make him eligible for the presidency.

You know what? If he's that lucky he is destined to be president and I don't screw with Destiny.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:10 PM (jlvw3)

308 That right there
was a dang good post, Ace.
<golf claps>
Takeaway: "Sarah Palin's answer is going to be the basic default generic answer for almost all politicians on the right," so get used to it. We gots bigger fish to fry.

Posted by: les grossman at December 04, 2009 06:11 PM (Vc/xe)

309 All that said -- there is not one shred of evidence
Mrs. Obama was anywhere but Hawaii when her son was born and wishing
with all your might won't change that fact.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:07 PM (jlvw3)


She was in Washington state something like two weeks later. (As indicated by her college enrollment records.) It doesn't prove anything. Just another odd tidbit.



Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:12 PM (ou+hP)

310 A woman who's so concerned about the odd implementation of American natural-born citizenship law that she will phone in fake birth announcements to Hawaiian newspapers, but oddly enough, not so concerned about her son's citizenship that she just doesn't DELAY THE TRIP TO KENYA UNTIL AFTER SHE HAS GIVEN BIRTH AND IS MORE FIT TO VISIT A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.

Please.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:12 PM (jlvw3)

311 scab >>> pick >>>> bleed >>> scab >>> pick >>> bleed
Rinse 'n repeat.
Why is it a year later and people are still picking at this scab?? This only makes conservatives bleed.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 04, 2009 06:14 PM (pLTLS)

312 >>>The supposedly forged birth certificate simply opened up inquiries into the issue. People not getting sensible answers fueled further inquiry and speculation. As more bits and pieces come out, people finally conclude that there is SOME kind of hanky panky going on. Not really sure what it is, but theres a whole lot of smoke.

Every JFK (and RFK, and MLK, and etc.) conspiracy theorist can say the exact same thing.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:15 PM (jlvw3)

313 Well, two things: 1 I find that glib and very
unlikely, and 2, that means Obama is the luckiest guy in the world. A
guy born in another country, but whose mom just happened to
coincidentally create a paper trail to make him eligible for the
presidency.





You know what? If he's that lucky he is destined to be president and I don't screw with Destiny.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:10 PM (jlvw3)


Another oddity. The two girls born the same day as obama were NOT in either of those newspapers.

Someone reported that newspaper announcements were routinely forwarded from the Office which handles birth certificates. If this were true, then the two twin girls should have also been routinely forwarded.


In any case, I find Canada to be more plausible than Kenya, (because of it's proximity to Washington state.) but I think he was most likely born in Hawaii.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:16 PM (ou+hP)

314 delay the ALLEGED flight to Kenya, I mean.

I don't get that. She's so determined to get Obama all the rights and priviledges of American citizenship, and so worried about how the law might strip it from him, she plants fake birth announcements in the papers.

She has that foresight. Okay, she has that foresight.

On the other hand, she doesn't realize that maybe if she just stays in her home and actually give birth to him in Hawaii, then there's no doubt at all, and no need for phony newspaper announcements.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:16 PM (jlvw3)

315 >>>>Someone reported that newspaper announcements were routinely forwarded from the Office which handles birth certificates. If this were true, then the two twin girls should have also been routinely forwarded.

How did Lee Harvey Oswald get from the sixth floor of the book depository to the ground floor with no one seeing him on the stairs?

Hmmmmm....

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:18 PM (jlvw3)

316 AFTER SHE HAS GIVEN BIRTH AND IS MORE FIT TO VISIT A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.



Please.




Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:12 PM (jlvw3)

Well, that's just silly. Most people think the daughter was an idiot doing idiotic things, and the mother (A bank employee) filed the birth announcements.


Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:18 PM (ou+hP)

317 Get real. It's academic at this point. You're beating a dead horse.

Posted by: Opinion at December 04, 2009 06:18 PM (Cta0m)

318 Ace,

My mom who also gave birth to a half-Kenyan in that same year, same month says that it would have taken weeks to get to Kenya, give birth and come back in the year of Our Lord 1961. She also says that she wasn't exactly feeling like globetrotting in the ninth month of any of her pregnancies. Be advised, she hasn't ruled out the other O being the Antichrist. She just knows from experience that the born in Kenya thing is logistically impossible.

Posted by: baldilocks at December 04, 2009 06:18 PM (hQp43)

319 How did the blood preservative ETMA (I think) wind up on OJ's clothes? Must have been planted, poured out of a vial containing it.

Hmmmmmmm....


Do you not see? THERE IS ALWAYS SOME LITTLE ODD FACT IN ANY SITUATION. If you look hard enough, you will find them.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:19 PM (jlvw3)

320 Excellent article, but I have two points of contention. 1) You paint Birthers into a very small corner of believing some secret cabal is committing fraud regarding his birth certificate. I believe a significant portion of Birthers, myself included, just want to see every last scrap of his life record. From birth certificate to college transcripts to illegal trip to Pakistan. We want transparency and since most other Prez elects and nominees have to reveal this stuff it brings up questions of fairness. Hell, Palin is no longer a public servant but the AP sent 11 reporters to dig thru her trash cause she wrote a book. Where Obama was born is less of a concern than getting a full and accurate account of our President's life. 2) You seem to make the assumption that bringing up the Birther issue is the job of politicians. Isn't that the job of the media? I understand that many on the right distance themselves from this issue and many feel it's not the most important battle to be fighting. But the overwhelming reaction from media on the right is smears and derision. Look at the term Birther casually tossed about. I mean, most of these sights run tabloid mag hearsay that Angelina Jolie might hate the Prez but only touch the Birther issue to dish out more scorn and ridicule. Not saying I've seen that from you, but shouldn't an active, vibrant and radical Right media be able to go after all the issues weird or not? As you note you don't have to get 51% of the votes so we should be checking every angle no matter the weird factor. Politicians have to measure their words. But the media should be ferreting out the truth and the records with vigorous determination if for no other reason than to put it to bed.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at December 04, 2009 06:19 PM (WZFkG)

321 Every JFK (and RFK, and MLK, and etc.) conspiracy theorist can say the exact same thing.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:15 PM (jlvw3)

I've looked at the JFK conspiracy theories, and I know people who firmly believe that some sort of conspiracy occurred. I consider this the whacko test. If people believe the JFK conspiracy, they're WACKO !
I looked at the evidence, and it is entirely consistent with the warren commissions findings.

This birth certificate thing is consistent with people trying to blow smoke up our asses. The only thing I know for certain, is that it is damned difficult to pin down very many FACTS about this stuff.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:21 PM (ou+hP)

322 I agree about that. I'm not sure what the solution is. Bear in mind, if you establish a panel, that panel can be used by vindictive partisans to disqualify people you like... Sarah Palin, for example, was born in Idaho, but could easily ahve been born in ALaska (where her parents moved when she was 3 months old).
Now-- Alaska wasn't a state then, so, I don't know, one could imagine some kooky liberal partisans making up a new "rule" that if you're not born in an American state you can't be a natural born American citizen.

Not saying that's not a good reason to NOT have a panel examine and rule on Constitutional requirements, just saying, any panel can be abused.
The solution, so far as I can see, are the mechanisms that we actually have, but no one uses. Each state has charged the Sec State with the responsibility of checking the eligibility of candidates in order to appear on the state's ballots. That already exists. The problem is that none of the SecStates seem to have done that, and, instead, only took the word of the party as "proof of eligibility". Any disputes that one of these SecStates (or a panel) would bring up would be resolved in court, as the court would determine if the candidate satisfied (in this case) natural born status - as The Precedent's case should have, if the courts would have given as much standing to a voter as they do to every Tom, Dick, and Harry who has a racial/gender grievance about something pathetic and stupid. We already have the mechanisms. We just have people refusing to implement them. And the courts' "lack of standing" arguments are bullshit of the rankest sort. I brought this up with MikeO when he mentioned "disparate impact" and how the courts love to roll around in that ridiculous notion - made more famous with our empathetic new adjective-denying justice.
But yes, I am a bit perpelexed to find one part of the constitution -- an important part -- is apparently dead-letter because no one in the universe has the legal right to enforce it.
It is only this "special" case that people are refusing to enforce it. The Senate had no problem moving on McCain's eligibility and McCain would likely have had no problem defending his eligibility in court. I'd go so far as to say taht McCain would probably see it as his duty to defend his eligibility in court.
All that said -- there is not one shred of evidence Mrs. Obama was anywhere but Hawaii when her son was born and wishing with all your might won't change that fact.


Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:07 PM (jlvw3)
I'm not big on the Kenyan birth idea - though it is part of the whole eligibility question. I'm more interested in the idea that dual/multiple citizens are allowed to be President, now. This is, without any doubt, a new development (something that no one would have even tried to fight for, before, as we see in how Chester Arthur went to such an extent to cover up the circumstances of his father's nationality at his birth).
But, even on this multiple citizenship question, there is little risk. The SCOTUS could always decide to just clean the blackboard and declare that multiple citizenship doesn't obviate natural born status - thereby requiring a Constitutional amendment to straighten it all out. If the SCOTUS did this, the whole issue blows away and the system has been preserved. But, instead, we are moving to just ignore the breaking of the system that is happening.
That's how I see it all.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:23 PM (A46hP)

323 319
How did the blood preservative ETMA (I think) wind up on OJ's clothes?
Must have been planted, poured out of a vial containing it.





Hmmmmmmm....





Do you not see? THERE IS ALWAYS SOME LITTLE ODD FACT IN ANY SITUATION. If you look hard enough, you will find them.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:19 PM (jlvw3)


I know this one. The ETMA is a common used chemical used in the paint on the gate that the sample was taken from.

No more odd little fact.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:23 PM (ou+hP)

324 "...states will secede to form a decent nation that follows the rule of law and respects the American creed. This nation, however, is pretty much toast."
Damn right. The courts are not issuing standing to anyone because if the case must be decided on merits it would likely find him not a "natural born citizen," and thus not eligible. Fear of leftist and race rioting is why the judges are not granting trials. Fear of violence trumps the rule of law. The country is dead. We will see it split in our lifetime.

Posted by: ccruse456 at December 04, 2009 06:25 PM (3pv79)

325 >>>I believe a significant portion of Birthers, myself included, just want to see every last scrap of his life record. From birth certificate to college transcripts to illegal trip to Pakistan.

yeah but it's only the birth certificate where you have any arguable legal right to demand to see them. The rest of your wish list you'd LIKE to see (as would I), but you have no arguable right at all to demand them. Like Kerry concealing his military records.

Further, none of that other stuff could possibly result in the goal ultimately sought -- disqualification from the presdiency.

I want to see his contract with Bill Ayers re: editing services. But I have no way to compel that.

>>>2) You seem to make the assumption that bringing up the Birther issue is the job of politicians. Isn't that the job of the media

Eh. The media, when they've brought up Trutherism (rarely), have dismissed it as unfounded and silly. I don't know if they're obligated to "look into" every silly theory.

You have no evidence. You have those Hawaiian newspaper birth announcments. You have the staggering unlikelihood of an about-to-drop woman globetrotting, as Baldilocks says, to a third-world country whose hospital system is certainly far inferior to any in America, just to... what? SIGHTSEE in her last two weeks of presidency? I know Kenya has deveolped areas and stuff, and it's not like, you know, empty savannah, but I am damnably curious about the theory for these very odd travel plans.

"Oh, let me jaunt off to Africa in my last two weeks of pregnancy. Because I'm not feeling crampy and shitty enough as it is; I want to spend 12-20 hours on a fucking airplane in an uncomfortable chair. So I can go there and... well, lie in bed all day, pretty much. Not see any of Kenya, really. JUst take comfort in the fact I am there."

What? Why? What on earth would provoke such a thing?

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:27 PM (jlvw3)

326
315
>>>>Someone reported that newspaper announcements were
routinely forwarded from the Office which handles birth certificates.
If this were true, then the two twin girls should have also been
routinely forwarded.




How did Lee Harvey Oswald get from the sixth floor of the book
depository to the ground floor with no one seeing him on the stairs?





Hmmmmm....




Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:18 PM (jlvw3)

That's a conundrum of equal validity ? No one was looking at the time. Maybe they were doing something else, like watching the President's motorcade roll by ?

Geeze, this is easy.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:27 PM (ou+hP)

327 >>>>I know this one. The ETMA is a common used chemical used in the paint on the gate that the sample was taken from.


Correct. But the initial fact is "odd," isn't?

Search a bit further -- and look for ALL answers, not just those that support your theory -- and you might find lots of reason to explain any of the things you find suspicious here.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:28 PM (jlvw3)

328 >>>That's a conundrum of equal validity ? No one was looking at the time. Maybe they were doing something else, like watching the President's motorcade roll by ?

Nope, two people say they were either in the stairwell or at the exit to the stairwell at the time.

Hey, here's an explanation: They were wrong about the time (we are talking about a two minute timeframe here) or yeah, they didn't notice.

And yes- this is an equal conundrum. You are spinning huge theories out of tiny little nitpicks in the "official story" that could be easily explained in a thousand obvious ways, but you reject all the obvious answers, because you wish to see nefarious hands at work.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:30 PM (jlvw3)

329 @322 progressoverpeace

I'm more interested in the idea that dual/multiple citizens are allowed to be President, now.

Hell! Screw the "allowed to be President" question. I want to know why dual/multiple "citizens" can even live in this country without a visa.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:32 PM (Ce+tv)

330 Q: Why did the Hawaiian Newspapers say Obama was born in Hawaii?

A: Because he was born in Hawaii.

REJECTED! Too simple. That's exactly what THEY want you to think.

There are explanations for this that are far more convoluted and strange, and that proves that they are the likelier solutions to this mystery.

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:32 PM (jlvw3)

331 The courts are not issuing standing to anyone because if the case must be decided on merits it would likely find him not a "natural born citizen," and thus not eligible. Fear of leftist and race rioting is why the judges are not granting trials. Fear of violence trumps the rule of law.
Bingo! That is why we are now an Ochlocracy. It is very sad.
The country is dead. We will see it split in our lifetime.
Posted by: ccruse456 at December 04, 2009 06:25 PM (3pv79)
Yep. I'm pretty convinced of this. Either the insane expansion of the federal government will push states away (as Arizona Prop 101 only lost by 0.4% in 2008, for example) or the coming monetary disaster will cause the disintegration fo the federal government.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:34 PM (A46hP)

332 Allow me to explain how I do things. I am an Electronics Technician,etc. and I fix stuff. (Communications equipment, Industrial control equipment, etc.)

Often I am faced with symptoms that can be caused by any number of component failures, and it is up to me to figure out WHICH component is the one causing the symptoms. (it's usually just one, but not always.)

With this in mind, my first step is to come up with a theory of which components might be the culprit, and then weed the theories out one by one till only one is left.

That's how I solve these type problems. For me, it is commonplace to regard multiple theories as being possible until they are eliminated by proof that makes them impossible.

And that is how I regard the Birth certificate issue. Until I have a piece to rule out a particular theory, it stays on the table. (Born in Canada ? Born in Kenya ? Born in Washington ? Born in Hawaii ? Born aboard ship ? )

I don't simply announce that one theory is correct until I can see that it and it alone fits all the facts. I call this being open minded.



Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:34 PM (ou+hP)

333 How do you know Sarah Palin wasn't born in Germany?

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:35 PM (jlvw3)

334 Hell! Screw the "allowed to be President" question. I want to know why dual/multiple "citizens" can even live in this country without a visa.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:32 PM (Ce+tv)
Heh.
Most Americans don't care much, or understand, the difference between them and those with multiple citizenships, but if the sh#t hits the fan and they see the dual nationals easily rush off to safe havens in their other countries, Americans will get a quick lesson and the attitude about multiple citizenship will change quickly.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:37 PM (A46hP)

335 And yes- this is an equal conundrum. You are
spinning huge theories out of tiny little nitpicks in the "official
story" that could be easily explained in a thousand obvious ways, but
you reject all the obvious answers, because you wish to see nefarious
hands at work.







Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:30 PM (jlvw3)

My point (about the two girls being absent from the newspaper announcement) is that the official story about the newspaper announcements being automatically generated by the State records officials, cannot be true, or else the case of the twin girls is a rare exception.
It indicate (not proves) that the Newspaper announcements were NOT automatically generated by State officials. And if not them, then who ? The grandmother is the obvious choice. (but not possible to prove at this time.)

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:38 PM (ou+hP)

336 @332 Diogenes

I don't simply announce that one theory is correct until I can see that
it and it alone fits all the facts. I call this being open minded.

This is the underlying problem. The facts needed to move past this are available, or they are not available.

The birther issue could disappear with the stroke of the pen that the kenyan princess uses to sign the release to have his long-form birth certificate released to the public in its entirety.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:40 PM (Ce+tv)

337 Oh, and I don't reject the obvious answers. One of the theories still on my table is that everything is exactly as most people says it is. Obama was born in Hawaii, and there is a valid birth certificate on file in the State's office of records.

I don't reject that theory until something demonstrates it to be false. So far, nothing disproves the common wisdom, but so far, I can't disprove several other theories yet either.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:40 PM (ou+hP)

338 I have to believe there are people who have sneaked a peek at Obama's birth certificate and would have come forward if there was something fishy or that it didn't exist.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at December 04, 2009 06:41 PM (muUqs)

339 Screw the "allowed to be President" question. I want to know why dual/multiple "citizens" can even live in this country without a visa.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:32 PM (Ce+tv)
It's also interesting to note what the oath of citizenship requires of someone being naturalized:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
One wonders how this can be the oath of citizenship but dual citizens are deemed eligible to be President. Amazing.
So much of the meaning of our laws has been thrown away ...

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:44 PM (A46hP)

340 The courts are not issuing standing to anyone because if the case
must be decided on merits it would likely find him not a "natural born
citizen," and thus not eligible. Fear of leftist and race rioting is
why the judges are not granting trials. Fear of violence trumps the
rule of law.

I think ya'll are making too much of the cases that have percolated up through the system. They have not ruled ALL people out of standing, only the ones who have sues so far.

I would think the only people who meet the "standing test" would be someone who ran against him, i.e. Hillery or McLame because they are the only ones who were "harmed" if he is not a citizen. Guess what, neither one of them are going to sue.

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 06:44 PM (CDUiN)

341

"Oh, let me jaunt off to Africa in my last two weeks of pregnancy.
Because I'm not feeling crampy and shitty enough as it is; I want to
spend 12-20 hours on a fucking airplane in an uncomfortable chair. So I
can go there and... well, lie in bed all day, pretty much. Not see any
of Kenya, really. JUst take comfort in the fact I am there."





What? Why? What on earth would provoke such a thing?




Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:27 PM (jlvw3)

I work with a lot of Cops, and the Cops taught me one thing. Don't discount the fact that people will do STUPID and unpredictable things.From what i've read, Stanley Ann Dunham was in Washington State about two weeks after giving birth to baby barack. As near as can be ascertained, she never saw Barack Senior until years later.

As i've pointed out before, Stanley Ann Dunahm was a weird and unpredictable nut.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:45 PM (ou+hP)

342 @334 progressoverpeace

Most Americans don't care much, or understand, the difference between them and those with multiple citizenships

I've educated a number of people from across the political spectrum about dual citizenships. The best line of attack to use with lefties is: "If a dual citizen hit the lotto jackpot, he could always go back to his other country and dodge US income taxes."

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:45 PM (Ce+tv)

343 Superb post.
And educational -- Allahpundit turns out to be Canadian and married to someone named Danielle.

Posted by: gack at December 04, 2009 06:46 PM (yy+Js)

344 @339 progressoverpeace

One wonders how this can be the oath of citizenship but dual citizens are deemed eligible to be President live in this country without a visa. Amazing.


FTFY

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:47 PM (Ce+tv)

345
Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:34 PM (ou+hP)

333
How do you know Sarah Palin wasn't born in Germany?

Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:35 PM (jlvw3)

I don't. If the issue comes up, people can ask for the proof. I won't, because I don't think Natural born citizen status has anything to do with where you are born. (I've researched this issue quite a bit over the last year.)
I have been convinced that it is an "Of the blood" issue. Not an "Of the soil" issue.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:48 PM (ou+hP)

346 The best line of attack to use with lefties is: "If a dual citizen hit the lotto jackpot, he could always go back to his other country and dodge US income taxes."

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:45 PM (Ce+tv)
Cognitive resonance, baby!
The only problem in this case is that lefties don't pay taxes, anyway.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:49 PM (A46hP)

347 338
I have to believe there are people who have sneaked a peek at Obama's
birth certificate and would have come forward if there was something
fishy or that it didn't exist.


Posted by: Dr. Spank at December 04, 2009 06:41 PM (muUqs)




Fear is why no one will do this. Chicago politics, remember?

Posted by: baldilocks at December 04, 2009 06:50 PM (hQp43)

348 This is the underlying problem. The facts needed to move past this are available, or they are not available.

The
birther issue could disappear with the stroke of the pen that the
kenyan princess uses to sign the release to have his long-form birth
certificate released to the public in its entirety.


Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:40 PM (Ce+tv)

This is true, but occasionally another detail pops out. For example, I found a reference to the Doctor who delivered Obama. (I emailed it to Ace, who didn't post it to refute the "birthers." ) This lends credibility to the theory that he WAS born in Hawaii.

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:51 PM (ou+hP)

349 @346 progressoverpeace

The only problem in this case is that lefties don't pay taxes, anyway.

That doesn't stop them from expecting everyone else to pay those taxes.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:51 PM (Ce+tv)

350 >>>yeah but it's only the birth certificate where you have any arguable legal right to demand to see them. >>> Then why have all other modern Presidents released medical and college records. Even Hillary had to unleash her college thesis on Alinsky she'd been hiding for years when she ran. It may not be a legal mandate but it sure is a tradition of transparency Barry should live up to. Since he's a tax-funded public servant he should cough it up. He isn't God. No special rules for special people.

>>>Further, none of that other stuff could possibly result in the goal ultimately sought -- disqualification from the presdiency. >>> That's not my goal. Nor is it I suspect the goal of many. I just want the damn secrets to end. I mean, hell, what the fudge was he doing in Pakistan in the 80's? More insight into his past will give us more insight in the man. Who knows how deep that hideous rabbit hole goes.

>>>I want to see his contract with Bill Ayers re: editing services. But I have no way to compel that. >>> But you do it's called journalistic investigation. The whole point of journalism is report things people want to keep secret! Am I saying you personally have to do it? No. But when a valid investigator does bring up credible and sometimes damning evidence most right-wing sites treat it as another nutball on a nutwing site says more nutty stuff. The man says he's got British citizenship in his own book, but to the right Birtherism is like garlic to a vampire or Joy Behar to humanity - repulsive.

>>>Eh. The media, when they've brought up Trutherism (rarely), have dismissed it as unfounded and silly. I don't know if they're obligated to "look into" every silly theory.>>> Please don't compare assclowns saying Bush and the Jews murdered 3000 people on 9/11 with people who see Obama actively hiding his past and demanding truth. Beyond being pretty twisted, the Truther conspiracy ha been proven false. No one has any damning proof against Obama not meeting natural born citizenship requirements. Hell my main argument is for him to release proof in the form of records. Birthers aren't kooks fighting against fact and logic. We are people fighting against a cloud of secrecy form a man proven to hide the most heinous of actions and hideous of associations. Big bloody difference. Saying I have no evidence only reinforces my point. I want evidence. I want confirmation one way or the other. And to say it's silly to demand it from a sitting President is silly form anyone claiming to support the constitution in any way shape and form. Having an illegitimate Prez might be an important thing to know.

And Obama's Mother wasn't seen in Hawaii for months before her delivery and months afterwards back at her college. Your logic depends on her being sound and rational. She was a America-hating hippie who married an abusive alcoholic and was probably only too glad to abandon this nation. The father wouldn't mind him being born in Kenya either. As the report I linked to above in the URL section points out getting a Birth Certificate was ridiculously easy even for those outside the country. Only by releasing the actual certificate will we know what form of birth reporting was used.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at December 04, 2009 06:53 PM (WZFkG)

351 @348 Diogenes

This is true, but occasionally another detail pops out.

My point was that if the long-form birth certificate gets out to where everyone can see it, then there wouldn't be much room for more details to "pop-out."

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:54 PM (Ce+tv)

352 Dunt dunt DUNN!!!! (The Weird conspiracy music.)

Strangely enough, there was an incident in 2008 (may I think) in which people looked at the passport files of George Bush, Bill Clinton, John McCain and Barack Obama. The passport files contain a copy of the birth certificate which was sent to them when the person applied for a passport.
Presumably it contains a Pre-COLB birth certificate, meaning an original for Barack Obama.

(que the weird music)
One of the guys responsible for breaking into the passport files was shot to death in his car in front of his church a couple of weeks later after the scandal broke.


Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 06:55 PM (ou+hP)

353 I think ya'll are making too much of the cases that have percolated up through the system. They have not ruled ALL people out of standing, only the ones who have sues so far.
Well, there have been around 30 cases, so far, and I believe that all were thrown out for lack of standing - in both state and federal courts.
I would think the only people who meet the "standing test" would be someone who ran against him, i.e. Hillery or McLame because they are the only ones who were "harmed" if he is not a citizen. Guess what, neither one of them are going to sue.

Posted by: Vic at December 04, 2009 06:44 PM (CDUiN)
Candidates are not "harmed" because they can't get the political position of their heart's desire. I understand what you're saying (and others have argued this point) but ineligible persons in positions in government harm the citizenry, not the rival candidates. To consider that candidates have more of a right to know the eligibility of other candidates than the citizenry has to know of all of them makes no sense to me, and puts the citizenry at the mercy of whatever small group of candidates there are.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:55 PM (A46hP)

354 That doesn't stop them from expecting everyone else to pay those taxes.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:51 PM (Ce+tv)
Touche! I stand corrected.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 06:56 PM (A46hP)

355 @354 progressoverpeace

That doesn't stop them from expecting everyone else to pay those taxes.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:51 PM (Ce+tv)
Touche! I stand corrected.
Piling-on here: Do you think any lefty would advocate the whackery that they do if they thought they would have to live by those rules, themselves?



Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:59 PM (Ce+tv)

356

REJECTED! Too simple. That's exactly what THEY want you to think.





There are explanations for this that are far more convoluted and
strange, and that proves that they are the likelier solutions to this
mystery.
Posted by: ace at December 04, 2009 06:32 PM (jlvw3)

There are explanations that are NOT convoluted and strange. Like this for example. (not that I believe this, but it's an example)

Idiot child Stanley Ann Dunham went to Kenya to meet her husbands family. While there, her husband refused to let her leave until it was too late. Her mother, knowing full well how valuable American citizenship was, filed a birth announcement in the two newspapers, and filed an at home birth form for the state records people.

See, nothing convoluted or strange ?

Does it fit the fact ? As far as we can see, yes it does. I don't see any obvious holes in it. A birth in Canada could have been handled the same way.




Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 07:00 PM (ou+hP)

357 Piling-on here: Do you think any lefty would advocate the whackery that they do if they thought they would have to live by those rules, themselves?



Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 06:59 PM (Ce+tv)
Mostly, lefties want others to obey the left's rules (they love the control and that's about it) but don't forget that there are lots of self-hating leftist nihilists who are bent on destroying our society (because it reminds them of themselves and their families - their fathers, mostly) and are very happy to have their own lives come to an end with it. They just don't want to go alone, as they are cowards and sniveling slime.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at December 04, 2009 07:03 PM (A46hP)

358 concern troll? really because i'm disappointed that she would breathe new life to the birther movement? Yes Ace's comments do make sense, as do Geraghty's over at campaignspot but I do not like this one bit. I'm not totally out of the Palin camp but I am a little more leery of her now. But i'm sorry I disagree with someone on something so I'm branded a hater, nice.

anyway, sullivan's comments are fun, don't worry it's a safe-link to politicalwire not his blog. http://tinyurl.com/yanbf33

Posted by: hueydiamondpooty at December 04, 2009 07:07 PM (Uod0o)

359 Brilliant. You know, this whole deal started bringing to my mind many of the side topics I've now foundyou have addressed in this post. You've brought a lot of things together for me that don't have anything directly to do with this incident........and I thank you for that. Like you, I've been fighting the good fight in politics for many years and, like you, I'm kind of stuck between the so-called "elites" and the new kids on the block. What you've managed to do, here, is write something very important for everyone involved.Thanks.

Posted by: Lisa Graas at December 04, 2009 07:07 PM (MiqSk)

360 @357 progressoverpeace

Mostly, lefties want others to obey the left's rules (they love the
control and that's about it) but don't forget that there are lots of
self-hating leftist nihilists who are bent on destroying our society
(because it reminds them of themselves and their families - their
fathers, mostly) and are very happy to have their own lives come to an
end with it.

I don't forget it. The taxonomy is clear to me:

1. Those too dumb not to believe

2. Those who believe because they want to believe

3. Those who ride #1 and #2 into power

I speak only of #3. The other two groups may or may not discover reality someday.

Posted by: MikeO at December 04, 2009 07:09 PM (Ce+tv)

361 I finally realized, people are basically competent at what they do to earn a living
No, not really. Not most of them.

Posted by: Warden at December 04, 2009 07:11 PM (QoR4a)

362 361

I finally realized, people are basically competent at what they do to earn a living

No, not really. Not most of them.

Posted by: Warden at December 04, 2009 07:11 PM (QoR4a)

It depends on the Job. In government, you can be a complete fool, and if the people above you are fools, they will never notice. In private industry, if you don't provide a competent good or service, people will stop patronizing your buisness.





Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 07:13 PM (ou+hP)

363 For those of you who missed it, here's a anecdotal account of someone claiming that Obama told them he was born in Mombassa.


It doesn't prove anything, but it is interesting.

http://tinyurl.com/yj9ladj

Posted by: Diogenes at December 04, 2009 07:17 PM (ou+hP)

364 so can we question desiree rogers then? oh noes obama privilege

Posted by: newrouter at December 04, 2009 08:17 PM (bEZJ+)

365 you can't question obama or global warming for that matter

Posted by: newrouter at December 04, 2009 08:18 PM (bEZJ+)

366 "I would think the only people who meet the "standing test" would be someone who ran against him, i.e. Hillery or McLame..."

Don't forget that Alan Keyes did run against him on the ballot in CA, and that case was also thrown out by Judge Carter. Carter, a former marine, previously stated the military plaintiffs in the same case with Keyes had a right to know if their Commander in Chief was legit. After many weeks Carter decided to throw the case out. I can only guess but I followed the case closely and I bet Carter was put under extreme pressure to throw that case out.




Posted by: ccruse456 at December 04, 2009 08:27 PM (UNvcb)

367 "Excitable Andy" sez ...
I think the Birthers are nuts. But there is no reason on earth that the original cannot be retrieved and shown. Jon Klein and CNN were wrong, and I retract my apology of yesterday.
Obama promised total transparency. Where is it? Or will it arrive at the moment when he tackles the deficit, and withdraws from Iraq?
.. and Legal Insurrection calls it a "Friday Night Prisoner Exchange" which leads a commenter to say ...
Right, a baby's birth certificate is a fair trade for proof that the president of the United States does/does not meet the Constitutional requirements to hold his office.
Maybe we could get a pre-K class to donate a week's crayon drawings in exchange for the raw station data that the East Anglia CRU used in their global warming models.

Posted by: Neo at December 04, 2009 09:00 PM (tE8FB)

368 Is it time for waterboarding?

The Truth is Out There.

Posted by: eman at December 04, 2009 09:21 PM (B+7+o)

369 Only Palin can do this. After the BS about HER CHILD, she has carte blanche.

So, really, I blame Andrew Sullivan.

Posted by: sexypig at December 04, 2009 09:37 PM (ZW4TW)

370 I'm less concerned that Obama is a Kenyan then I am that he is a Keynesian.

Posted by: Ostral B Heretic at December 04, 2009 11:15 PM (y29/1)

371 Global Warming: Obama's Birth Certificate
Hacked E-Mails: ...?

Posted by: Jack Ryan's sealed divorce records at December 04, 2009 11:16 PM (DtTM9)

372 Didanyone ever confirm whether or not that nekkid chick was S.A. Dunham?

Posted by: Blackford Oakes at December 04, 2009 11:22 PM (DtTM9)

373 Update from #200
The line for Palin in Fairfax was 40-50 overniters as of 10pm
The weather should be wet, but the spirits there are very strong.

Posted by: Cromagnum at December 05, 2009 01:19 AM (rRlh2)

374 Well, what is the problem. Obama refuses to release his birth certificate. Let us not be intimidated by CNN and MSNBC.

Posted by: Federale at December 05, 2009 01:46 AM (ryQYO)

375 hahaha... ace talking to girls! in nyc. now that's as likely as obama being an american. jk

Posted by: Contributor X at December 05, 2009 02:26 AM (IhX2x)

376 2010 2010 2010 2010 ... 2009 .. 2010 2010 2010. . . , , , , , , .. . 2009 . 2009 . . . . . , , 2009. . . . . . . 2009 . . . . . - . . 2009. . 2009 2009 2009 . 2009. mms mms 2009 2009mms 2009 - mms 2009 2009 , , , , 2009 2009 2009 mms ( 2009 2010 2010 mms ~ mms 2009 2009 , , , mms , 2009 2009 1430 , , 2009 , , , sms mms mms mms ~ 2009 mms 2010 2010 2010 Mms 2009 sms , , 2009 sms 1430 2009 2009 mms 2009 2009 009 mms 2009 mms 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 mms 2009 mms + sms ( 2009 2009 mms mms 2009( () 2010 2010 2010 2010 mms
mms sms

Posted by: aseel at December 06, 2009 12:34 PM (Aolv2)

377 HTML clipboardJe l’ai instalé et fonctionne très bien. Love it et Merci pour le créer. les gars un grand secours. Tout le meilleur pour vous.؟؟














العاب طبخ

العاب قص شعر
دليل
توبيكات
منتديات
شات صوتي
توبيكات
دليل
العاب

شات الرياض
العاب
طبخ



دردشة صوتية سعودية


دردشة صوتية كويتية

دردشة
صوتية اماراتية


دردشة صوتية قطرية


دردشة صوتية بحرينية


دردشة صوتية عمانية


دردشة صوتية عربيه


شات كام


شات كتابي





Posted by: QFQWEF WEEFGERGEGR at May 04, 2010 07:33 AM (5vRiG)

378 مسلسلات رمضان - اناشيد -
اناشيد اطفال -
القران الكريم -
العاب للكمبيوتر
-
قصص -
روايات -
كتب -
فضائح -
خواطر -
اشعار
-
ازياء -
ازياء نسائيه -
ازياء اطفال -
ازياء المحجبات -
ازياء الحوامل
-
فساتين -
فساتين سهره -
فساتين اطفال -
فساتين جديده
-
تسريحات -
تسريحات شعر -
تسريحات جديده -
تسريحات بنات -
ازياء الحوامل
-
ازياء العروس -
العنايه بالبشره -
العنايه بالشعر -
لانجري
-
زفات -
زفات افراح -
ميك اب -
عطورات -
اكسسوارات
-
غرف نوم -
اكلات -
حلويات -
اثاث وديكور -
اطباق رئيسيه
-
صور -
نكت -
مباريات اليوم -
قطط -
خلفيات -
وظائف
-
مسلسلات -
يوتيوب -
مسلسلات تركيه -
مسلسلات يابانيه -
مسلسلات اجنبيه
-
مسرحيات -
اغاني مسلسلات -
مسرحيات كويتيه -
صور مسلسلات
هوليود -
Hollywood -
بوليود -
bollywood
بلاك بيري -
منتديات بلاك بيري -
توبيكات بلاك بيري -
صور للتصاميم
-
افلام -
افلام اجنبيه -
افلام عربيه -
افلام مصريه -
افلام هنديه
-
انمي -
افلام كرتون -
افلام ديزني -
مسلسلات انمي -
صور انمي -
توبيكات ملونه
-
توبيكات للماسنجر -
صور للماسنجر -
برامج جديده -
مسجات

Posted by: منتديات at May 15, 2010 09:45 AM (wy06E)

379
شات
دلع جازان
دلع جازان
دردشة دلع جازان
تحميل اغنية
غرقان راشد الماجد ومنى امرشا في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - ديو اغنية منى
امرشا وراشد الماجد غرقان في جلسات وناسة 2 mb3

تحميل اغنية
خلص حنانك راشد الماجد وعبدالمجيد عبدالله في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه -
ديو اغنية عبدالمجيد عبدالله وراشد الماجد خلص حنانك في جلسات وناسة 2 mb3

تحميل الحلقة
37 هيفاء وهبي ‏ اخر من يعلم هيفاء وهبي 2010 , حلقة هيفاء وهبي من برنامج
اخر من يعلم الحلقة السابعة والثلاثون اروى برنامج اخر من يعلم ضيف الحلقه
37 هيفاء وهبي في برنامج اخر من يعلم 2010

ahj
]v]ai
تحميل الحلقه 5
برنامج نقطة تحول محمد عبدة . حلقة محمد عبدة نقطة تحول الحلقة الخامسة
تحميل الحلقة 5
اخر من يعلم حياة الفهد , حلقة حياة الفهد اخر من يعلم الحلقة الخامسة
تحميل نغمات
اتحادية mp3-اهازيج اتحاديه mp3-صالح القرني mp3-اغاني نغمات اتحاديه mp3
شات ابوعريش
اكواد
الالوان
اغرب صور2010
،جديد اغرب صور2010 ، اغرب ، صور 2010 ، اغرب صور2010
ايميل ماجد
المهندس 2010 ايميل ماجد جديد 2010 ماجد المهندس ايميل
جامعة جازان
توبيكات اغنية
وحشتنا يا حبيب راشد الماجد ومحمد عبدة جلسة وناسة 2010 , توبيك وحشتنا يا
حبيب محمد عبدة وراشد الماجد جلسات وناسة 2010

صور موضي
الشمراني صورة موضي الشمراني جديده 2010 صورة الطقاقه موضي الشمراني
jazan
hams
رقم شجون
الهاجري رقم جوال شجون الهاجري رقم موبايل شجون الهاجري شوجي
صور فرقة طيور
الجنة 2010 , صور طيور الجنة , فرقة طيور الجنه ,صور جديده
تحميل العاب
فلاش 2010,لعبة فلاش ماريو 2010,العاب فلاش للكمبيوتر 2010,تحميل العاب
فلاش
تحميل لعبة
فيفا 2010 كاملة لعبة فيفا 2010 , Fifa 10 , فيفا 10 , لعبة الفيفا 2010 -
ال
توبيكات
نصراويه 2010,توبيكات نادي النصر2010,توبيكات العالمي2010,توبيكات للنصر
2010
تحميل برنامج
تيربو للماسنجر, تيربو ماسنجر turbo msn للجوال نوكيا الجيل الثالث والثاني

تحميل برنامج
المحادثة الشهير Yahoo! Messenger 10.0.0.542 Bet اخر اصدار
صور سيارات
2010,صور سيارات جديده 2010,احلى واجمل صور لسيارات 2010
صور بي ام
دبليو 2010 , bmw 2010 صور سيارة بي ام دبليو,صور سيارة بي ام دبليو z4,صور
بي
منتدى الوظائف
والتوظيف
منتديات همس جازان
تحميل انشودة
ارايت دعاية زين الجديده 2010 mp3 أرآيت , تنزيل انشودة دعاية زين الجديده
2010 أرآيت , فيديو كليب انشودة زين ارايت بوتيوب , انشودة زين ارئيت محمد
الياسين
شاعر المليون 4
الجزء الرابع
اديها فله
منتدى
توبيكات
تحميل أغنية
مسلسل قلوب للايجار راشد الماجد mp3 الأغنية كاملة + النغمات
صور مميزة
للمسن 2010 و صور شبابية للمسنجر و صور قلوب للمسن 2010
صور للمسن 2010
,صور مسنجر حلوه , جديدة , اجمل صور المسنجر
صور مسن شوجي
فايز انت فايز شوجي - صور للبنات
توبيكات العيد
الفطر,صور مسن للعيد,توبيك العيد,توبيكات 2009
تحميل سكربت
كاشف الظهور دون اتصال الاوف لاين 2009-2010
تحميل أنشودة
برنامج خواطر 5 الجزء الخامس للمبدع حمود الخضر
تحميل انشودة
حجر الزاوية mp3 الشيخ سلمان العودة
تحميل انشودة
رمضان مشاري العفاسي لشركة زين mp3 2009
فساتين و
أزياء ومكياج مسلسلات حليمه - حليمة بولند
تحميل اغنية
برنامج شوجي شجون الهاجري mp3

يوتيوب YouTube

يوتيوب جازان

كأس العالم جنوب أفريقيا 2010

يوتيوب جيزان
سكس 2009
همس
نتائج جامعة
جازان للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ , نتائج جامعة جازان الفصل الاول للعام
الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ
تحميل انشودة
ليش بتكذب ياوليد 2010 طيور الجنه mp3 , فيديو ليش بتكذب لعصومي و وليد من
قناة طيور الجنة 2010
تواقيع العيد
جديده , بطاقات العيد , توقيع العيد, صور العيد , روعه ,جديده 2010
فساتين بنات
للعيد ازياء للعيد ملابس العيد جديده 2010
jv[li
زفات- زفه -
منتدى زفات - زغاريد-منتديات زفات عروس - منتدى زفات عرايس اسلامية
ترجمة
تحميل انشودة
في السوق رغد الوزان mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب في السوق طيور الجنة
2010 , يوتيوب في السوق رغد الوزان 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 نشيدة في
السوق
تحميل انشودة
عمو حرامي رغد الوزان mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب عمو حرامي طيور
الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب عمو حرامي رغد الوزان 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة 2010
نشيدة الحرامي عم حرامي
ترجمة
النصوص
فيديو
حيوانات مفترسة في الغابات افتراس قتل حروب معارك
تحميل انشودة
لعبوا بالسكين عصومي ووليد mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب لعبوا بالسكين
طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب لعبوا بالسكين عصومي ووليد 2010 , جديد طيور
الجنة 2010 نشيدة لعبوا بالسكين
كلمات أغنية
اذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010
كلمات ألبوم
أذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010
توبيكات البوم
اذكريني ماجد المهندس 2009 - 2010
تحميل اغنية
خلاص من حبكم راشد الماجد في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - اغنية راشد الماجد
خلاص من حبكم جلسة وناسة 2 mb3
sitemap
تحميل أناشيد
كراميش كاملة mp3 ، قناة كراميش فيديو كليب كراميش ،تردد قناة كراميش
تحميل حلقات
مسلسل عاصي asi التركي الجديد من الاولى حتى الاخيره
روابط تنقل
المباريات نقل مباشر قنوات مباشرة على الانترنت online بث مباشر
تحميل ماسنجر
9,ماسنجر 9 عربي,تحميل ماسنجر 9 ,مسنجر 9 عربي للتحميل , تحميل برنامج
ماسن
تحميل ماسنجر
بلس 9 عربي - Messenger Plus! Live 9
تحميل برنامج
كاسر بروكسي opera mini 4.2 fainl جوالات الجيل الثالث 2010
تحميل اختصارات
للماسنجر 2010,رموز للماسنجر جديده 2010,اختصارات للمسنجر جديده 2010,رم
صور بنات للمسن
2010,صور بنات للماسنجر جديده وحلوه للمسنجر و اجمل صور البنات msn 2010
رموز ماسنجر
2010,اسمايلات ماسنجر متحركه 2010,رموز ماسن اسماء بنات,رموز ماسنجر اسماء
مركز تحميل
تحميل زفة
اسلامية محمد عبده جديده 2010 , زفات محمد عبده اسلاميه بدون موسيقى 2010
تحميل زفات
عروس 2010 جديده زفات احلام مع محمد عبده 2010 زفة افراح عروس
تحميل زفات
راشد الماجد 2010 زفات عرائس راشد الماجد 2010 زفات افراح بدون موسيقى
توبيك
توبيكات

اسلامية
توبيكات

جديده 2010
توبيكات

حزينه
توبيكات

حب
توبيكات

رومانسيه
توبيكات

اسماء
توبيكات

اغانى
توبيكات

منوعة
توبيكات

مضحكه
صحيفة همس جازان
صحيفة
مجله
أخبار و مواضيع
متنوعة: سياسية، دولية، محلية، رياضية، تجارية، ثقافية، اسلامية، اعلانات، و
اشتراكات.
News
توبيكات

عتاب وخيانه
توبيكات

ساخره
التوبيكات

الشعرية
توبيكات

انجليزية
توبيكات

رياضية
توبيكات
تحميل اسطوانة
القعقاع 2010 - تحميل برامج القعقاع 2010 - تحميل القعقاع الاصدار الثامن
2010
اسطوانة
القعقاع 2010
القعقاع 2010
برامج القعقاع
2010
توبيكات جازان
توبيكات جيزان
تحميل انشودة
يسلمو يا دكتور محمد بشار و ديمة بشار mp3 طيور الجنة 2010 , فيديو كليب
يسلمو يا دكتور طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب يسلمو يا دكتور محمد بشار و ديمة
بشار 2010 , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 نشيدة يسلمو يا دكتور
توبيكات همس
تفسير الاحلام
موقع تفسير
الاحلام
تفسير حلم
الاحلام
حلم
منتديات تفسير
الاحلام
تعبير الرؤى
رصاصة رحمه
مسلسل رصاصة
رحمة
dreams
توبيكات جازان
تحميل انشودة
لأ لأ مش كدة عمر الصعيدي 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب لأ لأ مش كدة
طيور الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب لأ لأ مش كدة عمر الصعيدي , كلمان انشودة لأ لأ
مش كدة طيو الجنه , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 لأ لأ مش كدة
تحميل انشودة
روق روق أشرف يوسف 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب روق روق طيور الجنة
2010 , يوتيوب روق روق أشرف يوسف , كلمان انشودة روق روق طيو الجنه , جديد
طيور الجنة 2010 روق روق
تحميل انشودة
عندي حصالة رغد الوزان 2010 طيور الجنة mp3 , فيديو كليب عندي حصالة طيور
الجنة 2010 , يوتيوب عندي حصالة رغد الوزان , كلمان انشودة عندي حصالة طيو
الجنه , جديد طيور الجنة 2010 عندي حصاله
مقاطع سكس
جديده 2010
موقع مهرجان
جازان الشتوي الثالث
مهرجان جازان
الثالث
موقع مهرجان
جازان الشتوي 3
منتديات مهرجان
جازان الشتوي 3
مهرجان جازان
الشتوي الثالث 2010
منتدى مهرجان
جازان الشتوي الثالث
مهرجان جازان
الشتوي 3 الثالث 1431هـ
مهرجان
الجنادرية 25
تحميل فيديو
كليب البتول راشد الماجد 2010 , تنزيل اغنية البتول جديد راشد الماجد ,
فيديو اغنية البتول كليب راشد الماجد 2010, كليب راشد البتول 2010 , استماع
اغنية البتول فيديو 2010

<!--End Adv!-->مركز

تحميل,

مركز تحميل ملفات,

مركز تحميل صور,

موقع تحميل,

تحميل,

تحميل ملفات,

رفع ملفات,

رفع صور,

رفع صورة,

رفع ملف,

تحميل صور,

تحميل ملف,

رفع صوتيات,

رفع فيديو,

رفع فلاش,

رفع ملفات مضغوطة,

تحميل صوتيات,

تحميل فيديو,

تحميل ملفات مضغوطة,

مركز رفع ,

مركز تحميل الصور والملفات ،


مركز تحميل الصور والملفات ،


مركز همس،

مركز تحميل ،

مركز تحميل جيزان ،

تحميل صور ،ملفات ،

مركز تحميل جازان ،

برامج ،

مركز تحميل ملفات ،

مركزتحميل صور ،

مركز همس جازان

، مركز تحميل صور ،

موقع تحميل صور وملفات ،

مواقع ،

موقع تحميل برامج ،

مركز تحميل ،

مركز تحميل فلاش

تحميل

-



تحميل همس -

تحميل ملفات

توبيكات
منتديات همس
ماسنجر 2011

قصر الدانة قامرة
مركز تحميل
مملكة رويال
r00yal , ROYAL KINGDOM

مملكة رويال

صور
2011
نجم الخليج
2010

مسلسلات
2011
منتدى شجون
الهاجري الحقيقي
اغنية حبه
حبه
تحميل اغنية
حبه حبه
اغنيه حبه
حبه
حبه حبه
اغنية حبه
حبه mp3
تحميل اغنيه
حبه حبه
دردشه ابوعريش
دردشه ابوعريش
فله
اديها فله
منتدى اديها فله
منتدى فله
منتديات فله
توبيكات
منتديات همس

قصر الدانة قامرة

صور شوجي
2010
اغنية حبوب
الداشر 2010 بيني وبينك 4 , اغنية حبوب الداشر راشد الشمراني mp3 , حميل
اغنية راشد الشمراني حبوب الداشر مسكين - حبوب الداشر بيني وبينك 4


صور شوجي
2010 في برنامج شوجي 2 - صور شجون في برنامج شوجي 2 - صور شوجي في برنامج
شوجي 2

منتدى الكمبيوتر والبرامج

دليل مواقع

توبيكات نكات ماسنجر 2010

تفسير الاحلام

المكتبة الاسلامية

مسلسلات رمضان 2010 - تحميل مسلسلات رمضان 2010 -مسلسلات جديدة 2010 -
مسلسلات خليجية 2010

منتدى الكتب الإلكترونية

منتدى مسجات و رسائل وسائط (SMS)

حقو ماغص

منتدى الاغاني

أزياء - فساتين - موضه - اكسسوارات- قصات شعر
شات جازان,دردشة دلع
جازان ,دردشة قمر جازان الصوتية ، قمر جازان كام , قمر جيزان كام,دردشة
جازان كام,دردشة ابو عريش,شات ابو عريش,بنت جازان دردشة شات,دردشة شلة
جازان,دردشة قمر جازان,دردشة شلة جازان شات شلة جيزان دردشة شات جيزان
دردشة قمر جازان دردشة شلة صبيا دردشة شلة جيزان دردشة بنت جازان دردشة قمر
جازان دردشة ربا جازان دردشة نبض جازان ,دردشة جازان كول,دردشة شلة جازان,

حبي
الصوتيات
والمرئيات الاسلامية
البليآردو
gamezer-billiards,قيمز,لعبة,بلياردو,قيم
تحميل
مسابقه دوري
البلياردو gamezer-billiards
يوتيوب YouTube
جازان
جيزان
dalil
دردشة شات همس جازان -
دردشة كتابية سعودية عربية
شات
دردشه
شات
دردشة
منتدى
همس جازان
منتديات همس
منتدى همس
دليل مواقع
دليل مواقع همس
جازان
مشاهده
مباريات كاس العالم 2010 - اولاين مشاهده مباريات كاس العالم 2010
افلام تورنت
Torrent Movies , افلام تورنت جديده - افلام تورنت مترجمه
افلام تورنت
Torrent Movies
تحميل افلام
تورنت Torrent
تغطية جلسات
وناسة 2010 , الحلقة الاولى جلسات وناسة 2 الجزء الثاني 2010 , فيديو جلسة
وناسه 2
جلسات وناسة
2010
جلسة وناسه 2
تغطية جلسات
وناسة 2010
فرقة أطفال
ومواهب

جيزان نيوز

جازان نيوز

توبيكات
توبيكات حزينة
توبيك
توبيكات ملونة
توبيكات

فيديو
حيوانات مفترسة في الغابات افتراس قتل حروب معارك

تحميل
اغنية يامركب الهند محمد عبدة في جلسات وناسه 2010 الثانيه - اغنية محمد
عبده يامركب الهند جلسة وناسة 2 mb3


غرقان


اغنية
غرقان


اغنية
غرقان منى امرشا


حقو ماغص


منتدى حقو
ماغص


منتديات
حقو ماغص


صور تخرج
للتصميم 2010 - صور عبايات تخرج 2010 - صور نجاح للتصميم 2010 - صور
قباعات للتخرج - صور نجاح 2010 - صور تخرج للتصميم جديده


مسلسلات
رمضان 2010

نتائج
جامعة جازان للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ , نتائج جامعة جازان الفصل الاول
للعام الحالي1430 ـ1431هـ


نتائج
جامعة جازان
نتائج جامعة
جازان الفصل الثاني 1431

lshfrm
vlqhk 2010

مسابقة
رمضان 1431

مسابقة
رمضان

جوائز
مسابقة رمضان 2010

جوائز
مسابقة رمضان 1431

اسئلة
مسابقة رمضان 1431

اسئلة
مسابقة رمضان 2010

مسابقة
رمضان 1431

مسابقة
رمضان الكبرى 1431هـ - 2010

مسابقة
رمضان 2010

الخيمة
الرمضانية

سيرة رسول
الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

منتدي
الثقافة الاسلاميه

منتدى
الصوتيات والمرئيات الاسلامية

توبيكات

منتدى تفسير الأحلام

منتدى
الترحيب بالاعضاء الجدد

ملتقى
الاعضاء

الركن
الهادئ

منتدى
المسابقات والفعاليات والانشطة

منتدى
أخبار منطقة جــازان

المنتدى
التراثي

مهرجان
الصيف 2010

مهرجانات
الصيف 1431هـ

فعاليات
الصيف 2010

مهرجانات
صيف 1431هـ - 2010

المواضيـــع

المميــزة

المنتدى
العام

منتدى
الحوار

منتدى
الاخبار المحليه والعامه

منتدى
الوظائف والتوظيف 2010 , وظائف 2010, وظائف رجاليه 1431, وظائف نسائيه 1431
وظائف حكوميه 1431

المنتدى
الإقتصادي

منتدى
اللغات Languages


الانجليزية English

الفرنسيه
French


الاسبانيه Espaniol

الايطاليه
Italian

لغات اخرى
Other Language

منتدى
المعلمين والمعلمات

مطويات

نشرات

مجلات

مقالات

صور
البرايم الاخير من ستار اكاديمى 7- الحلقة الاخير من ستار
اكاديمى7 2010

بحوث

اذاعة
مدرسية

مطويات -
نشرات - مجلات - مقالات - بحوث - اذاعة مدرسية

منتدى
السياحه والسفر والرحلات

المنتدى
التجاري

منتدى
الكتب الإلكترونية

الكتب

الكتب
الإلكترونية

منتدى
الفلسفة وعلم النفس والفكر الإنساني

منتدى
الإتجاهات الفكرية المعاصرة


الإتجاهات الفكرية المعاصرة

منتدى
حواء والطفل

أزياء -
فساتين - موضه - اكسسوارات- قصات شعر

زفات-
زفه - منتدى زفات - زغاريد-منتديات زفات عروس - منتدى زفات عرايس اسلامية

همساتنا
الأسرية و الإجتماعية

منتدى آدم


منتدى
عالم الديكور

منتدى الطب
والحياة

منتدى
دنيا المأكولات

منتدى
الخواطر الغير منقولة ابداع اعضاء همس جازان

منتدى
الخواطــر و عذب الكلام

منتدى
الشعر النبطي والفصيح

صوتيات و
مرئيات أدبية

منتدى
القصص والروايات

المنتدى
الرياضي

كأس
العالم جنوب أفريقيا 2010

منتدى
الكمبيوتر والبرامج

منتدى
اخبار التقنية

توبيكات

توبيكات
نكات ماسنجر 2010

منتدى
الجوال

منتدى
الموسيقى mp3 - منتدى الموسيقى العالمية والعربية

منتدى
مسجات و رسائل وسائط SMS - mms

منتدى
التصاميم والجرافيكس

منتدى
تطوير المواقع والمنتديات

منتدى
الحماية والهكرز

منتدى
الصرقعة والوناسة

مسابقه
دوري البلياردو gamezer-billiards

قروب نواف
بيك

منتدى
عالم الصور والغرائب

تصوير
الأعضاء

منتدى
أفلام الكرتون والالعاب

يوتيوب

YouTube

العاب

العاب بنات

العاب فلاشيه
العاب 2011
العاب حربية

منتدى
اخبار الفن والفنانين والمشاهير

مسلسلات
رمضان 2010 - تحميل مسلسلات رمضان 2010 -مسلسلات جديدة 2010 - مسلسلات
خليجية 2010
مسابقات رمضان
2010 , مسابقات رمضانية 1431 , مسابقات رمضان , مسابقة رمضان 2010 , مسابقة
رمضان 1431
منتدى اديها فلة
اديها فلة
اديها فلة
زخرفة أسمك في
قيمزر gamezr , زخرفة قيمز , قيمزر - 500 شكل لزخرفة أسمك في قيمزر gamezr

شرح التسجيل في
قيمزر - gamezer , قيمزر - بلياردو - البلياردو - موقع قيمزر - التجيل في
قيمزر - قيمزر - rdl.v - قيم - billiards Gamezer

بلياردو -
قيمزر - billiard - gamezer - قيم - [dl.v

طريقة فك الحظر
في قيمزر البلياردو 2010 , قيمزر - قيم - بلياردو - rdl.v - فك الحظر - فك
البلوك - gamezer - billiard



الريُسـبشن●

~ My Space ~

● زوآيًــــآ
عامــه ●

● إسٌلآمـنا
هو حيآتـنٍا ●


][الصـوتيــات][

● للمواضيع
الهادفة ومثيرة الجدل ●

● للأخبار
والاحداث الغريبهـ ●

● منتديات
تطويــر الشخصية والـذات ●

● English
Forum ●

● السيآحه
والمنآظر الحلوهـ●

● كـلأم
نــوآعــم ●

● آنـآقـةّ
وجـُمـآل القـُيٍرل ●

● آنـآقـةّ
وجـُمـآل الـبويز ●

●ذوق
منًـزلك واسـتايلـٌو ●

● جمـآلك
وصحـتك ●

● الكتشن
الساخن●

● شـ ع ـر
وقآفيــة ●

● خوآطـر
ينـزف حبـرها على صفحآتـٌنا ●

● حكـآيات
وروآيات ●

● منتدى
اخبار الفن والفنانين والمشاهير ●

●منتدى
الأفلام العربيه و الاجنبية●

منتدى
المسلسلات العربيه و الاجنبية

عآلم الآنمي
The world of Anime

● Music
Rap Rock ...etc ●

● منتدى
الفديو ومقاطع البلوتوث ●

●Computers●

● جوآلات
واكسـسوآراتهآ ●

{.. عالم
الماسنجر/ ~ ..!!

● فوتوشوب -
Photoshop - تصاميم - جرافيكس●

● قسم دروس
فوتوشوب ●

● معرض
تصاميم الاعضاء●

● للـبكشرز
العـجيبه والـرهيبـهـ●

●عدسـہ
آڷآعضآء ●

عضۈ فيَ
ۈرطـہ...!

● ضحك
وونسهـ ع طووول●

●المسآبقأت
الآلعــاب ●

قسم كرسي
الأعترآف ...!

● الـحرب
بين الشبآب و البنـآت●

● الريآضه
وعشاقها ●



Posted by: قصر الدانة at October 03, 2010 10:13 PM (2m7kL)

380 تساريح 2011


تساريح 2012


يوتيوب YouTube


يوتيوب


YouTube


صور حب


صور حب 2011


صور حب 2012


صور الحب


صور حب رومنسية


صور شفايف


هيدرات حزينه


صور بنات خقق


تحميل قصائد mp3


فك المحجوب


اسماء مزخرفه


منتدى تفسير الاحلام


تسريحات جديده


مجلة همس جازان



تساريح 2011
تساريح 2012
يوتيوب YouTube
يوتيوب
YouTube
صور حب
صور حب 2011
صور حب 2012
صور الحب
صور حب رومنسية
صور شفايف
هيدرات حزينه
صور بنات خقق
تحميل قصائد mp3
فك المحجوب
اسماء مزخرفه
منتدى تفسير الاحلام
تسريحات جديده
مجلة همس جازان
اسيا 2011
وظائف 1432
توظيف 1432
صور اسيل عمران
صور اسيل عمران روعه
مهرجان الجنادرية 26
مهرجان الجنادريه 2011
مهرجان الجنادرية 1432
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 4 الرابع 1432هـ
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 1432
مهرجان جازان الشتوي 2011
دردشه
دردشة
شات


]v]am
]v]ai
ahj
صور
صور 2011

Posted by: الجنادرية 1432 at April 11, 2011 08:56 AM (5l8qf)






Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.116 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.041 seconds, 389 records returned.
Page size 324 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat