Who Started Birtherism?

Well, Trump played the media game rather well today. Suspense about his Birther statement had cameras on 20+ minutes of endorsements from Generals, 2 x Medal Of Honor winners, and a stage full of military veterans behind him (including a few black faces center stage at strategic times / locations. So his staff is learning how to stage manage.)

His big Birther announcement was that Hillary started it and He ended it (implied via his badgering Obama enough to get the Hawaii birth certificate issued).

True to form, in the news froth following this, MSNBC and CNN were ranting about how this doesn’t end the RACIST!!!! birther issue for The Donald. Even Fox had Democrat Representatives with their brains all DVR’ed up with the RACIST!!!! talking points. OK, what does this say? It says, front and center, that Hillary is betting it all on the RACIST!!!!! card at the moment. Ergo she is deathly afraid of her dropping numbers with the black voter. Race Bating at it’s finest.

We’ll see in the next few weeks if the American Black Voter is as dumb as Hillary thinks, or if they are as smart as Ben Carson thinks. If they take the Race Bait, or if they look at what Democrats have done to them, their inner cities, and their jobs over the last 50 years and decide they can do better without that kind of “help”.

Donald, perhaps a bit dimly, or perhaps ‘crazy like a fox’, started his statement with a “Hillary started it” claim. This had MSNBC putting up a line on the screen that “Trump {falsely} claims Hillary…” and the whole Loony Side Of Left with their panties in a bunch about it frothing and shouting RACIST!!!!! LIAR!!!!. Well, ether it was dumb to dampen the “I finished it” with a Hillary jab, or it was a great way to keep his name in lights. Time will tell.

When Did Birtherism Start?

I got to wondering, when / where did it start? Was Hillary in the area at the time? I dimly remembered it coming out of her campaign against Obama, but having little interest in either of them, I’d not paid much attention to their campaigns.

One of the things I like to do, when an advocacy laden issue comes up, is look at what “the other side” claims. If the response is fairly contorted or muddied, with only weak points, they are usually not possessed of the whole truth. (Or they would be giving strong pointers to that truth supporting their side).

In this case, I took a look at PolitiFact who rated the Trump statement about Hillary to be “False”. What is their evidence?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/23/donald-trump/hillary-clinton-obama-birther-fact-check/

After a fair amount of Hillary-Good Trump-Bad position polishing, they get to:

It’s an interesting bit of history that the birther movement appears to have begun with Democrats supporting Clinton and opposing Obama. But Trump, and others who have made this claim, neglect to mention that there is no direct tie to Clinton or her 2008 campaign.

The story appears to have started with supporters of Clinton, an important distinction.

Trump goes on to completely distort the chain of events by claiming Clinton “was all in” on the birther movement. Most of the talk started after Clinton suspended her presidential campaign. And the only thing she officially has ever done is deny any accusation of starting a whisper campaign.

So the whole defense is that it started with supporters of Clinton, not with her, personally, getting on stage and shouting it?

What makes The Donald different is that he’s not well schooled in the skulduggery of politics. Those who are schooled in it, know that all negative slanderous things are to be initiated by “your supporters” and then you just say “I sure hope there is no truth to the ( mumble rumor ) that my opponent eats dead babies since that would make him totally unfit for office.”

Mr. Trump looks at it and sees it starting with The Hillary Clinton Campaign Supporters and just shortens that to Hillary Clinton. OK, he gets a D in Political Skulduggery as he still thinks a leader is responsible for their organization…

In Conclusion

OK, so we know how this will play out from here. Hillary, and her “campaign” and their “supporters”, will continue to promote “Trump the LIAR!!! and RACIST!!!! Birther!!!” at every turn. If it gets traction, the 4-walling be be put on steroids for the next 2 months.

Frankly, I’ve heard the RACIST!!!! Alinsky attack so many times it no longer does anything for me other than brand the shouter as a Saul Alinsky-ite in full faux rant. It would hurt me more if they called me something real, like old, or ‘hey grey beard!” or even ‘tubby’… When we elected Obama, it was a clear statement that a majority of Americans were quite happy with a Black President, even a Socialist Soros Sponsored one. America loved Colin Powell leading our troops. Condoleezza Rice is brilliant, talented, and caused many a guy’s head to turn. Oh, and need I point out that Oprah is extremely rich from all those RACIST!!!! “deplorables” watching her shows? (Not to mention the NBA and NFL stars being majority black and extraordinarily well paid…) That is what echos in my brain when someone shouts RACIST!!!! at me. Or at someone else. It doesn’t reflect at all on me, or the one shouted at, only on the shouter and their failure to grasp reality.

The question is just how many folks are dumb enough to buy the Alinsky Attack, and how many have such a tough hide now that it isn’t even noticed, or if it is, noticed as what it is, a faux rage over a non-issue.

Now, my bias. I like to state it so there is no doubt. I was, briefly, interested in the birthplace of Obama. Why? Because I believe in following the Constitution and there was some doubt that was being done. Democrats in particular, but Republicans too, have tossed out 90% of it by simply ignoring it or lying about what it says; so why not the rest?… Had the same issue been raised about, say, Ted Cruz (oh, wait, it was…) I’d have the same response. “Let’s take a look and see.” That Obama spent YEARS hiding his birth certificate, and that the ‘transition’ of his mother from Kenya to Hawaii while pregnant is a bit vague, and more; all ‘gave the story legs’. I’m about 99% convinced he’s a USA citizen. I’ve seen pregnant ladies on planes before, so the argument that she couldn’t just fly over seems a bit lame. I’d like to see a full on forensic analysis of the birth certificate, and some R&D into his mothers transport, just to assure that last 1%, but I’d also like clarification on Cruz as quasi-Canadian too… Can you just renounce your country of birth and be Natural Born American? (The same kind of issue was raised for McCain, who, IIRC, was born in Panama on a US Base. Was he, as a foreign born US registered birth to adult parents a Natural Born American? While I think so, it’s a legal question so my opinion doesn’t count…)

Now which of those three is RACIST!!!!, and why? McCain, Obama, Cruz? All three get the same Birther questions. McCain and Cruz less of it since they didn’t stay in the spotlight as long and had some clear evidence that put it in the “lawyer land” not the “no evidence public opinion” land. Obama kept things alive by staying in the spotlight and not releasing his birth certificate. Does that make HIM the source of the “racism”? Or is there no racism, just honest folks wondering what he was hiding and why he didn’t show it right out the gate?

OK, now we’re going to get a few weeks of Hillary Surrogates doing the Saul Slime with RACIST!!!! on every street corner, with “community organizers” getting the BL Matter folks worked up and in the news again, with other faux protests in the streets over non-events by Mr. Trump, and be prepared to hear David Duke!!! shouted far more than his irrelevancy deserves.

Me? I’m going to hit the “jump” button on the remote whenever that crap comes on the screen. I’ve got several places I can go for real news. Oddly, RT Russia Today has more straight news than does MSNBC and often more than CNN. Sad, that. Also the BBC America “news” (really a 30 minute teaser) is generally polite about things and avoids the rant camera clowns. I fully expect this to not move the needle at all for Hillary. When it fails, they will move on to the next line of attack. Until then, it’s just noise and nonsense, all ‘content free’, and I’ll find other things to watch, read, etc. They can preach to their own choir, but that won’t gain them any converts… While Trump is giving meaty policy speeches and laying out a sound set of programs and principles to fix the problems created by 8 years of Obama… Those I listen to ‘end to end’ as they are full of content.

Praise For CSPAN

I’ve grown to like CSPAN. While Fox & Fox Business had “talking heads” mumbling over the Trump introduction speeches, and while MSNBC / CNN had Racist-Ranters fuming on post speech, CSPAN just carried the whole thing, end to end, and without annoying “commentary”.

I how have the habit, when seeing a Big Speech show up on a news channel, of checking CSPAN (usually CSPAN-1). IF they are carrying it, that’s where I go. They start earlier, finish later, show more of the room and reactions, and most important of all, do not “interpret” or “comment on” events ‘for me’. I get it clean, straight, and uncut. I like that.

I will, from time to time, jump to any of Fox, Fox Biz, CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. to ‘check in’ on their coverage. Usually followed by an immediate jump back as they are talking over a lead in speech that is of interest, or ranting over an exit speech that is also of interest. In several such samples over a dozen or so minutes, both before the main event and after, I was able to get the sense of what the others were “up to”, while at the same time getting to hear the heart-felt speeches of various Generals et. al. on the stage. Sometimes, the commercial carriers will have a speech that CSPAN isn’t covering. Sometimes they have better camera angles and / or better sound quality; then I’ll stay on them. Far too often, then, they cut to talking heads or start talking over the real action. Then it’s just “jump” and I’m back on CSPAN… There is a tangible feeling of relief then as my BS Filter can take a break ;-)

So if you have CSPAN but have just ignored it as “that dull place showing congress doing nothing”, do try it during the major speeches by candidates and / or the debates. It is a refreshing alternative. And they don’t keep screaming RACIST!!!!
;-)

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in News Related, Political Current Events and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Who Started Birtherism?

  1. philjourdan says:

    At this point, I do not care where Obama was born as it is moot. 8 years ago, I dismissed it because his mother was a US citizen, so it did not matter where he was born (I later found out that due to her age, it could have been a question, but that, like the truth itself, is now moot).

    But unlike you, I am 99% SURE that the cause of the controversy is Obama himself. Either out of ignorance (he was not aware of the US Code, Title 8, Section 1401 and did not know where he was born), or to submarine Hillary, he encouraged it with his ducking and evasion and failure to come clean. Hillary refers to him as “that man”, less because he actually beat her in the primaries 8 years ago, but more because he played her like a harp from hell! Obama could not have gotten any Republican to give the controversy legs, so he got Hillary to do it.

    And so I have fun with the Obama supporters who do not know any facts. But are so damn sure that it is a VRWC. It is easy to jerk their chain. Even when you agree with them in a circuitous way (that he is legal).

  2. Gail Combs says:

    Actually it was OBAMA who started the Birther movement… Snicker.

    Tony Heller has covered it a number of times. Here it is again:

    Who Was The First Birther?

    On April 3, 2007, Obama was still officially born in Kenya.

    But by April 21, 2007 he was switched to being born in Hawaii.

    Two weeks later he announced his candidacy for president, which required that he was born in the US.

    Obummer has always been an opportunist.

  3. Gail Combs says:

    Phil says “… I do not care where Obama was born as it is moot. ….”

    Actually it is not moot because every single law and every single presidential agreement (like the Paris Accord) that he signs goes belly up. NONE of them are LEGAL!

  4. Larry Ledwick says:

    I originally posted this on a different thread before you put this one up, but more directly appropriate for here.

    Trump just trolled the media and suckered them into covering military endorsements of him for president. They can see that they are getting played by him but blind to it (or complicit) when they get played by Obama/HRC.

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/media-outraged-after-trump-tricks-them-to-cover-endorsements-from-military-heroes/


    I agree we have reached burn out phase on several of the Progressive attack strategies. At first people took them as being legitimate, then segment by segment people got so inoculated with them that they just tuned them out. Of late the only groups still buying into “Racist” attacks are the far left radicals and even that is starting to fall apart as folks who have been stirring that pot for decades slowly got more and more over the top on what was being labeled racist. I have seen several interviews in the last year or so that even in the inner cities blacks are waking up to the fact they are being played by the race manipulators. It is finally starting to break through that although it is still politically incorrect to say people dislike Obama because of what he does and is (marxist-progressive) and not the color of his skin and 50% of his gene heritage.

    I think the dam breaker in public acceptance that there are conservative blacks has been more of a slow drip drip rather than a breach, but people like Ben Carson, Mia Love, Tim Scott, Herman Cain,Thomas Sowell, Condoleezza Rice, Allen West, Shaquille O’Neal, Alveda C. King, Stacey Dash, Sheriff David Clarke etc. have slowly been getting more and more air time, and fighting the stereotype that there are no conservatives of color.

    I now see man/woman on the street interviews and youtube features by average black citizens saying they are fed up with the progressive hell holes they are living in and the race baiters that try to preserve the progressive hold on the black community.

  5. Larry Ledwick says:

    Regarding the actual birth certificate, that has already been dissected by Sheriff Arpio in Arizona, his Posse. Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s posse released a detailed report on the document and did a detailed forensic analysis of it that it was in fact a photoshop forgery. The people who produced it forgot to flatten the image after producing it and it was composed of multiple layers of inserts.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/17/obama-birth-record-definitely-fraudulent-sheriff-joe-arpaio-says.html

    http://www.mcsoccp.org/joomla/

    There used to be a detailed report on line with the Posse’s assessment of the birth certificate but so far I cannot find it.

  6. philjourdan says:

    You do not understand Government Gail. Even if it was proven otherwise, 100% of congress would make sure that every order and every law was passed unanimously. It is moot.

  7. Gail Combs says:

    Phil, It depends on how much screaming the Great Unwashed does. Remember, the Deplorables are no longer cowed kicked dogs and are finally realizing THEY HAVE POWER.

    If no president (or in this case a usurper) signs a bill it is a pocket veto.
    The pocket veto is an absolute veto that cannot be overridden. The veto becomes effective when the President fails to sign a bill after Congress has adjourned

    So if Obama is found to be a usurper everything he signed flips into the pocket veto category since a legit president DID NOT SIGN the bill into law AND Congress has adjourned.

    To make those bills laws, every single one that was not vetoed and then passed by a super majority would have to go through the senate and house a second time.

    If there is a conservative Supreme Court we could probable get that interpretation enforced since it is the strict legal interpretation.

  8. philjourdan says:

    Gail, no it does not. You are fortunate that you live south of the perfect test bed for exactly what I said. The state entered into a disastrous contract with a private company, and refused to do anything about it, even though the services went to hell in a handbasket. Why? The GA had voted for it. Only now (and even now with a lot of resistance) are they even thinking about getting out of it and the disaster was 13 years ago (and 60% of the GA ago).

    Politicians have Egos. And more than ideology, that drives them.

  9. Gail Combs says:

    Smokey added a couple more to the collection.

    What Obummer has accomplished:

    OH, and the skuttlebutt is they are going to remove Hitlery and insert MMMmmmoooshell as the DNC presidential candidate. GAG..

  10. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Gail; nice catch. Wonder if this is the reason the prophecies say that after his time in power, The Great Deceiver disappears. A Trump administration would want to zero out everything and not want to be tied by anything Obama has signed. Small wonder Obama got into collage without transcripts and sealed his school records as his administrations first order of business. Seems no one remembers this guy in schools he is supposed to have attended. The Social Progressives are supposed to destroy all their creditability with the general population during this time as well…pg

  11. cdquarles says:

    EM, you are old enough to remember Jim Crow. California wasn’t guilty of it much, but Hawaii was at the time. His certificate, I believe, has a certain word on it for I also believe that the State of Hawaii did not recognize his parent’s marriage. That is what he was hiding, in my opinion. About Cruz and McCain, well there are relevant sections of the US code that spell out what natural born citizen means. McCain, I know, qualified. Cruz, I think qualified. The point, though, is spot on. All he had to do was issue a copy with that word redacted, to the relevant authorities. That wasn’t my issue with him, anyway; and I tried to warn all who would listen, Black and White, what the actual issues with him were, are, and will be.

  12. Gail Combs says:

    I never though politics could be so entertaining…

    Cyber says:
    “This is the same lady who just fought a frog and lost.”

    She also lost the script…

    The media is going ballistic too.
    …..… they are upset about having to cover U.S. veterans? And they’re going public about being upset about covering high ranking U.S. veterans, metal of honour winners, gold star families? Seriously? On MIA/POW day?

    And after the MSM goes all ‘Splodey head calling Trump a liar on air….

    And

    After all this whole exercise starting with the Flint pastor and the unearthed birther crap plus the Congressional Black Caucus conference was all orchestrated to bring the media conversation back around to the birther issue with the implication that
    a) Trump started it, which
    b) makes him a racist….

    OOPS? So does this make Hillary the racist???

    And to add icing to the cake, Obama just said on TV that he was “shocked” that the issue came up given all the other serious matters to discuss….

    #Newsmonia! Caution it is very contagious!

  13. Gail Combs says:

    cdquarles says: “….Cruz, I think qualified. “
    ………….
    I am sorry but Cruz IS Canadian he had ZERO claim to US citizenship.

    FIRST:
    “Natural Born Citizen” IS a “settled matter”. The SCOTUS has ruled at least SIX times that a “Natural Born Citizen”is one born IN the United States to Parents who are BOTH US Citizens.. The NBC clause exists for the sole purpose of preventing anyone born of foreign, dual or divided national allegiance from ever entering the Oval Office. http://northamericanlawcenter.org/ted-cruz-not-legal-u-s-citizen-at-all/#.VtxKDVsrLnB

    Supreme Court Cases that Cite “Natural Born Citizen”as One Born on U.S. Soil to Citizen Parents
    Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
    Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
    Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
    Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
    United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
    Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939) .
    This is why the Supreme Court fell back on you do not have ‘standing’
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    From January 1, 1947 until February 15, 1977, Canadian law prohibited “dual citizenship.” Foreign parents giving birth to a child in Canada in 1970 were forced to choose between Canadian citizenship only, or citizenship in another country, and to declare that with Canadian officials at the time of birth. The parents of Ted Cruz chose and declared “Canadian citizenship” for Rafael declared “Canadian citizenship” for Rafael Edward Cruz. His mother is listed on the Canadian voter rolls and actually voted in the Canadian National Election of 1972. So she had to have given up her US citizenship at that time other wise Canada would have never let her vote. That may be why Cruz has had all his families records in Canada sealed. Much like Obama did.

    NATURALIZATION ACT of 1952 Section 320: CHILD BORN OUTSIDE OF UNITED STATES OF ONE ALIEN AND ONE CITIZEN PARENT AT TIME OF BIRTH; CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH CITIZENSHIP AUTOMATICALLY ACQUIRED
    This is the act that was law at the time of Cruz` birth.
    SEC. 320. [8 U.S.C. 1431]
    (a) A child born outside of the United States, one of whose parents at the time of the child’s birth was an alien and the other of whose parents then was and never thereafter ceased to be a citizen of the United States, shall, if such alien parent is naturalized, become a citizen of the United States, when-
    (1) such naturalization takes place while such child is under the age of eighteen years; and
    (2) such child is residing in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of naturalization or thereafter and begins to reside permanently in the United States while under the age of eighteen years.
    (b) Subsection (a) of this section shall apply to an adopted child only if the child is residing in the United States at the time of naturalization of such adoptive parent, in the custody of his adoptive parents, pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence.

    By the language above you can see that Cruz never has been a legal citizen of the US. His father didn’t naturalize until 2005 so Cruz was over 18 years of age at the time of that naturalization so the naturalization of his father had no bearing on Cruz himself and there is no paper work with the INS for any legal admission to the US for Cruz at any time. He isnt even eligible to be a US Senator.

    Elisa Sluijs said:

    … And as a neighbor to Elanor I know more that I am sure Cruz does not want told but the Consulate in Calgary Alberta has no problem in stating she could not and did not record his birth with them as she was not American at the time of his birth….

    I lived next door to Elanor Elizabeth Wilson for many years I was present when she went to Canada Immigration in 1968 and denounced her US Citizenship and surrendered her US Passport. she at that time was given Canadian Citizenship she went directly from there to the Canada Manpower Office and obtained a Canadian Social Insurance number, she then went to Alberta Health and obtained Alberta Health care, she also registered to Vote in the Canadian elections and did so….

    … notarized copies of all these records are now filed with the Court of Queens bench in safe keeping so that no one can make them disappear as well as having been turned over to American Authorities whom we did not trust to investigate this matter as well, so we also sent to England copies of these notarized documents so they can not be destroyed or gotten rid of…

  14. Terry Jay says:

    This has been mentioned several places, including https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/244108/

  15. gallopingcamel says:

    As usual Gail Combs has nailed it. Barack Obama started the birther movement by claiming to have been born in Kenya on the dust jacket of his book until 2007.

    Who can blame Sydney Blumenthal for picking up on that? Now Hillary can claim “Plausible Deniability” even though Blumenthal was a member of the Clinton’s inner circle.

    As usual the media trashes Trump for the Cinton’s misdeeds.

  16. Larry Ledwick says:

    Little video that appeared over on The Conservative Tree House that digs into the birther origin issue.

  17. Larry Ledwick says:

    This covers the problems with the long form birthcertificate as originally uploaded to the whitehouse web site. Several links at the bottom of the first item regarding analysis of the original version of the document. The original document was a layered PDF when it was represented as a scanned image of a photocopy. If true that should have been just a single layer with no inconsistencies within the document.

    Current version of the document as of 9/17/2016 on the white house site
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

    I have not been able to locate an archived version of it as originally presented in 2011 with layers.
    The wayback machine has archives of the document but they do not appear to have layers when viewed in Foxit PDF reader. Maybe I am missing something – perhaps the wayback machine also flattens images to save storage space.

    However if you do zoom in on the document and focus on the index number 61 10641 it is clearly obvious that the final digit 1 is different than the first digits, different optical density (not quite as black) and it is not as pixilated having much smoother edges.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20110428213248/http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

    http://www.science.co.il/Obama-Birth-Certificate.htm <— has multiple links on analysis of the original
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yerPzQ4doyU <— 1 hour 20 minute video

  18. Gail Combs says:

    p.g.sharrow says:“…. Wonder if this is the reason the prophecies say that after his time in power, The Great Deceiver disappears. A Trump administration would want to zero out everything and not want to be tied by anything Obama has signed….”

    P.G., I am not religious but the Trump run for president not only has me praying, but also wonder if there is a being who actually cares about us. I sure hope so. (My biggest worry is a Trump assassination however this time the backlash would be very very severe because the MSM can no longer be used to muddy the waters. I will leave it at that.)

    Trump has already said one of the first things he will do in office is get rid of Obummer’s E.O.s He also plans to get rid of 70% of the regs. (Should be 100% since they are UNCONSTITUTIONAL) but I will take 70%.

    Given the 200 years of laws on the books he can do a great deal WITHOUT any OK from Congress at all. I do not think many people realize that but the criminals in D.C. certainly do and they are shaking in their boots.

    On top of that Trump has a YUGE group behind him to help do the digging. All that is needed is for them to be unleashed. One of Trump’s biggest pluses is he is a really great exc., he LISTENS to people and he is very very good at picking out raw talent. We already know that he has someone watching ConservativeTreeHouse.

    Finally if Trump (and the Monster Vote) can get actual CONSTITUTIONAL scholars appointed to the Supreme Court, a heck of a lot of the Unconstitutional laws can be wiped from the books.

    There are people like Publius Huldah out there who would make very good Supreme Court Justices. (The left hates her BTW)
    https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/

    Publius Huldah on the Original Intent of the US Constitution

    Publius Huldah: Restoring / Protecting our Constitutional Republic — Part 1

    (I wish she was a better speaker.)

  19. Gail Combs says:

    Someone at ConservativeTreeHouse had an interesting take on the Birther Issue rising from the dead that makes sense.

    Pepperjelly says:
    September 16, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    I believe the hILLiary Campaign is trying to kill 2 birds with one stone. Take down Trump and throw suspicion back onto Obama since there’s been rumblings this week of Moochelle taking hILLiary’s place or Obama suspending elections.

    Now why didn’t I see that?

  20. E.M.Smith says:

    @Gail:

    You can’t see everything, or you will understand nothing…

    Some amount of intellectual discrimination in input is necessary to assemble a rational (self consistent, subject to reason) understanding. The Hegelian Left often forgets that, as do the Idealists (who take discrimination of inputs too far).
    So no worries, eh?

  21. Gail Combs says:

    No problem E.M. Just a rhetorical comment since once pointed out it made a lot of sense.

    My brother has an IQ over 200 (no common sense though) so I have no real ego to worry about when I don’t catch something.

  22. David A says:

    Yes, the O is the original birther, as has been pointed out. But this was NOT a one time “error” of his publicist. For well over a decade the O and his publicist claimed the Kenya birth, just as his Grandmother claims to remember from being there!

    Is the issue important. Hell yes, but hell no from a political standpoint at THIS time. (Trump played this one well) Yet for the practical reasons Gail mentioned plus it is very important historically. How the O played the US citizens for fools is very important to know.

    Yes, I think a Trump presidency will bring the O and the C’s down. ( If Trump wins there will be one hell of a scramble and a lot more then some missing keyboard keys will be deep- sixed during the transition.)

  23. E.M.Smith says:

    @Phil:

    OMG! That’s a great cartoon!

  24. Gail Combs says:

    Intellectual Froglegs (Joe Dan Gorman) has an interview with the cartoonist:

    Guilty as Hill” with special guest AF Branco

  25. cdquarles says:

    @Gail, hmm, interesting. What did the administrative court say? Was there a direct ruling?

  26. Gail Combs says:

    cdquarles,
    Since I write a lot I am not sure what you are referring to. Give me more of a hint and I will answer if I can.

Anything to say?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s