Is anyone going to provide a reference for when, during the hearing, the attorney for Obama acknowledged that the birth certificate is a forgery? Thus giving rise to the thread title, and to the material in the linked article (OP)? The whole thing is on YouTube, 3-4 hours worth, if it happened, it’s got to be in there, right? Seeing that the birthers have been shown repeatedly to be deluded (and/or liars), I say one should perform some due diligence before repeating anything that comes from such sources. Rather than demonstrate that he did a respectable amount of research, Thomas now presents a farrago of other claims, as though anyone is so invested in demonstrating his errors that they’re going to put in further effort. OMG, now Obama is a power lusting liar! Who’d have thought?!?!
So I’m to believe that the one thing all the political brokers in Washington can do right – smear people for political gain – has been ignored for years until some unknown journalist wanders in the back door to discover it? .
Like Bob Woodward, you mean?
The only reason the issue has gone on ad nauseum…
Ad nause a m.
Ad nause a m.
At the same time, Ninth Doctor deserves recognition for his use of the word “farrago.” That’s just neat.
And yes, I am a nerd, but I take my pleasures where I can!
A nauseum is a place that shows pictures of sick people.
Like Bob Woodward, you mean?
Well now there is a wonderfully complex example 
I sure am glad so many people are concerned about a misspelling of “ad nauseum” when Rome is burning and being taken over by a dictator wannabe. At least you’ve got your priorities right…
Well now there is a wonderfully complex example
Well now there is a wonderfully complex example
Just sayin, sometimes “respectable” sources of information aint the final say and counting on their integrity or thoroughness is an incredibly big mistake… http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-issues-apology-on-zimmerman-tape-screw-up/2012/04/03/gIQA8m5jtS_blog.html for example.
I sure am glad so many people are concerned about a misspelling of “ad nauseum” when Rome is burning and being taken over by a dictator wannabe. At least you’ve got your priorities right…
Yes, let’s not leave any time for laughter in our lives while “Rome is burning.” We should prioritize and be grimly serious at all times, and focus only on the most important issues in fighting against the dictator wannabe – important issues like investigating birther theories, or spending hours and hours and hours intentionally mangling Kant’s aesthetics in a lame attempt to distract from Rand’s blatantly obvious aesthetic contradictions.
J
To this day men are legally required to register for the selective service. Some still refuse, either as a political statement or because they fear the return of active conscription. I considered refusing, but ultimately decided to comply. I would not be surprised to find out that, especially among leftists, the number of men who refused to register was very high six years after suspension.
I am in the strange boat (with a cohort of other young men of the time) of having refused to register with the selective service yet voluntarily enlisted in the Navy anyway. I simultaneously am and am not “a draft dodger”.
Schools that take federal money are required to verify a student’s registration before they give aid. If Obama took such aid after 1980, when the registration rule came down, he was registered.
A wider question: you use the (very dated) phrase “draft dodger” as a pejorative. I wouldn’t expect to see this sentiment in an Objectivist forum. What’s your problem with draft-dodgers?
I’m about to play birther’s advocate. Not because I believe the conspiracy theories, but because I think they can be fun. Before I do I should make it clear that I didn’t mean to use, “draft dodger,” pejoratively. I don’t know of any other term that makes it clear what I’m talking about without sounding pretentious. My contempt I hold for Obama (which you may have sensed) is for other reasons.
It’s forgivable to be ignorant of the nitty-gritty details of birther theory. The claim is that Obama’s financial aid records are sealed to conceal the fact that he is a foreigner. Obviously, he is a citizen because his mother was. But, the conspiracies don’t have to die here. The SS fraud version is that the school records are sealed to conceal the fact that he received aid as a foreigner (he wouldn’t be eligible for aid as a US citizen if he dodged the draft; he’d have to contrive some other way, committing fraud in the process). The support for the “foreign student” claim comes from a mailman who worked a route that had him delivering mail to the parents of Bill Ayers. He claims to have had conversations with them in which they indicated that they were helping to support a foreign student. The mailman claims to have met and conversed with that student and firmly believes that said student is Barack Obama. In addition, you probably know that Bill Ayers is an unrepentant member of the terrorist group, the Weather Underground Organization (WUO). This is significant because as a member of the WUO, Ayers (and through Ayers, Obama) would have access to accomplished forgers. Some people, including Sheriff Joe Arpaio, believe Obama’s social security card is a forgery because of discrepancies between the date stamp that appears on his SS card and the date stamp on other similar cards. I have no idea how credible this claim is (my own SS card has no date stamp). In addition, some believe that the number on the card indicates residency in a state in which Obama never lived. If you’re rationalizing a belief in a forged SS card, you could suppose that any changes to a birth certificate are part of an elaborate plan to cover up for the forged SS card (maybe something on the original “long form” would give clues to finding out the mystery).
My purpose here is not only to engage in wild conjecture. It is to answer the question, “does anybody think these claims are serious?” As I’ve indicated before, the primary “birther” claims have absolutely no merit; even if Obama was born in Kenya, he is a US citizen. So those claims might be the slightest bit “serious” in the sense that he could possibly have been born in Kenya. But they are not serious in the sense of their implications; the circumstances of Obama’s birth make him as eligible to be president as any other US citizen. However, the claims regarding his SS card are more serious because there is a conceivable motive and clear means of forgery in the former members of the WUO (again, not saying I believe this charge to be true). They are also more serious in the other sense that if the claims are true, the implications would be far worse - criminal war-slavery avoidance, aid fraud, social security fraud and the like, which is at least impeachable.
A nauseum is a place that shows pictures of sick people.
Ha! Impressive puncraft.
We should prioritize and be grimly serious at all times, and focus only on the most important issues in fighting against the dictator wannabe –
You mean, like destroy everyone’s credibility by repeating lies? Ok, but do I have to believe them too?
Here’s the right way to deal with all those blockbusting revelatory birther stories:
Okay, I’m new here. I actually had a conversation with this guy thinking he was legit. But instead he’s a birther nutjob. Some of you tried to warn me but I was too dense to get it.
And just to be clear, even bringing this issue up is a very clear sign of nutcasehood because even the most charitable interpretation is about whether Obama “lied” when all politicians at his level lie and this would be one of the most paltry (as compared to, say, lying about closing Guantanamo?). So bringing it up can only point to dishonest motives which are ultimately counterproductive besides.
Now I know :-).
Okay, I’m new here. I actually had a conversation with this guy thinking he was legit. But instead he’s a birther nutjob. Some of you tried to warn me but I was too dense to get it.
I don’t think Thomas is going as far to say Obama is not really a US citizen and therefore saying Obama should no longer be president, as a birther would say. But of all the things that could be said of Obama lying or being disingenuous, his birth certificate is probably the most trivial issue to talk about. We don’t even have good sources of information, so it’d be better to throw out the entire thing as arbitrary until there is *some* evidence to think otherwise.
I don’t think Thomas is going as far to say Obama is not really a US citizen and therefore saying Obama should no longer be president, as a birther would say. But of all the things that could be said of Obama lying or being disingenuous, his birth certificate is probably the most trivial issue to talk about. We don’t even have good sources of information, so it’d be better to throw out the entire thing as arbitrary until there is *some* evidence to think otherwise.
No, even if we had rock-solid evidence of (whatever), it still would be a completely pointless issue. These conspiracy theories are effectively anti-concepts: they are not only invalid, but they displace legitimate conversation around actual issues.
In other words, debating the ACA or Obama’s handling of this or that policy is perfectly valid and salient because as the democratically elected president we’re stuck with, these are the issues that matter.
To put it another way… so where would this go? So we impeach Obama because he did such and such… and we replace him with… whom? If you’re honest you’d have to recognize that the odds are better than even that it would be somebody even worse… (viz. that Mormon dude)…
The discussion about Romney V Obama has been moved to the US Elections 2012 thread.
Taken in isolation, the possibility that Obama lied about his place of birth is not all that big of a deal; and I don’t think he can be kicked out of office for it, even if it were true that he wasn’t born here or is not a natural born citizen – primarily because Congress would have the final say, and I don’t think they would kick him out on a technicality like that anyhow. However, it is not just one isolated characteristic about him – it shows that he is willing to lie wholesale and to the whole world, and he does that on a daily basis. Him saying that capitalism doesn’t work is totally groundless, but so are so many other of his claims that I think the American people are just accepting that he is a liar and moving on with their lives.
Now, why would he be this way, and how can he get away with it so often? It is because of Immanuel Kant – yes, the philosopher from 200 years ago has taken over our culture and made it nihilistic and not so concerned with reality. According to Kant, that which we observe is not reality the way it is, it is a Copernican Revolution that is brought about by our minds and has no direct connection to things the way they really are. So, why take it seriously enough to be in-tune with that which you observe with your own two eyes (like on TV when Obama is giving a speech) in the face of such massive contradictions to what actually exists? Obama could come out and say that the moon is purple, and no one would think that he has lost touch with reality even though they see it as white because you can’t trust your senses anyhow, so why bother confronting him with his lying? Is it really lying or is it just dismissive of the opposition stance that capitalism is good (within limits, because they are no great defenders of capitalism either)? Can you say that an abstract statement must conform to reality? not if you are going to use Kantian pure reason, which is totally disconnected from the facts. Why argue about principles and a man’s character, it’s just phenomenal anyhow and has nothing to do with real reality noumena.
The facts don’t matter to them because they have rejected reality in favor of power-lust; and besides, the tax payers will pay for it all anyhow.
Now, why would he be this way, and how can he get away with it so often? It is because of Immanuel Kant – yes, the philosopher from 200 years ago has taken over our culture and made it nihilistic and not so concerned with reality.
What’s with all this blubbering about Kant? When did Obama’s attorney say that his birth certificate is a forgery? Either give us a reference, meaning a verifiable quote from the hearing, or admit that you didn’t know what the hell you were talking about when you started this thread, with its breathless opening salvo: “Obama’s Birth Certificate *WAS* Faked”.
I couldn’t care less if the statue of liberty gave birth to him.
Aside from the fact that a bronze statue would have made a better president.
Taken in isolation, the possibility that Obama lied about his place of birth is not all that big of a deal; and I don’t think he can be kicked out of office for it, even if it were true that he wasn’t born here or is not a natural born citizen – primarily because Congress would have the final say, and I don’t think they would kick him out on a technicality like that anyhow. However, it is not just one isolated characteristic about him – it shows that he is willing to lie wholesale and to the whole world, and he does that on a daily basis. Him saying that capitalism doesn’t work is totally groundless, but so are so many other of his claims that I think the American people are just accepting that he is a liar and moving on with their lives.
Now, why would he be this way, and how can he get away with it so often? It is because of Immanuel Kant – yes, the philosopher from 200 years ago has taken over our culture and made it nihilistic and not so concerned with reality. According to Kant, that which we observe is not reality the way it is, it is a Copernican Revolution that is brought about by our minds and has no direct connection to things the way they really are. So, why take it seriously enough to be in-tune with that which you observe with your own two eyes (like on TV when Obama is giving a speech) in the face of such massive contradictions to what actually exists? Obama could come out and say that the moon is purple, and no one would think that he has lost touch with reality even though they see it as white because you can’t trust your senses anyhow, so why bother confronting him with his lying? Is it really lying or is it just dismissive of the opposition stance that capitalism is good (within limits, because they are no great defenders of capitalism either)? Can you say that an abstract statement must conform to reality? not if you are going to use Kantian pure reason, which is totally disconnected from the facts. Why argue about principles and a man’s character, it’s just phenomenal anyhow and has nothing to do with real reality noumena.
The facts don’t matter to them because they have rejected reality in favor of power-lust; and besides, the tax payers will pay for it all anyhow.
Thomas, you’re the one who has no concern for reality. You make stuff up, you ridiculously misread others’ views, and then when you get caught telling your falsehoods, you try to create distractions by making stuff up about Kant and blaming him for all of the evils that you imagine exist in the world. Will you never learn?
J