Replies

OK, let me get this straight. You are proposing that Obama continues this battle only because it is politically expedient to do so. You don’t believe there is any real problems with his background that make him ineligible for the office of POTUS.

No. Here's what I'm saying.

There is no "battle" for Obama.

There's no "public relations issue" for him to manage. There hasn't been for more than two years.

There have only been a small but noisy group of people going around making his opponents look like fools, and distracting his enemies from the things that matter, and the points on which he's actually vulnerable.

If I were Obama, and the birthers didn't exist, I'd be at least halfway tempted to invent them.

Not that I think Obama is actually behind the birthers. I don't. But they are nothing more than a friendly wind that blows happily in his direction.

I'm not sure there are even any lawsuits in which Obama is even a party any more.

If there are, then he or one of his minions, long ago, has simply said to the lawyers, "Yeah. Just deal with the legal stuff on this lawsuit, okay?"

And they may have even said, "They're asking for a copy of the birth certificate. Just file dismissals and stuff instead. That'll do the job legally without actually killing the birthers oof. We don't actually want these nutcases to really go away. It's too nice for us to have them around filing this stuff and distracting people."

Don’t you suppose that the majority of “birthers” also believe that continuing this fight is politically expedient (let alone a service to the country at large). It seems to be your opinion that birthers are continuing to fight a battle that is distracting the country from the real battles?

There are at least two kinds of birthers: Those who understand the score and keep playing for their own reasons, and those who don't understand the game.

I'm sure there are a lot of birthers who haven't followed the points made by myself and other realists. Maybe they've even told themselves, "You don't have to read the stuff those people write. They're EEVIL!!"

Unfortunately, that's a real good way to cut yourself off from the truth.

In any event, I'm sure there are quite a few sincere birthers. Most of them, probably. Especially including those who don't follow the issue closely and haven't done the research and haven't read both sides, and who just buy the line that anyone who doesn't agree with the meme is from Satan.

There are others who I'm convinced know the score damn well. These are the people who've created dozens of fallacious arguments, and continued to push them even after the fallacies have been revealed. They're the people who have ignored, brushed aside and even tried to discredit all of the best sources of information.

These include our Founding Fathers, those who were close to them, all of our early national legal experts such as William Rawle, the US Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justices, the major conservative Constitutional foundations such as Heritage.org and many others, as well as those who've done the best analyses of the birth certificate claims, including John Woodman and Prof. Ricardo de Queiroz on the "forgery" side of things.

In the place of all of the best authorities, they've substituted people like David Ramsay (who was voted down 36 to 1 by Father of the Constitution, half a dozen other Framers and the other members of our first House, Samuel Roberts (who was a judge over several counties but had no national legal responsibilities or authority at all), and quack "experts" who made a whole series forgery claims that have been thoroughly disproven.

Like the one I mentioned earlier in the thread who made a claim of "impossibility" that had been clearly stated NOT to be impossible at all in the specification document published way back in 1999.

If that is your cause, then why attack birthers on the substance of their claims instead of espousing the importance of these other battles to be fought.

Because I really don't like lies, and I don't like con men, and I don't like seeing fellow conservatives being made fools of and taken advantage of, which is exactly what is happening here.

Also because in the course of discussing this issue, I've become an expert on it. This is one subject that I know now. And I know it and understand it much better than I do (for example) the NSA scandal or Benghazi or any one of a number of things that are the real issues.

Another aspect is that there don't really seem to be that many people besides myself who actually do understand the issue that well.

I didn't knee-jerk-reaction this. My understanding of it has been developed through tons of reading and discussion over the past two years. I've read and understood the points made by, as far as I can tell, all the major players on both sides. And I've gone to the original sources to see what these people are talking about, and found out which ones are right and which ones aren't.

I propose that your time is much better spent leading people against the real corruptions of this POTUS that you believe are of greatest import rather than dismissing the efforts of those who oppose on “lesser” platforms. Why not leave that work up to the Obots and Fogblowers??

Because conservatives are being taken advantage of. And because I am attached to the Constitution and to the truth.

I would expect that fellow Freepers would be more willing to hear your voice if it were speaking out vehemently against the Obama crimes that you have found to be worthy of pursuit. Your argumentative behavior causes many on these threads to question your fundamental intentions...

I definitely do speak out on other issues from time to time. But a lot of Obama's abuses are well enough known, and well enough commented on, that there's not really that much I can add except, "Me too."

In those instances, I don't find that "me too" posts are very much of a contribution. And I'm not going to just write down "me too" in order to try and prove my conservative credentials to people who are so attached to the birther meme that they wouldn't believe anything I said anyway. I'm not a performing dog, and the research I've posted and on occasion linked to referring to the work of others is certainly tight enough, for those who investigate it with a halfway open mind, that it's self-authenticating.

In other words, the points I make are verifiable. You or anyone else can go and read original documents that I refer to in their context and see that I'm not misrepresenting sources or misquoting people. And you can also do your own investigation and see that when I accuse someone of having committed a fallacy, or chosen the least authoritative sources possible because the most authoritative sources completely contradict them, that is actually the case.

If you have any trouble finding original sources, ask me and I can provide them.

As far as being argumentative, I started out in a non-argumentative way. On pretty much a daily basis for the past two years, I've been called the worst of names and accused of the worst of crimes. I've routinely and repeatedly been called an "Obot," a "traitor," a "shill," a "liar," and a dozen more things I can't even remember.

In other words, my good-faith efforts at discussion were met with the most brutal Alinsky-style tactics (if I understand the term correctly) on the part of birthers that were possible to conduct over the internet.

I finally got tired of it and decided to fight back.

All of that brings me to another couple of reasons for doing what I have done.

1. I'm not going to just submit to the bastards, the mob, who want to corrupt our history and our law and misrepresent our Founding Fathers and our Constitution, and (frankly) who have viciously slandered and falsely me and others now for two years, and who continue to try and mislead my fellow conservatives.

2. There don't seem to be that many people besides myself who are willing to put up with the gauntlet just for the sake of standing up for our Constitution and our Founding Fathers and our history and the truth.

Yes, there are some. There are certainly some good folks here at FR. Mr Rogers and 4Zoltan and Kansas58 and a few others come to mind. Those perhaps at the top because they've commented a bit more recently than some others.

But there don't seem to be as many of those as there are of people who (in spite of the fact that they can't or don't do their own research and can't refute the realistic points that have been made) are willing to jump in and join the mob of thugs, who say black is white and white is black just because they say so, and by God, if you disagree, they're going to call you as many vile names as they can and maybe, just maybe, beat your ass if they ever get the chance.

I hope that helps explain my position.