Posted on 12/04/2009 10:02:44 AM PST by pissant
I was trying to esplain to another poster how a person could have the “right” to ask a question, but the question not be a “right” question.
I was using analogies to try to find an example that would make the point.
Sarah used the example that reporters had the RIGHT to ask her to prove she was Trig’s mother, but that the question was actually offensive, and they SHOULD NOT have asked. Thus, “have a right to ask”, but not “right to ask”.
Legal vs moral, I think.
I know that others find less conclusions to draw from her use of the “Trig questions” analogy when explaining the birth certificate question.
Palin’s position seems to be perfectly reasonable. Trust but verify.
The whole demonization attempt by the elites with regard to Obama and his concealed records is similar to the whole global warming saga. Substitute “birther” with “denier”. Fainthearted politicians fear the establishment far far more than they fear the people. Fear of the dreaded “birther” tag far outweighs the fear that Obama has lied his way into office.
Thanks for the clarification. Actually your original post did a good job making that point, after I read it again. It seems like this story line has a lot more people attacking “birthers” today. I never that that before on freerepublic. So my sensitivity is on overtime. Where did all these attackers come from. I read every birther story that is posted and never see such illogical arguments/attacks against people who aren’t convince that President Obama is a natural born citizen.
By your logic, Mr. Schlesinger, Sarah Palin also “flip-flopped” on the Trig “birth certificate issue.” Why single out just the Obama part?
Ah yes, the endless attempt to truncate and partially quote Sarah Palin to paint her as a “Birther,” “Birther” enabler, or for that matter any other kind of nut, even though she has several times denied being a “Birther” - a denial you don’t seem to actual get from any actual “Birthers.” She even refers to them as “Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters;” yet somhow, this is a non-rebuke to you.
Would that Barack Obama would call Trig Truthers “Conspiracy minded” folk; but alas, nobody in the press will ask Barack about conspiracy theories from the left. This reminds me of the press’ strange lack of curiousity when John Kerry gave credence to vicious Conspiracy rumors about Bush wanting a reinstitution of the Draft if reelected.
So she calls them “Conspiracy-minded” folk, rebukes the idea that she would ever ask to see the Birth Certificate or make it an issue, and equates the issue of Barack’s birth question with questions about whether or not Trig is actually her son; yet somehow you see this as a “wink and a nod.” Seems more like ricidule to me, though a polite ridicule at that.
More likely, her intention is to draw attention to herself now that she’s moved on from elective politics and into the lucrative celebrity business.
I understand your being pathetically petrified with fear.
I see it all over the net from liberal Democrats.
Thanks for playing.
It does not say she never presented them either.
“Where does she say specifically that she presented them?”
Where does it specifically say she didn't, like you are claiming?
Nowhere in what you posted were there any medical records. None at all.
So, no. It didn’t help. Because if the argument is that she was asked but didn’t show them, she’s in the exact same boat as Obama, making it a very bad argument.
And if your argument is that the newspaper reports are enough, then is Obama’s birth announcement enough?
She either showed the records to the press or she didn’t. Show me where she did.
I don’t believe for one second that she isn’t the mother. Of course she is. If I were her, it would be a cold day in you-know-where before I released my child’s medical records.
I’m simply saying that unless she released the records to the press, it is a very bad argument to make.
Post 160
Then that doesn’t make her a bold leader, it makes her a “run of the mill” political. When faced with a issue, either get in or stay out... Don’t stick your toe in to test the water.
More like helplessly convulsed with laughter.
“Then that doesn’t make her a bold leader, it makes her a “run of the mill” political. When faced with a issue, either get in or stay out... Don’t stick your toe in to test the water.”
No a bold issue is Abortion, where she takes a stand in policy and in her life.
Avoiding being lumped in with “birthers”, of which I am one, shows her ability to weave the mines that liberals will leave for her.
What she said is that there is a segment of the electorate, that is millions of American voters who are asking this question, therefore it is a legitimate question. She personally has NOT asked the question, nor does she plan to in the future.
If any nubes don’t know,,,stevie b is a Democrat that is allowed to have fun ....cats need there mice lol.
This is what you wrote:
Plus she confirmed in her Facwebook post last night that she DID in fact produce the birth certificate, after the bottom feeding media laid siege to her doctor and her lawyers, shrilling demanding that she show her son's birth certificate.
And all for what? Because some lunatic had posted that she was not the mother to her own baby, at Daily Kos.
You said that she claims to have presented it. So where did she say it? And to whom did she show it? Because as we know, Obama is supposed to have shown his BC to reporters who photographed it and put it on the internet.
Where did she show it? To whom did she show it? The answer is: she didn't. And that is precisely why it is a losing argument to liken her being asked to Obama being asked. He has been asked and did not show it. She has been asked and did not show it.
I don't think she should show it. If I were her, I'd tell the press to pound sand. But people here saying she did when she did not is blatantly untrue.
You obviously can't read.
I say she was exactly right and was exactly right again.
There is no “she was wrong” anywhere in my post, despite your pathetic attempt to put it there.
Post 170
Did you read this bovine scat before you posted it, this isn’t to satisfy “inquiring minds” (press or otherwise) this is to satisfy legal/constitutional requirement. You don’t seem to grasp the deference, or don’t want to.
I am completely ticked!
Rush, Hannity, Beck, Coulter, Malkin, Levine, Medved, Boortz..etc....Well, I will **NEVER** trust them again! Some issues and their actions towards Obama’s eligibility are deal breakers in my opinion.
I hold special contempt for Coulter. NO POSSIBLE WAY WILL I EVER BUY ONE OF HER BOOKS AGAIN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.