Registered? Please log in below.
New? Please register.
Here are some reasons why.
Sarah Palin on Thursday told radio talk show host Rusty Humphries that the provenance of Barack Obama's birth certificate is "a fair question, just like I think past associations and past voting record — all of that is fair game."
Well... ain't that a gas? AllahPundit at Hot Air writes: "Something for (almost) everyone here: For the left, smoking-gun proof that she’s a fringe character, and for Birthers, smoking-gun proof that their concerns are mainstream."
And how. Joel Mathis is so upset, in fact, he's threatened to eat some baronial linen fine art paper.
Moments before, responding to the question of whether she would "make the birth certificate an issue" if she ran, Palin said: "I think the public, rightfully, is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue ’cause I think there are enough members of the electorate who still want answers."
Allah again: "It’s the same thing as Truthers saying that all they’re doing is 'asking questions.' The answers have already been provided; they just reject them because they’re married to their conspiracies."
Meantime, Pajamas Media's Rick Moran, whose work I'm liking more and more lately, utterly destroys Palin's assertions:
No, it is not a “fair question.” It is a silly, stupid, ignorant question. No, “the public” is not making this an issue — only looney tune numbskulls are pursuing it. No, there aren’t “enough (whatever that means) members of the electorate who still want answers.” Only a small subset of the entire electorate cares.
By even entertaining the question the way she did, Palin has lent some mainstream legitimacy to a fringe theory. Doing so doesn't help her chances at anything other than winning the goodwill of nutters. And, indeed, her stake puts every Republican elected official on defense. Writes Moran:
(S)he is now going to force every GOP candidate for the House and Senate to come out and declare whether they are birther nuts or not. Even if they’re not, being forced to answer in the first place makes the party look even kookier than it has to this point in time. You can bet Democratic opponents of Republican candidates will be asking whether they agree with Palin or not — and they will do it every chance they get. The press will gleefully repeat the question, no matter how many times the GOP candidate answers it.
That is correct.
Joel and I dispensed with the Birther business in a Scripps-Howard column in August. I wrote:
Every calorie burned and every neuron fired on the subject of President Obama's birthplace -- yes, contrary to what you might have heard Alan Keyes say, he is president -- is energy better spent elsewhere.
It is energy not spent opposing the president's very real policies. Congress is busy debating a $1 trillion health-reform bill that would fundamentally change the way Americans get medical care, and yet some Americans would rather argue over Obama's certification of live birth.
Why? Because of the fallacy of "if only." If only we can show that Obama is constitutionally unqualified to be president, it would all just go away -- the crazy socialized medicine schemes, the cap and tax energy legislation, the suicidal debt increases, the ridiculous posturing to Iran, Russia, and Venezuela, all of it.
If only politics were so simple. Forget the fringe. Obama isn't going anywhere. But his agenda presents conservatives with real opportunities to craft and articulate sound alternatives. Conspiracy theories, like the poor, will always be with us. But they don't win elections.
For her own part, Palin revised and extended her remarks on Facebook under the headline "Stupid Conspiracies":
Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask... which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.
If the conspiracy theories are as stupid as Palin says, she ought not do her part to fuel them. By the way, notice how well parsed her last sentence is. Very deft. And who could be against regular folks asking questions...?
Comments
Birther, truther ...
Every time I start to think Palin can redeem herself, she does something like this. Like Geraghty, I don't think she plans to run for public office again. But she may see herself as a kingmaker, or the arbiter of what it means to be a (insert "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" dialect here) bona fide Republican. Before long, she's likely to lurch into Ron Paul territory and then not return to reality.
... Kingmaker, um, Uther?
y'know, like Uther Pendragon? oh -- nevermind.
Anyways, I am the only person here who is going to say this, so say it I will: I find this disappointing, coming from Mrs. Palin.
(Am guessing that most here would insert "even" in front of "coming from" in that last)
And a major league, Chief-of-the-Poohawks "SI-i-IGH" in exasperation.
I had Palin not running for president as soon as she retired the governorship (allowing for some public-conscription possibility, which never turns out well, even if you are Teddy Roosevelt). Even so, if she wishes to remain in the political fray as king- or rainmaker, she shouldn't be afraid to define the "fringe" from the "core" of her ideal party.
Just say it, Sarah: "No; it's a stupid question."
And we all know what exhibit "A" is, in the stupidity of the question trial:
If there were anything there, H. Clinton would have used it, both barrels blazing.
I don't need to know anything else but *that* to remove any reasonable doubt in my mind ;o/
.
"Don't confuse political savvy with competence or principles." -- RobbL, 2009
And By the Way, I have a Question I Brave to Ask
Was President Obama *really behind* Jose Padilla's attempt to plant a hydrogen bomb in Chicago?
.
"Don't confuse political savvy with competence or principles." -- RobbL, 2009
Obama/Padilla
Obama is from Chicago. Padilla was caught in Chicago. What more proof do you need people?
And the 20th hijacker was Rahm Emmanual. That's a Middle Eastern sounding name if I ever heard one.
Dwight
I'm pretty sure, though, that Dwight Schrute has Barry Obama's Hawaii birth certificate in his pocket during that "We Are the World" video.
good to see
you guys finally have something to get your collective panties in a bunch about.
Collective Panties
"Collective"?? Whaddarru, a commie?
Writers' Collective Panties
No offense, john, but I don't think I want to consider this line of thought. Also, you might consider updating your name; I mean, really -- 2000 is so 20th-century
Re: good to see
Dammit, John, I haven't worn ladies underwear in years!
Look
... all that Mrs Palin essentially said was that the science is not settled in the minds of many Americans. It is not her job to settle that science. The unsettled questions extend well beyond the hap-slap birther label. She has questions; I have questions. Since when is having questions a litmus test, especially when providing answers is so fought against every step of the way. It would have been dishonest for her to say "that's a stupid question". I have doubts whether such a dishonest answer would have changed any minds here (perhaps I'm wrong). Who would have expected the CRU emails and code to emerge as they did? Who could have expected Building 7 to have such a perfectly symmetrical collapse? Who would have thought it would be so difficult to audit the FED? Who could have believed an Attorney General could declare such a trial in NYC without notifying the President nor the city of New York in advance? Just questions, my friends (borrowing from John McCain).
Panties are Okay, I suppose, but it is probably best to not go driving around in them.
Re: Look
So, John, the fact that some questions aren't stupid means that all questions aren't stupid?
Right.
For what it's worth, if Sarah Palin legitimately "has questions" about Barack Obama's citizenship/birth, she should be using her high profile to press those questions -- she's got one of the biggest platforms of any American political figure today -- because the issue is one of Barack Obama's constitutional legitimacy to be president. It's not a small thing, not a thing about which reasonable people can disagree. He's either a natural-born American citizen and eligible to be president or he isn't.
But the way Palin idly considers the question suggests to me A) she doesn't really have doubts -- or even very serious questions -- about Obama's citizenship, except for the utility of such questions to undermine a political opponent or B) she DOES have real questions, but she's not willing to pursue a matter of grave constitutional concern either because it would be unpopular or because she's too busy talking to Oprah.
Either option suggests she's a fool or a weakling, manifestly undeserving -- as if any more evidence were needed -- of a high spot in the executive branch, and not to be taken at all seriously in our discourse.
Some questions are settled, John; the continued posing of them after evidence has been presented -- and no contrary evidence offered -- is just that: A pose.
Indeed
it does threaten the constitution to not be certain about this non-issue since nowhere does that tattered document mention any rights of uncertainty. In the light of the right to print money, the right to declare war, the right to stiff legitimate private bond-holders in order to pay off major party supporters, ad infinitum, I believe your proffered paradox falls well below the realm of ludicrous. I suspect that you already know that, or I would hope that is the case. But let me be perfectly clear; it is ludicrous.
It is funny that you would mention "the utility of such questions to undermine a political opponent", since that is what I would offer as the primary honest to God motivation of those who continuously assault this private citizen from both sides of the allegorical aisle. And yes, I'll be sure to watch the state corporatism network's Oprah/Obama Christmas love-in direct from the white house on the 13th if the Eagle/Giants game is not too compelling. I do so much want to see that peace prize. I await the pose(s).
Now, I do agree that it would indeed be a tragedy should it ever be found out that Mr Soereto was proven to be ineligible. The time for that passed under the bridge some time ago. Would you feel less troubled/gleeful if Mrs Palin had simply said: "The time for that passed under the bridge some time ago, next question." Of course not. What it comes down to, I betcha, is that you would have taken umbrage no matter how she answered the gotcha question.
Re: Indeed
I wasn't aware that there were implied statutes of limitations for current, ongoing violations of the Constitution. Very principled.
First of all: Gotcha question? The guy who asked her the question was a conservative talk radio host! She was playing on friendly ground. You can't blame this one on the liberal media, John.
Second of all: You're wrong. If she'd said, "No, I wouldn't raise that question because there's no question to raise," we wouldn't be having this discussion. I either would've said nothing, or I would've praised her.
I'm going to go ahead and say that anybody who is doing conservative radio talk show interviews -- and who has, in the last few weeks, done TV interviews with Oprah and Barbara Walters -- on their book tour doesn't quite the fit the label of "private citizen" as you seem to put it forward. She's out there on national media platforms expressing her views; I certainly didn't make her do it. Responding to those publicly expressed views is not an "assault" (and God, I am so tired of the Palinite victimization routine); it's debate.
When Sarah Palin stops saying stupid stuff, I'll stop talking about how what she says is stupid.
Did I blame it on the "liberal" media?
I don't even think I insinuated that. I don't know the microphone jockey from the man on the moon. He asked a question and she answered it. Regardless, it came across as a gotcha question.
And yes, she is a private citizen. I did not mean to imply that she is exempt from public scrutiny. The more anyone is in the public eye, the more scrutiny they can expect. I believe Mrs Palin has learned some lessons the hard way and now knows the game better after a rather remarkable year. But, please, don't play the constitution card to try and make your point. Go Fish on that one.
That I have plenty of questions regarding just about everything about the president does not make me a birther. Plenty of people have plenty of questions, and the list of questions grows daily. Judging from recent polls, the list of people has been growing steadily also. I don't think it has much to do with some birther issue or Mrs Palin for that matter. I think some refer to the matter as PDS.
Would I support Mrs Palin for president? Actually her voice and use of language drives me a bit daft sometimes. Maybe she can work on that. Besides, 2012 is a looooong way down the road, so I don't really think about it like a lot of people do. It could be that the Palin Effect is her most interesting quality. It could be that she has a good sense of humor.
I came across some more food for thought regarding the Gridiron Dinner tonight:
"As for the president, Palin joked that she was looking at a magazine cover of Obama and Chinese president Hu Jinato during an airplane flight. A nearby passenger stated, "Hu's the Communist," she related.
And, Palin said, "I thought he was asking a question."
Time to get out the FactCheckers to see who really wrote the joke?
Anyway, here is the full article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30242.html
~
It's perfectly legitimate to question Obama's policies
Without heading down the rabbit hole.
John, yes, if she had said something along the lines of, "The time to deal with that has passed," I would feel better about her. But she hasn't. Which makes me wonder how eager she is to humor the -- yes -- loonies to fuel her own ambitions or fantasies.
Mindless populism is not healthy for self-government.
Forget the birth certificate ...
Why are Obama's college records under lock and key? Or at least most of them. And his medical records, too.
If I remember right, Bush's college transcripts and medical records were all released in full. And, as it turned out, Bush was a slightly better student than John Kerry.
Re: Transcripts & medical records
I assume you're suggestion was tongue-in-cheek, as I would hope you don't think that a campaign to get Obama to turn over this data would be productive for ANYONE, especially Republicans.
RE: Re: Transcripts & medical records
A bit tongue-in-cheek. These records are wholly unproductive in themselves. However, those records should not be controversial, or guarded like state secrets. It's like saying you can't look in my garage. "Oh, it's messy." Hell, everyone's garage is messy. No big deal, right? But at every turn, when people try to ask about Obama's youth, the steel doors come down. Every time. It's the Obama Team's actions that have raised suspicions and controversy where common sense says there shouldn't be any. And I could care less if it makes sense from a Republican/political point of view (though I agree, it would be harmful to harp on it). I'm just curious.
Full revelation of one's life has been the norm for other presidents in the modern era. They've fessed up — or had the media reveal them. When "RatherGate" hit (about Bush's time in the Air National Guard), the White House revealed all they had. I was among the first who saw them when I was covering Bush for The Washington Times (it was my day in the rotation for pool duty). It turned out that there was no "there" there.
The point is this: The Obama team is refusing to reveal portions of Obama's past, even seemingly routine, non-controversial aspects. Perhaps revealing more information, especially of his college transcripts, would burst the bubble of the "genius president"? What else are we to think? Indeed, the lack of candor leaves the field open for all sorts of thinking — most of it worse (I'd hope) than the truth. It's dumber, I think, for Obama to be so loath to reveal ordinarily routine information than that a fringe screams and yells about it. Isn't sunshine the best disinfectant — especially when it can be used to spray upon partisan, loony cockroaches?