The Post and Email

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34177
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9576

Post by realist » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:23 pm

Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:07 pm
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:49 pm
Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:33 pm
My view is, was, and remains that there was never a good faith basis for anyone to have "questions" regarding Obama's birthplace.
My view was, and remains, that those who have "questions" about President Obama's birthplace do so out of racism.
I think that the controversy over the birth certificate may have been initiated by individuals who really objected to a black president. Once the controversy was in full force, many people began to have questions about the authenticity of President Obama's credentials. However, I think it's unjustified to label all people with questions as racists. I for one could care less whether Obama was black or white. My questions came about because of the ongoing controversy, not because of any racial animosity.
Imagined controversy by a bunch of lunatics.

At the time of his run for president I understood the questioning of whether he was a natural born citizen by those completely uneducated in the the Constitution and, well, missed fifth grade civics class.

Outside of racism, however, I never understood why anyone, anyone, would question the validity of his birth certificate. And only his, by the way.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: The Post and Email

#9577

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:37 pm

:like:

I've stated my position. Brian Reilly's post has not caused me to change it. Realist pretty much covers it.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 22748
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9578

Post by bob » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:41 pm

Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:07 pm
My questions came about because of the ongoing controversy, not because of any racial animosity.
Why was only one candidate held to such extraordinary scrutiny? No one thought twice about, for example, George W. Bush's failing to release his birth certificate, that no hospital has proclaimed itself to be his birthplace, etc.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6973
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9579

Post by Slartibartfast » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:12 pm

Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:33 pm
My view is, was, and remains that there was never a good faith basis for anyone to have "questions" regarding Obama's birthplace.
This is complete and utter unscientific bullshit. There was a good faith basis (and still is) for anyone who isn't an expert of Constitutional law (or hasn't gotten an answer backed up by credible and relevant expertise) and hasn't seen the COLB to have questions regarding President Obama's natural born citizenship (or his place of birth). Otherwise, you are saying that I acted in bad faith (and, in Stern's opinion, was a racist), because I asked about President Obama's natural born citizenship after first encountering birthers at Texas Darlin's blog before the 2008 elections. I was very seriously concerned and didn't know the answer. Of course, I investigated and my ignorance was easy to alleviate -- and now I can no longer question President Obama's natural born citizenship in good faith. But I can still question, for instance, Rafael Cruz's, as :sterngard: does.

There are, of course, usually many tells in how you go about investigating if you are not acting in good faith. If you wont say what it will take to change your mind (or, even worse, simply wont change your mind period), you aren't acting in good faith. If you don't investigate by trying to prove yourself wrong (i.e. establish the conditions which would change your mind), you aren't acting in good faith. And if you don't consider any other scientific evidence you come by on its merits, you aren't acting in good faith. Too, also, avoiding any of these willfully is pretty much the definition of "bad faith"

Actually, this seems to be tautological from an epistemological point of view. If you act with scientific integrity, then your beliefs are what is most likely to be true given the evidence you have. In other words, your faith is good. If you fail to follow a scientific methodology, then there is a chance that your faith is bad (i.e. you are wrong), which increases to certainty over time.

But don't take my word for it, listen to what Tommy Jefferson had to say...
I think the educational and psychological studies I mentioned are examples of what I would like to call Cargo Cult Science. In the South Seas there is a Cargo Cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they’ve arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas—he’s the controller—and they wait for the airplanes to land. They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn’t work. No airplanes land. So I call these things Cargo Cult Science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential, because the planes don’t land.

Now it behooves me, of course, to tell you what they’re missing. But it would he just about as difficult to explain to the South Sea Islanders how they have to arrange things so that they get some wealth in their system. It is not something simple like telling them how to improve the shapes of the earphones. But there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in Cargo Cult Science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school—we never explicitly say what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It’s a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you’re doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you’ve eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can—if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong—to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition.

In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction or another.
"Just asking questions" is never wrong -- you just have to have the integrity to seek out the answers you don't want to hear, listen to them, and take them to heart. At least that's what I believe and strive to do myself.

Addendum: Sorry Stern, but you're saying that Brian was a racist because he was exposed to propaganda that he wanted to believe and, after making a good faith effort to evaluate that propaganda, decided that it wasn't correct. I say that he proved his integrity on the birther issue beyond question, something that no anti-birther can ever do (since President Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen). Too, also, Realist, there is no way to know, a priori, that the birther foo-foo-raw was an "imagined controversy by a bunch of lunatics". Although it is easily determined on closer inspection, you can't say that the birthers, the 9/11 truthers, or the advocates of the big bang theory1 are acting in bad faith until you see them using unscientific methodologies.
  • 1. I am completely serious about this and can defend this statement. The big bang theory, true or not, is exactly the kind of cargo cult science that Feynman was describing.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: The Post and Email

#9580

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:23 pm

Slarti - hate to break it to you, but after candidate Obama released his short form birth certificate, that was it. People who persisted in questioning it, on various grounds, did so because of the extra melanin in Barack Obama's genes.

As for Cruz, he wasn't born in the United States. I don't question his birth certificate. He is just not a "natural born citizen" as that term was used in the 1790s.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 22748
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9581

Post by bob » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:33 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:23 pm
Slarti - hate to break it to you, but after candidate Obama released his short form birth certificate, that was it. People who persisted in questioning it, on various grounds, did so because of the extra melanin in Barack Obama's genes.
Too also: there was about a six-month gap between Obama releasing the COLB and Donofrio inventing the two-citizen-parent "rule." Propter hoc, etc., notwithstanding, that notable time gap suggests this "rule" was "discovered" to act as a facially neutral "concern."


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34177
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9582

Post by realist » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:33 pm

Slarti wrote:Too, also, Realist, there is no way to know, a priori, that the birther foo-foo-raw was an "imagined controversy by a bunch of lunatics". Although it is easily determined on closer inspection, you can't say that the birthers, the 9/11 truthers, or the advocates of the big bang theory1 are acting in bad faith until you see them using unscientific methodologies.
As you stated above, this is complete and utter bullshit.

One does not have to walk through the pig pen to know what one is stepping in.

As for the Constitutional question, I stated my position that I could see legitimate questions asked as to whether he was indeed a natural born citizen for those uneducated in the Constitution or missed fifth grad civics.

As to the questioning of the legitimacy of the BC, I will now and forever stand by my statement that it was/is an imagined controversy by a bunch of (racist) lunatics.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: The Post and Email

#9583

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:08 pm

:like:



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8402
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9584

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:19 pm

For me, determining whether a question is reasonable or in good faith includes asking why the question is being asked.

There were no questions raised about any other candidate's citizenship, either in that election or any other election within recent memory. There was nothing that made Obama's birthplace any more mysterious than any other candidate's. So why were questions raised at all?

This is particularly true after the COLB was released - which predated, as you'll recall, any claims about Obama's birthplace.

No candidate before Obama faced demands that he prove his birthplace, so why was it reasonable to ever question Obama's? In my view, that was true at the start; it was certainly true by the time teabaggers , race-baiters, and other assorted deplorables demanded criminal investigations into the veracity of the proof of his birthplace.
Edit: My phone just autocorrected "teabagger" to "teenager," which is a calumnity upon the teenagers.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 1052
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am

Re: The Post and Email

#9585

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:42 pm

I don't want to get into a fight with Starti, but why would Cruz not be a Natural Born Citizen, when nobody questioned George Romney's citizenship?



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8402
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9586

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:54 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:12 pm


Addendum: Sorry Stern, but you're saying that Brian was a racist because he was exposed to propaganda that he wanted to believe and, after making a good faith effort to evaluate that propaganda, decided that it wasn't correct. I say that he proved his integrity on the birther issue beyond question, something that no anti-birther can ever do (since President Obama is, in fact, a natural born citizen).
I'll be willing to consider the possibility that Reilly might possibly have some integrity, but I'm gong to have to see his personal apology to Alvin Onaka first. In the long form original, and without layers.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14355
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Post and Email

#9587

Post by Reality Check » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:56 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:42 pm
I don't want to get into a fight with Starti, but why would Cruz not be a Natural Born Citizen, when nobody questioned George Romney's citizenship?
George Romney's eligibility was questioned by one or two scholars in 1968. We beat this around a lot last year in the Cruz thread. I disagree with Stern and Mike D. I think Cruz is eligible. The courts danced around it a bit in the cases filed against Cruz, non of which made it through standing, mootness and other sustainability issues.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 14572
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: The Post and Email

#9588

Post by Suranis » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:57 pm

All I know is that a Birther postd at Doc's the day before the release of the LFBC "Obama could end this tomorrow! All he has to do this is to release a certified copy of his long form birth certificate." And then, Obama released it tomorrow. And here we are.


"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked.” - Thomas Moore

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14355
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Post and Email

#9589

Post by Reality Check » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:05 pm

Suranis wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:57 pm
All I know is that a Birther postd at Doc's the day before the release of the LFBC "Obama could end this tomorrow! All he has to do this is to release a certified copy of his long form birth certificate." And then, Obama released it tomorrow. And here we are.
We read that line a hundred times and each time it was a damnable lie.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22748
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9590

Post by bob » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:25 pm

Reality Check wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:56 pm
Grumpy Old Guy wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:42 pm
I don't want to get into a fight with Starti, but why would Cruz not be a Natural Born Citizen, when nobody questioned George Romney's citizenship?
George Romney's eligibility was questioned by one or two scholars in 1968.
Correct: "concerns" were raised about G. Romney, but he eventually existed the race before such concerns became lawsuits.

The courts danced around it a bit in the cases filed against Cruz, non of which made it through standing, mootness and other sustainability issues.
In Pennsylvania, the trial court ruled Cruz was eligible because his citizenship at birth made him a natural-born citizen. SCOPA affirmed that ruling. IIRC, the administrative hearing in New Jersey (with Apuzzo!) also came to the same conclusion; Apuzzo's appealed that ruling, but it was eventually abandoned.

Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:19 pm
No candidate before Obama faced demands that he prove his birthplace, so why was it reasonable to ever question Obama's?
The typical birther typically responds with, "ALL THE DISCREPENCIES!!!", i.e., various newspapers articles' inaccuracies, the statements by various Kenyan officials, (Berg's twisting of) the paternal grandmother's account, the publisher's pamphlet, etc. Most of which sound like post-hoc rationalizations, as I'm guessing somewhere on the internet someone once said George W. Bush was really born in Toronto (or China, or wherever).


To go from the hypothetical generalization to the specific, perhaps Brian Reilly can reconstruct his thought process from the start of Obama's candidacy that led him down the road it did.


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: The Post and Email

#9591

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:52 pm

Re Romney's eligibility -- good question.



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8402
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9592

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:52 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:25 pm
Mikedunford wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:19 pm
No candidate before Obama faced demands that he prove his birthplace, so why was it reasonable to ever question Obama's?
The typical birther typically responds with, "ALL THE DISCREPENCIES!!!", i.e., various newspapers articles' inaccuracies, the statements by various Kenyan officials, (Berg's twisting of) the paternal grandmother's account, the publisher's pamphlet, etc. Most of which sound like post-hoc rationalizations, as I'm guessing somewhere on the internet someone once said George W. Bush was really born in Toronto (or China, or wherever).
The "discrepancies" are clearly post-hoc, as one has to drill down well beyond the point any other President's birth was examined before the information that makes up the alleged discrepancies begin to appear.
To go from the hypothetical generalization to the specific, perhaps Brian Reilly can reconstruct his thought process from the start of Obama's candidacy that led him down the road it did.
I'm less interested in his starting point than I am in hearing why he decided to question the veracity of people at the Hawai‘i Department of Health by demanding that a sheriff, already internationally known for his disrespect for the rule of law, investigate the long form birth certificate. I'd also be interested in hearing whether he still believes, as he once quoted as saying, that "the lord's hand" was involved when the sheriff, at Reilly's personal instigation, launched an investigation into whether President Barack Obama was really an American. Finally, I'm curious as to what measures, if any, he's taken to make amends for the real harm that his dive into baseless conspiracy theories caused to real people.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 6899
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9593

Post by Orlylicious » Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:31 pm

I always agree with Realist. :P And excellent comments all around. It does seem that there were levels of stupidity: many Republicans hated everything about President Obama and latched on to anything to vent (see: Miki Booth). Speaking of Miki, she's out of Facebook Jail and here's one of her lovely supporters today:

Lori.JPG


Comes with the territory, Bush 43 got it and Donald is getting it too. But Rharon must have been dropped on her head, she's digging back to 2012 to find something, anything, to talk about :lol:

Did the State of Illinois Promote a Birth Certificate Forgery as Authentic?
On Thursday, January 25, 2018No Comment

“NO BASIS IN FACT OR LAW”
by Sharon Rondeau

(Jan. 25, 2018) — A ballot challenge filed in January 2012 in the state of Illinois by registered voter Michael D. Jackson claiming that then-candidate Barack Hussein Obama was not constitutionally eligible to serve as president was responded to with a motion which included a copy of an image purported to represent Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate.
***

On Sunday evening, The Post & Email submitted a request to the ILSBOE through its designated FOIA officer, Heather Kimmons, requesting “*All documents pertaining to case # 12 SOEB GP 104, which was a ballot objection heard on January 24, 2012 and January 27, 2012, with a final determination produced on February 2, 2012.”

Our request continued:

*I would specifically like to obtain a copy of the Candidate’s “Motion to Strike and Dismiss the Objector’s Petition,” including all attachments which might have accompanied it.

On Tuesday, we received the following from Kimmons:

Responsive records are attached. This will complete your FOIA to the State Board of Elections

The email contained a 30-page attachment: Obama Objection

The majority of the responsive documentation consisted of Jackson’s filing on September 13, 2012 of a general-election challenge to Obama’s placement on the Illinois ballot and contained press releases from then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, under whose authority Zullo conducted his probe, and documents released by the U.S. State Department showing that Barack Hussein Obama of Kenya was present in the U.S. on a student visa and returned to his home nation in 1964.

On page 25 of Kimmons’s release, Hearing Examiner James Tenuto wrote that “The birth certificate attached as Exhibit A clearly establishes the Candidate’s eligibility for office as a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ [sic] with a recommendation that the “Motion to Strike and Dismiss the Objector’s Petition” submitted by the candidate’s counsel “be granted.”
https://www.thepostemail.com/2018/01/25 ... authentic/

Too big to attach but it's funny. PDF at https://www.thepostemail.com/wp-content ... ection.pdf


Why aren't we filing FOIA requests? There must be some interesting information to discover...


ETA: Bob wrote a great post about this, it's at viewtopic.php?p=952377#p952377
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.



Brian Reilly
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:11 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9594

Post by Brian Reilly » Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:51 pm

Mike Dunford:

"I'm less interested in his starting point than I am in hearing why he decided to question the veracity of people at the Hawai‘i Department of Health by demanding that a sheriff, already internationally known for his disrespect for the rule of law, investigate the long form birth certificate. I'd also be interested in hearing whether he still believes, as he once quoted as saying, that "the lord's hand" was involved when the sheriff, at Reilly's personal instigation, launched an investigation into whether President Barack Obama was really an American. Finally, I'm curious as to what measures, if any, he's taken to make amends for the real harm that his dive into baseless conspiracy theories caused to real people."

Brian Reilly:

As I have said in the past, the ongoing endless back and forth of controversy (conflict) about President Obama's birth narrative seemed like a simple thing to resolve. People on the left, said everything was legit, people on the right were adamant that the long form birth certificate PDF was not legitimate. I started to review the PDF document myself, admittedly only with basic computer operation skills and no computer forensic background skills or training, and I found what I considered to be peculiarities which was first and foremost, the last digit "1" in the President's birth certificate number 10641, not understanding what caused the last digit "1" to look different than the first digit "1" in 10641. Growing up with exact paper copies made by Xerox machines, I was expecting there to be perfection in the PDF representations. ( I later spoke with a computer scientist in Berlin who told me how the PDF process works. Also, when I was with the CCP, I made PDF copies of documents sent from the CCP to the MCSO. I soon learned the PDF copies that I made, did not exactly match the original document. That was an eye opener for me. I also reviewed RC's work with the Xerox 7600 series office machines and I learned much form RC and Doc. C's website. ) When I petitioned Arpaio to do the Obama PDF investigation, I originally thought it was amazing how everything fell into place getting the third largest sheriff's office in the nation to investigate the authenticity of the PDF document. My expectation was that Arpaio would use all of the assets at his disposal to authenticate the document. He didn't do this but turned the project over to the all volunteer Cold Case Posse. What I thought would eventually reveal the truth about President Obama's birth certificate, actually revealed the truth about President Obama and about Sheriff Joe Arpaio. And yes, as a believer in Christ I, believe his hand is in everything. This whole process exposed Joe Arpaio for who he is and it proved to me that President Obama's PDF of the long form birth certificate contains legitimate, verified information. Anyone who has any doubts can view any of the 3 Hawaii Verifications of Birth that were issued back in 2012, and see proof that President Obama was born in America. While I didn't start or was an active part of this controversy back in 2007-2008, I believe that my request to Arpaio in 2011, helped to bring the controversy to a conclusion for anyone who wanted to review the Hawaii Department of Health Verification of Birth that was issued to the Arizona Secretary of State, Ken Bennett on May 22, 2012. There still remains some on the right who will choose to remain ignorant and will not accept the truth that convinced me. And finally, I'd really enjoy writing to President Obama. Do any of you have his mailing address? Maybe he'll answer my correspondence? President Trump has never replied to my correspondence.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 22748
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9595

Post by bob » Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:58 pm

Mike Dunford wrote:Finally, I'm curious as to what measures, if any, he's taken to make amends for the real harm that his dive into baseless conspiracy theories caused to real people.
I didn't see Reilly's response to this part. :think:


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: The Post and Email

#9596

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:03 pm

So, Brian, if I send you a digital picture of Scarlett Johansson and you find some kind of supposed digital anomaly on it (or some loon tells you there is some anomaly that you can't rall fathom yourself), does that mean you question whether she exists?

I find your convoluted "explanation" rather bizarre. Hawai'i said Barack Obama was born there and provided a short form birth certificate. Everything else stems from the fact he had a funny name and was only half white. To me, that's racism.

I doubt very much President Obama would have any interest in corresponding with you.



User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 6899
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9597

Post by Orlylicious » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:16 pm

While I agree about Mike's question about the harm caused, and hope Brian can explain, Joe Arpaio is the responsible party. If he hadn't been wanting to milk birthers for cash (which he admitted was a motivation) Zullo and Co. wouldn't have gotten anywhere. I admire that Brian's coming forward and discussing it, as well as expressing regret for how out of control it got. Here's Arpaio in his own words from "The Joe Show". Have you seen this clip Brian? Seems like he was just using you all.





User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8402
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9598

Post by Mikedunford » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:31 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:58 pm
Mike Dunford wrote:Finally, I'm curious as to what measures, if any, he's taken to make amends for the real harm that his dive into baseless conspiracy theories caused to real people.
I didn't see Reilly's response to this part. :think:
Nor did I; apparently, a more direct explanation may be required.

Brian:

You understand, do you not, that when you took your request to Arpaio, you were suggesting that Dr. Alvin Onaka was complicit in a fraud on the American people. You, personally, saw fit to impugn his integrity. And you literally chose to impugn his integrity as it relates to the area of his life's work. And you did so on the basis of your own analysis of a pdf - something you had no knowledge about or experience in, and predictably enough performed with utter incompetence. You then took your accusations to Joe Arpaio, a man who already had an international reputation for using his office to target political opponents.* The result, as you well know, was a press conference that was covered in the international media, in which Onaka's work was further impugned by Arpaio.

We know how much that troubled you - because it was after that point, was it not, that you accepted the badge, car, and gas card?

How do you think that made Dr. Onaka feel? Particularly when Joe Arpaio - a man you personally asked to conduct the investigation despite the fact that he was already well-known for using the power of his office against political opponents at the time you went to him - went on to make public accusations which achieved national press coverage? I can assure you, Dr. Onaka was not ignorant of the accusations that were made. I strongly suspect that he was hurt by the implication that he would perpetuate a fraud at all, let alone in an area in which he had invested so many years - decades - of his life.

Dr. Onaka is not the only person that was harmed by the downslope effects of the little snowball that you decided to start rolling. But he's as good a place to start as any.


*Literally an international reputation; I've been asked about his rounding up of reporters and county officials by foreign attorneys I've had drinks with, in bars in other countries. This is why I, while acknowledging Orlylicious' point about Joe's role, hold Reilly equally culpable.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 14572
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: The Post and Email

#9599

Post by Suranis » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:40 pm

Image


"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked.” - Thomas Moore

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 5146
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9600

Post by Sam the Centipede » Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:37 pm

Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:51 pm
What I thought would eventually reveal the truth about President Obama's birth certificate, actually revealed the truth about President Obama and about Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
The truth was already known about Barack Obama, but you chose to jump into a cesspool of dishonesty and nonsense to swim with racist birthers.

And the truth was already known about Arpaio, that he is a racist, abusive, fascistic scofflaw. Nobody in their right mind would expect honest behavior from that appaling person.
Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:51 pm
And yes, as a believer in Christ I, believe his hand is in everything.
:o Jesus told you to join with the racists in their campaign of lying and hatred? Perhaps you should read more of Jesus's teachings instead of using it as an cover for your complicity in the promotion of birther fantasies.
Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:51 pm
While I didn't start or was an active part of this controversy back in 2007-2008, I believe that my request to Arpaio in 2011, helped to bring the controversy to a conclusion for anyone who wanted to review the Hawaii Department of Health Verification of Birth that was issued to the Arizona Secretary of State, Ken Bennett on May 22, 2012.
:doh: You live on which planet?
Brian Reilly wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:51 pm
And finally, I'd really enjoy writing to President Obama. Do any of you have his mailing address? Maybe he'll answer my correspondence? .
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Why do you think Mr. Obama might be interested in reading a letter about the writer's collusion with racist liars and fools, and the writer's assertion that the bigotry and calumnies were justified because his personal deity mandated that Mr. Obama be vilified by the scum of Arizona?



Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”