The Failing, Flailing Discombobulation of Obama’s Babies
July 7, 2014 4 Comments
~a few choice excepts from my time in thefogbow.com quarantined toilet as the vermin there attempted to filet my Seattle-Vancouver Scenario, but failed. The resident genius demons there are exceedingly clever is their human insights, but their real purpose is nothing other than deflection, obfuscation, and delegitimation of anything that dares question the impeccable pedigree of the Great One, -the socialist’s American “Dear Leader”.~note that these comments are the one’s that are fit to print. You can’t begin to imagine the ones that were not.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I, obama–nation wrote:Well, sammy boy, you just shot your own head off with that fine elucidation. Thanks!
You haven’t answered my question yet about why you are such a lying racist moron. As you haven’t proven to my satisfaction that it’s impossible that you are a lying racist moron, by your own rules, that means that you have admitted that you are a lying racist moron. Thanks, racist moron!
I WIN!! I WIN!! I WIN!! I WIN!!
Adrien Nash has admitted that he’s a lying racist moron!
He also uses the logical argument that “2+2=Aardvark. Or maybe PopTart. In either case, you claimed it equaled four, so you’re WRONG WRONG WRONGY MCWRONGERSON!!!!”
Frank Arduini’s Ten Key Characteristics of Nut-Job Conspiracy Theorists The are worth repeating. Look how many of these fit A. Nash to a tee.
1. Religious zeal.Nut-jobs generally believe that they are participants in a holy / patriotic / moral crusade, and hence their opponents are not merely political or ideological opponents, they are evil infidels.2. Impermeability to incontrovertible fact. It does not matter how conclusively or comprehensively an argument or assertion has been refuted, nut-jobs never abandon an argument once ventured. Nut-job lies never die.3. Willingness to embrace the impossible. Nut-job arguments regularly cross the line from excruciatingly improbable to physically impossible. Nut-jobs fearlessly violate the laws of physics and propose theories that rend the time-space continuum.4. Abhorrence of simplicity (Rube Goldberg’s Razor) . Nut-jobs never settle for a simple solution to a problem when a hopelessly complex and idiotic alternative can be proposed. “Occams Razor” is anathema to nut-jobs.
5. Emotional (and other) projection.
It is almost impossible to read someone else’s emotional state or actually know anything about them across the Internet. So nut-jobs regularly attribute their own emotional states, prejudices and motives to their opponents. This is often also called “Irony blindness.”
6. Anomaly Mining.
Nut-jobs are tireless in their search for minuscule anomalies and coincidences around which they assemble vast complexes of suspicion, most of which are actually irrelevant to their cause. The tiniest and most meaningless detail will often take on a life of its own, rendering their theories even more opaque and incomprehensible to rational observers.
7. Simultaneous contradictory beliefs.
Nut-jobs often imagine at the same time and even in the same sentence that (for example) they are fighting forces which are both super-humanly brilliant and powerful … and completely incompetent.
8. Irrational anticipation of imminent victory.
Nut-jobs are often convinced that they are just one day/argument/case away from completely vanquishing their rhetorical foes. They will believe this for years and years and years and…
9. Inability to comprehend disagreement.
Nut-jobs cannot conceive of anybody honestly disagreeing with them. Therefore anybody who disagrees must be either “part of the conspiracy,” paid to pretend they believe something they do not, or victims of violent extortion.
10. The Appeal to Galileo.
Nut-jobs know that they are considered nut-jobs. So they regularly appeal to “great nut-jobs of history” ; who were eventually proven to not be so nutty after all. Ignoring that Galileo was actually never considered a nut-job in the first place, for every nut-job rehabilitated by history ten thousand nut-jobs resolutely remained nut-jobs.
This is why I have been just hammering one simple fact at him over and over; Obama has Hawaii Birth documentation. Therefore it is not possible he was born elsewhere than in Hawaii.His own acknowledgment that Act 96 made it impossible for Obama to have HDOH birth files without being born in Hawaii torpedoed him.
That’s the way you beat a Gish gallop, you just hammer on the same fact that you have proven over and over and force the guy to say “Yes, I was wrong” no matter how many other shit they try and throw at you to distract you. Because in general, if they say they were wrong about one thing the whole structure of their lies collapses.
The Gish Gallop is mainly to avoid saying they were wrong about that one thing. A Gish Gallop is meant to exhaust you so you will forget about the stuff you have proven and to waste your time. By standing on that one fact that they cannot get away from you torpedo that.
There is no way he could prove his own American birth to the standard he demands of Obama or that Obama has supplied evidence for. And he knows that.
Loren July 23, 2013 There’s a term in skeptical circles called “JAQ-ing off,” an acronym for “Just Asking Questions.” It applies to people who don’t want to admit that they’re being unreasonable or denialist, but instead that they’re ‘just asking questions.’Above, Adrien manages to pose no fewer than 23 questions. And that’s within a space limitation of 1000 words. [MY RESPONSE TO A CHALLENGE AT OBAMACONSPIRACY.COM]One presumes that in order to satisfy Adrien’s curiosity, all of those questions (and whatever additional ones he thinks up) must be answered to his satisfaction.
But some of the questions are implicitly political and subjective (“What naïve fool would assume…”). Some venture into odd tiny conspiracy theories (“Who can show that she didn’t resort to seeking adoptive parents in Canada (Vancouver) because no parents in Washington volunteered to adopt?”). Some demand speculation on the thoughts of dead people (“Why did Obama Sr. not capitalize on having an American child when seeking an extension of his Visa in late August 1961?”)Some are just based on completely false premises. Like “Why does no communication from Hawaii regarding Obama bear the actual signature of a human being?” Well, Loretta Fuddy’s letter of April 25, 2011 has her actual signature on it. (I assume Adrien’s complaint would then be modified to say that there aren’t *enough* communications with signatures on them.)
Similarly, Adrien says “Even Obama himself was careful to never once mention the long-form bc that he appeared before reporters to present.” Except the first thing Obama said in his remarks on April 27, 2011 was “As many of you have been briefed, we provided additional information today about the site of my birth.” So Obama *did* mention it; is Adrien unsatisfied that Obama didn’t use the specific term “long form birth certificate”?
It’s a bizarre definition of “plausible deniability” when he’s giving a televised press conference about a document that was just circulated among the press corps in front of him, where copies were distributed to the press corps, and where the document was scanned in and posted to the White House website. But he thinks there’s somehow “plausible deniability” because Obama didn’t pose for pictures with it?
[HE NOT ONLY DELIBERATELY AVOIDED EVEN MENTIONING IT ONCE, BUT HIS WHITE HOUSE ATTORNEY BOB BAER STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT ALLOW THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE IN THE ROOM WITH OBAMA, REMOVING IT BEFORE HE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO ENTER. TOTAL DISTANCE BETWEEN HE AND IT.]
He’s unhappy that no Hawaiian officials have shown up to testify in any Birther lawsuits (“No Hawaiian official has ever referred to an original Hawaiian hospital birth certificate for Obama.”). But then just two sentences later he asserts that no official from Hawaii should be believed (“No statement made by any Hawaiian official can be taken as true…”). So he demands testimony that he admits he won’t believe?
[NOTE THE DESPERATE ATTEMPT AT FALSE CHARACTERIZATION; “HE’S UNHAPPY…, “HE DEMANDS TESTIMONY…” HE CREATES A STRAW MAN AND THEN KICKS IT DOWN! TRIUMPH!]
And that’s just a cursory view of the general problems above; I’m not about to go line-by-line in detailing the factual errors, logical fallacies, and unreasonable demands.
[AND THAT IS THE STORY OF MY EXPERIENCE AS AN EXPOSER OF THE OBAMA FRAUDULENCE, THEY JUST REFUSE, ALMOST WITHOUT EXCEPTION, TO GO LINE BY LINE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT TO REPEAT THE TRUTH THAT THEY DON’T WANT THEIR READERS TO KNOW. SO INSTEAD THEY SIMPLY RELY ON CRITICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF WHAT IS CONTAINED IN WHAT THEY ARE ATTACKING BUT WITHOUT THE COURAGE TO REPEAT IT.~]
After much study and investigation of the lizard language etymology, the only thing I can say with any degree of certainty is that the English word “research” is roughly equivalent to the word “thinking” in lizard language. Make of that what you will. I will continue my analysis of the lizard language but don’t hold out much hope for making any headway, because I have also discovered another major obstacle to pure translation. In lizard language, the meanings of words change depending on the author, the time of day, the BAC, and whether it is a declarative statement or a response.Without the comprehensive index of those conditions for each lizard language user, it is nigh on impossible to parse out the meaning of any particular comment made in lizard language.US: We have proof to back up our contentions.
HIM: Avocados and philodendrons!
HIM: I double-plus win! With maraschino cherries!y Sugar Magnolia » Mon Jun 30, 2014
We think we’re laughing at him (and we are) but he’s also laughing at us. He throws out this wild shit that even he doesn’t believe just to wind us up and it’s working. Either that, or he’s crazy as a shithouse rat. It’s a toss up at this point. As he goes through our logical, reasonable, fact-based responses, he latches onto a sentence or comment that he can twist into something unrecognizable and responds to that in his lizard language. But he’s fooled us all! He has made us think that lizard language is the same as English, but it’s not. The difference is that even though lizard language uses words that sound like English and are (usually) spelled the same, they have totally different meanings.
the idiot wrote:WHY OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE CANNOT BE BELIEVED
Nobody is reading your insane bullshit senile old man!
“This leaves you with no evidence that President Obama could not have been born in Hawai’i. Care to give up on your “Vancouver scenario”?
Notice the words ” reasons to doubt” are not “could not have been”. What could not have been is that the birth certificates are real. It could have been that he was born in Hawaii, as I’ve already said, but no one could explain how that could be while certainty exists that the birth certificates are fakes. …or were, until the dog ate them.
~claim: “No one remembers him or her.” [Ann Dunham & son in the maternity ward]
~reply: “Except Stig W’s mom. [who remembers a black baby in the hospital in early August of ’61.]
What a pathetic flat-lander response. To open your dogmatic mind a little; I’ll rephrase: No one remembers him AND her. That is not even possible if she gave birth in Honolulu. Days in a maternity ward, other mothers and nurses present constantly. Zero recollections of a young very-white mother with a black baby. No one saw a black African father visiting either.
What time of life would be more memorable than having a child, so how did all of those memories just inexplicably vanish without a trace? Just ask your dumb self: If Stig’s mom couldn’t forget a black baby by itself, how much more would she, like anyone else, have remembered it if in possession of a young white mother?
I wrote: “There’s no public hospital [admissions] record that the public is allowed to examine.”
As is the case for Mr. Nash and every other American citizen.
[“PUBLIC” record open to the PUBLIC! -But no more because Dunham’s name can’t be found in that ancient record. “No “half hand written, and half typed” affidavit in possession of the HDOH that anyone has been allowed to examine even though a supposedly real birth certificate is fully public, nullifying privacy concerns.”]
The “half/half” comment referred to the complete document, including CDC info,
I see. Checking boxes is considered hand writing in flatworld, but not in the real world. It was half HAND-WRITTEN!!! That means it was an application in her own hand-writing explaining how and why her child was born at home. She did NOT type her personal account. She wrote it out and signed it, attesting to its truthfulness.
btw, genius, please explain the clear statement of the governor that “it’s written down” in the archive. Explain how a hospital birth certificate magically changes into half hand-writing. And you talk about me not being rational? You stare reality right in the face and are too blind to see it. How irrational is THAT?
And then explain, how Obama did not waive his privacy concern by releasing his fake pdf image?
Hell, it’s actually ludicrous to point out that he won’t allow anyone to view what supposedly is an identical original of what he released when he will not allow anyone to even exam the fake that was presented once and only once briefly before a press corps that worshiped at his feet. THAT is how you pull off a successful scam! Congratulations Dear Leader! Another hoodwinking of the Public and a BIG FAT one at that.
I wrote: “No Hawaiian official has ever referred to an original Hawaiian hospital birth certificate for Obama.”
No reason why they should have.
Yeah that’s it… it’s ok to play stupid because you are stupid. But perhaps you could explain the purposes of the “NEWS RELEASES”? Were they intended to create even more doubts and leave more unanswered questions? (Or in your deaf, dumb, and blind case; no questions?)
If they were in regard to only one thing, the birth certificate, why did they deliberately avoid describing it in accurate terms unless those terms would have been INaccurate? Please explain.
I wrote: “No Hawaiian official has ever testified under oath as to anything about Obama’s birth record.”
Except when Dr. Fuykino testified to the Hawai’ian legislature.
And….. she said…. nothing about the nature and character of what was in the archive, but even if she had lied, there was no down-side to doing so. The legislature was composed of her “fellow travelers”, so only a deceitful fool would think that stamping her response with the imprimatur of her Democrat allies means a damn thing.
And that is a fact that you, not born yesterday, already know but pretend not to, you dishonest hack.
No statement made by any Hawaiian official can be taken as true because of a state and party and ideological bias toward supporting their favorite Hawaiian son,..Do you mean the Republican party which Governor Lingle and Dr. Fukino were (and are still) members of? [quote]What an outright lie. You just make it up as it suits you. No one has ever asserted that Fukino was republican nor shown any proof. And where but in flatland is a lied-to and deceived governor representative of any ENTIRE POLITICAL PARTY? Your devious distortions reveal your true luciferian nature.
Plus a nice ad-hominem attack against Hawai’i and ad-hominem fallacy against President Obama combo. Dishonest in both form and execution.
Plus a nice pretend, faux naivete about how honest government is, -perfect deflection from the guilt of those who made deceptive or lying statements. btw, pretend genius, how can an “ad-hominem attack” be “dishonest in form”??? You’ll get back to me on that one? Next century?
“How does one prove the legitimacy of a birth certificate from a US state? (hint: ask the agency who issued it)”
Ah… yes. The continued infantile pretense that we all, always and forever, must automatically assume, and trust and believe that every word that proceeds from the pie holes of partisan, political appointee hacks in government are the gods honest truth, regardless of them being actual lies intended to fool the willingly gullible who pretend that they believe crap that no sane person would ever believe.
So basically the abomination is admitting that he is nothing more than a sideshow geek—willing to do anything, no matter how crazy or dishonest, for money. It is, perhaps, fitting that a birther who thinks nothing of bearing false witness against anyone and everyone in an attempt to prop up his ignorant theories (theories, I might add, that are considered ignorant and crazy by other birthers) has admitted that he’s been in the service of Mammon all along. After all, we know that Jesus was a socialist that provided free health care and that the abomination hates everything he stood for.Slartibartfast: Besides, I thought that you earned your money and were leaving- [my lying account of a $1,200 bet that I couldn’t get 1,200 responses at the famous fogbow, which I concocted when that number was racked up. And which therefore was my pretend swan song of goodbye to sewer town.]
Thank you for providing unimpeachable evidence of just how damn gullible you are! Like a third grader. Or a worshipful devotee. Does dishonesty not even exist in your flat-world?
The democrat hacks, including Fuddy, in the HDoH LIED! L-I-E-D!
Fuddy; a team-player. She wasn’t going to let her captain suffer defeat at the hands of the doubters. His mother said he was born in Hawaii, and that was good enough for her.
You know you would have done the same thing that she did. It was only fair to Obama, after all. If his mother, who would have known, said he was born in Honolulu, then why doubt her? Give her kid a pass already and allow him to have the birth certificate that he never had. That is an honest, caring, and fair attitude to take. Is it not? You would have taken it also.
and… so here we are today, debating an affidavit written in obscurity over fifty years ago. But, like the issue of what “natural” and “jurisdiction” mean, seemingly insignificant things can be of gigantic importance when the context is right.