Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

d-usa wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Easy E wrote:Isn't this just a continuation of a trend we have been seeing since the start of the Cold War?

Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus during the ACW.

And he freed the slaves, allowing Obama to become president so that he could write this executive order. Clearly this goes deeper than we realize.

Maybe they are both templars, and we have had Assassin's attack the key presidents over the years?

Frazzled wrote:

reds8n wrote: I was thinking we'd just make you Queen and be done with it.

You get two birthdays a year !

I think a Frazzled in a giant Queen Elizabeth dress, white makeup, powdered wig, Remington 870 with matching gunbelts bandido style, sitting on a throne surrounded by slightly restive wiener dogs, would be just the thing to insure future safety for the US.

I mean, even if you were Al Qaeda, would you with that?

I thought you guys in Texas called that Friday night?

alarmingrick wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

reds8n wrote: I was thinking we'd just make you Queen and be done with it.

You get two birthdays a year !

I think a Frazzled in a giant Queen Elizabeth dress, white makeup, powdered wig, Remington 870 with matching gunbelts bandido style, sitting on a throne surrounded by slightly restive wiener dogs, would be just the thing to insure future safety for the US.

I mean, even if you were Al Qaeda, would you with that?

I thought you guys in Texas called that Friday night?

Tuesday night. Thats too tame for proper Friday partying.

It seems to me that alarmist nonsense like the claims in the OP actually make it harder to have a conversation about the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president. I suspect the OP and the writer of the article he linked don't really care about that, because they're really not that interested in issues of governance and effective checks on power. I think they're much more interested in having their daily freakout over the President, which they will continue to have until someone from their side wins an election, at which point issues like the above will become entirely irrelevant.

sebster wrote:It seems to me that alarmist nonsense like the claims in the OP actually make it harder to have a conversation about the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president. I suspect the OP and the writer of the article he linked don't really care about that, because they're really not that interested in issues of governance and effective checks on power. I think they're much more interested in having their daily freakout over the President, which they will continue to have until someone from their side wins an election, at which point issues like the above will become entirely irrelevant.

Well, to be fair, I suspect the quoted author is more interested in getting hits (making money) than anything else.

I love the OT during election season.

The lulz are free and easy.

dogma wrote:Well, to be fair, I suspect the quoted author is more interested in getting hits (making money) than anything else.

Fair point.

sebster wrote:It seems to me that alarmist nonsense like the claims in the OP actually make it harder to have a conversation about the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president. I suspect the OP and the writer of the article he linked don't really care about that, because they're really not that interested in issues of governance and effective checks on power. I think they're much more interested in having their daily freakout over the President, which they will continue to have until someone from their side wins an election, at which point issues like the above will become entirely irrelevant.

It's amazing how you can psychoanalyze people and their intentions over the internet, having never met them.

It must be amazing to be such a pollyanna that you can live with your head in the sand.

You must think there has never been a politician that grasped for more power than his due.

Regards,

Phanatik wrote:[It must be amazing to be such a pollyanna that you can live with your head in the sand.

What do you mean by pollyanna? Is this a reference to Dolittle's parrot?

Never heard that one before. Ostrich yes, Pollyanna, no. Must be a regional thing

Blackskullandy wrote:

Phanatik wrote:[It must be amazing to be such a pollyanna that you can live with your head in the sand.

What do you mean by pollyanna? Is this a reference to Dolittle's parrot?

Never heard that one before. Ostrich yes, Pollyanna, no. Must be a regional thing

You ever been close to a parrot? You don't with parrots. Parrots with you.

CT GAMER wrote:Besides Dakka is contractually obligated to have one of these tinfoil hat wearing threads open at all times...

Technically, we have two of those today!

Frazzled wrote:

Blackskullandy wrote:

Phanatik wrote:[It must be amazing to be such a pollyanna that you can live with your head in the sand.

What do you mean by pollyanna? Is this a reference to Dolittle's parrot?

Never heard that one before. Ostrich yes, Pollyanna, no. Must be a regional thing

You ever been close to a parrot? You don't with parrots. Parrots with you.

Oh yes, yes-indeedy-do. My better half's best mate has an African Grey that with every one. Psychotic little .

Ouze wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:Besides Dakka is contractually obligated to have one of these tinfoil hat wearing threads open at all times...

Technically, we have two of those today!

Of course it's a tinfoil exercise to look into whether the U.S. president is valid or not. Why should any American care about that?
Of course birth certificates distributed over the internet can't be faked.
Of course democrat politicians don't have a proven track record of fraud or corruption.
Of course a sheriff's department can't be trusted.
Of course investigative experts can't tell the difference between xerox and photoshop.

"These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along."

Regards,

Of course it's okay to look into exactly where a republican president spent his national guard time.
Of course it's also okay for the mainstream media to fake documents to hurt his credibility. He's a republican!

That is a lovely looking dog.

Yours?

MrDwhitey wrote:That is a lovely looking dog.

Yours?

Oh yeah. I have his birth certificate to prove it.

Best,

Ouze wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:Besides Dakka is contractually obligated to have one of these tinfoil hat wearing threads open at all times...

Technically, we have two of those today!

I was able to hack into the secret government surveillance network and catch one of the Dakkanauts posting in their natural habitat:

Phanatik wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:That is a lovely looking dog.

Yours?

Oh yeah. I have his birth certificate to prove it.

Best,

They do those for dogs? I assume that it's for pedigree ones, as ours never had one. I don't even know what she is, bar being a mongrel.

Damn thing is 16, almost 17 now and she still runs faster than I do.

Frazzled wrote:

reds8n wrote: I was thinking we'd just make you Queen and be done with it.

You get two birthdays a year !

I think a Frazzled in a giant Queen Elizabeth dress, white makeup, powdered wig, Remington 870 with matching gunbelts bandido style, sitting on a throne surrounded by slightly restive wiener dogs, would be just the thing to insure future safety for the US.

I mean, even if you were Al Qaeda, would you with that?

No frazzled. The gun would be in your wig. And so would a grenade so you can throw it and turn it into a smoke bomb.

I suspect one of the first things President Obama will do with his new "total takeover" powers is dramatically reduce the American people's access to tin foil. The thread on that story should be called "Obama another step closer to total takeover."

Phanatik wrote:
It's amazing how you can psychoanalyze people and their intentions over the internet, having never met them.

Given your posting history, and the particular lack of evidence for the claim made in the subject of this thread, making the claim Sebster did about your internet persona (which doesn't require meeting you) seems perfectly valid.

Phanatik wrote:
It must be amazing to be such a pollyanna that you can live with your head in the sand.

You must think there has never been a politician that grasped for more power than his due.

Simply because politicians have sought more power in the past does not mean that all politicians, or even this particular politician, seek more power, or even more power in all sectors.

More precisely, its plainly true that this EO is not about grasping for power, its merely a clarification regarding how an existential power will be used in the event that it is used.

Phanatik wrote:
Of course it's a tinfoil exercise to look into whether the U.S. president is valid or not. Why should any American care about that?
Of course birth certificates distributed over the internet can't be faked.
Of course democrat politicians don't have a proven track record of fraud or corruption.
Of course a sheriff's department can't be trusted.
Of course investigative experts can't tell the difference between xerox and photoshop.

Of course the sources I want to trust aren't feeding my confirmation bias.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:I suspect one of the first things President Obama will do with his new "total takeover" powers is dramatically reduce the American people's access to tin foil. The thread on that story should be called "Obama another step closer to total takeover."

Then there will be nothing to stop the great Obama-MLB conspiracy.

Phanatik wrote:Of course it's a tinfoil exercise to look into whether the U.S. president is valid or not. Why should any American care about that?
Of course birth certificates distributed over the internet can't be faked.
Of course democrat politicians don't have a proven track record of fraud or corruption.
Of course a sheriff's department can't be trusted.
Of course investigative experts can't tell the difference between xerox and photoshop.

"These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along."

Regards,

Of course it's okay to look into exactly where a republican president spent his national guard time.
Of course it's also okay for the mainstream media to fake documents to hurt his credibility. He's a republican!

While I know perfectly well the fruitlessness of arguing with a birfer, I will do so anyway.

1.) It's not a tinfoil exercise to check to see if a president is valid or not. It is to continue to do so despite incredible amounts of evidence that he is was born in the United States.
2.) What should he have done, mailed a copy to everyone? It's 2012.
3.) Right, no Republican has ever been convicted of corruption. C'mon bro, try.
4.) The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is not exactly a bastion of investigative excellence. I wish they were less concerned with their jusdiction-lacking investigation of the President, and more concerned with, you know, investigating sex crimes. But I guess catching child rapists isn't as high a priority for Sheriff Joe, since he's busy helping celebrities drive tanks into homes and shooting puppies.
5.) I haven't seen any of the credentials of this "investigative expert". Perhaps has a degree in "Cyberspace".

So far as your other laughable assertions,

1.) You're arguing that it should be OK to look into presidential vital records (like birth certificates) but not into vital records (military discharge papers)? Wow, consistency really took it in the shorts on this one. Which is it?
2.) It wasn't ok for the MSM to fake documents to hurt his credibility (which isn't actually what happened, but that's too subtle a distinction for this argument). That's why the producers behind the story were fired, Dan Rather was forced to resign, and was forced to proffer an on-air retraction and apology. That's pretty much the textbook definition of admitting something was "not OK".

Phanatik wrote:It's amazing how you can psychoanalyze people and their intentions over the internet, having never met them.

Noticing that someone is posting something that's completely ridiculous, and posing an answer to why they'd post something that's completely ridiculous isn't psychoanalysis.

You must think there has never been a politician that grasped for more power than his due.

In my previous answer I mentioned "the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president". It was the first fething line of my answer and you still missed it. That is just pathetic.

Anyhow, my point was that 'OMG here's a largely fictional story about the President totally about to consume complete power' and other such nonsense makes people dismissive of real encroachment of power by government and the president. I was asking you to be more responsible, stop making noise over obviously ridiculous nonsense, so that when stories of actual substance on the issue do come out they're not drowned out by your silliness.

You make people concerned with the growth of government power look bad. If that's a cause you're genuinely interested in, then you'll stop being silly. On the other hand, if you just like getting your daily dose of doom and jumping on to the internet to argue about it, then by all means carry on. Exactly where that leaves, psychoanalytically, is beyond my paygrade, but politically it makes you as a meaningless noise machine.

What do people in power always want? More power.

Ouze wrote:

Phanatik wrote:Of course it's a tinfoil exercise to look into whether the U.S. president is valid or not. Why should any American care about that?
Of course birth certificates distributed over the internet can't be faked.
Of course democrat politicians don't have a proven track record of fraud or corruption.
Of course a sheriff's department can't be trusted.
Of course investigative experts can't tell the difference between xerox and photoshop.

"These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along."

Regards,

Of course it's okay to look into exactly where a republican president spent his national guard time.
Of course it's also okay for the mainstream media to fake documents to hurt his credibility. He's a republican!

While I know perfectly well the fruitlessness of arguing with a birfer, I will do so anyway.

1.) It's not a tinfoil exercise to check to see if a president is valid or not. It is to continue to do so despite incredible amounts of evidence that he is was born in the United States.
2.) What should he have done, mailed a copy to everyone? It's 2012.
3.) Right, no Republican has ever been convicted of corruption. C'mon bro, try.
4.) The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is not exactly a bastion of investigative excellence. I wish they were less concerned with their jusdiction-lacking investigation of the President, and more concerned with, you know, investigating sex crimes. But I guess catching child rapists isn't as high a priority for Sheriff Joe, since he's busy helping celebrities drive tanks into homes and shooting puppies.
5.) I haven't seen any of the credentials of this "investigative expert". Perhaps has a degree in "Cyberspace".

So far as your other laughable assertions,

1.) You're arguing that it should be OK to look into presidential vital records (like birth certificates) but not into vital records (military discharge papers)? Wow, consistency really took it in the shorts on this one. Which is it?
2.) It wasn't ok for the MSM to fake documents to hurt his credibility (which isn't actually what happened, but that's too subtle a distinction for this argument). That's why the producers behind the story were fired, Dan Rather was forced to resign, and was forced to proffer an on-air retraction and apology. That's pretty much the textbook definition of admitting something was "not OK".

Header: Birther, not birfer. Trying to label me to shut down discussion won't work. It says nothing about me but more about you.

1. What incredible amounts? If there were incredible amounts lying around somewhere, there wouldn't be an issue. Obama brought this on himself by stonewalling for so long.
2. Have a presser, hand out copies to the media. viola! Sending out a layered electronic document just raises more doubts.
3. We're not talking about a sitting republican president that won't provide documentation concerning many things from his birth to school records.
4. It might surprise you to learn that a sheriff's department can investigate more than one thing at a time. It's no surprise that mistakes can be made. I suppose I could ask what slipped past Janet Reno while she was driving tanks into buildings burning children to death, or targeting americans for assassination? (Waco, Ruby Ridge)
5. Since you have not vetted the investigative experts, they could not possibly be experts? Just, wow.

6. I never said discharge papers shouldn't be investigated. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the left.
7. Fired. Resignations. Apologies. Sounds like something devious happened. But that's only "not okay," whereas looking into why Obama doesn't provide the normal background material gets you labelled a birther. Again, different standards for the right/left.

Regards,

No, if we're still discussing the President's birth certificate at this point, it's birfer.

sebster wrote:

Phanatik wrote:It's amazing how you can psychoanalyze people and their intentions over the internet, having never met them.

Noticing that someone is posting something that's completely ridiculous, and posing an answer to why they'd post something that's completely ridiculous isn't psychoanalysis.

You must think there has never been a politician that grasped for more power than his due.

In my previous answer I mentioned "the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president". It was the first fething line of my answer and you still missed it. That is just pathetic.

Anyhow, my point was that 'OMG here's a largely fictional story about the President totally about to consume complete power' and other such nonsense makes people dismissive of real encroachment of power by government and the president. I was asking you to be more responsible, stop making noise over obviously ridiculous nonsense, so that when stories of actual substance on the issue do come out they're not drowned out by your silliness.

You make people concerned with the growth of government power look bad. If that's a cause you're genuinely interested in, then you'll stop being silly. On the other hand, if you just like getting your daily dose of doom and jumping on to the internet to argue about it, then by all means carry on. Exactly where that leaves, psychoanalytically, is beyond my paygrade, but politically it makes you as a meaningless noise machine.

Firstly, if I remember correctly, you are in australia? Some might consider it "silly" for someone down under to lecture americans on what they should and shouldn't get concerned about. You tend the barbie in your backyard, and we'll tend ours. It's just possible that we have a closer eye on what's going on in our own backyard than you do.

Secondly, this administration has shown a willingness to operate outside of the law, so we can go "hmm" whenever we want to when he does something. And in general, the federal government since the civil war has been grasping more and more power, so yes it could be said to be yet another step.

Lastly, its not your place to ask me to do anything. If you can't stand a provocative title about a hot-button issue, stay out of the OT .

Regards,

Dat Dog Bites!

Phanatik wrote:

sebster wrote:

Phanatik wrote:It's amazing how you can psychoanalyze people and their intentions over the internet, having never met them.

Noticing that someone is posting something that's completely ridiculous, and posing an answer to why they'd post something that's completely ridiculous isn't psychoanalysis.

You must think there has never been a politician that grasped for more power than his due.

In my previous answer I mentioned "the steady erosion of liberties and the general increase in the power of the president". It was the first fething line of my answer and you still missed it. That is just pathetic.

Anyhow, my point was that 'OMG here's a largely fictional story about the President totally about to consume complete power' and other such nonsense makes people dismissive of real encroachment of power by government and the president. I was asking you to be more responsible, stop making noise over obviously ridiculous nonsense, so that when stories of actual substance on the issue do come out they're not drowned out by your silliness.

You make people concerned with the growth of government power look bad. If that's a cause you're genuinely interested in, then you'll stop being silly. On the other hand, if you just like getting your daily dose of doom and jumping on to the internet to argue about it, then by all means carry on. Exactly where that leaves, psychoanalytically, is beyond my paygrade, but politically it makes you as a meaningless noise machine.

Firstly, if I remember correctly, you are in australia? Some might consider it "silly" for someone down under to lecture americans on what they should and shouldn't get concerned about. You tend the barbie in your backyard, and we'll tend ours. It's just possible that we have a closer eye on what's going on in our own backyard than you do.

Secondly, this administration has shown a willingness to operate outside of the law, so we can go "hmm" whenever we want to when he does something. And in general, the federal government since the civil war has been grasping more and more power, so yes it could be said to be yet another step.

Lastly, its not your place to ask me to do anything. If you can't stand a provocative title about a hot-button issue, stay out of the OT .

Regards,

Perhaps you guys need a time out from World affairs so you can get this "niggle" running a country process sorted out? In fairness I know you've only had a few hundred years to get it nailed down. It does seem odd that the longer you have, the worse it gets

Phanatik, if you truly believe that Obama is trying to take over the United States, or that there are serious doubts as to his birth in the United States, or that your adorable dog gives you any leeway to be a complete nutjob, then you are sadly deluded.

rubiksnoob wrote:Phanatik, if you truly believe that Obama is trying to take over the United States, or that there are serious doubts as to his birth in the United States, or that your adorable dog gives you any leeway to be a complete nutjob, then you are sadly deluded.

Hey hey hey! Don't diss cute doggies!

I was at Petsmart Saturday (shop Smart shop S er Petsmart!) getting some Tbone chow and chews for the boys, when a half lab/half pit bull that reminded me of an old dog of man ran up to me in store and demanded quality petting. Beautiful dog.