Disqus - Latest Comments for thorswitch

Re: Question of the Day

thorswitch — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:23:27 -0000

A law clarifying the separation of church and state; defining "religion" any sincerely held spiritual belief or life/moral philosophy, whether or not it includes the concept of a god or gods; that all such religions are to be treated equally under the law, even if they seem goofy to some people; that aside from laws related to actions inflicted or performed upon an unwilling person (i.e. murder, rape, etc.,) the law cannot regulate regulate religion; religious beliefs cannot be used as the sole justification for a law; and that no signs, monuments, statues or other means of expressing statements of faith can be placed on public property. I think that covers most of it :)

I have to say, though, that I would also agree with the ERA, the end of corporate personhood, and a codification of the right to privacy.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

thorswitch — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:48:06 -0000

You misunderstand. I know perfectly well that there are a LOT of white southern republicans - of any age - who aren't racist, and I never meant to imply otherwise. My comment was describing a VERY specific subgroup of people - and it's NOT a subgroup of whites or southerners or older people or Republicans - nor is it even a subgroup of older white southerns who belong to the Republican party. It's a subgroup of BIRTHERS - specifically BIRTHERS who are older white southern republicans.

The analysis of a recent survey indicates that the largest single demographic group of birthers are older, white, southern republicans, and I believe their motivation in challenging Obama's legitimacy is because they are racists. That, however. cannot be extrapolated out into any kind of generalization about other whites, southerners, older people or Republicans (or even into any kind of a generalization about older, white, southern Republicans.) If you take the "birther" characterization out of the equation, we're no longer talking about the same group of people.

Let me be clear: I am NOT saying that the majority of older, white, southern Republicans are racists. I'm NOT even saying that the majority of older, white, southern Republicans are birthers. I have no idea whatsoever what percentage of older, white, southern Republicans are bithers - they may be a very small minority of the older, white, southern Republican group. What I AM saying is that among BIRTHERS, the single biggest "chunk" is made up of older, white, southern Republicans.

Re: Disbarment of Orly Taitz Sought by California Bar

thorswitch — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:02:39 -0000

I certainly hope that Taitz will be disbarred - I'm not a lawyer, but her insistence on continuing to promote (and use as part of her "evidence") information that is CLEARLY false - and that she must, by now, KNOW is false* - should be sufficient cause. This particular complaint, however, was filed in April. Is this something you just learned about or has something new happened that indicates it's progressing through the system?

*For example, her repeated claim that Obama's trip to Pakistan in 1981 proves he's not an American citizen because - according to her - the State Department banned all travel to Pakistan by Americans in 1981. Of course, contemporaneous documentation, including newspaper articles and State Department documents, proves that this isn't the case. Americans were warned against traveling there, but they were never prohibited, and if an American citizen such as Obama wanted to travel their, they could do so using their American passport. That's just one.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

poopshoot — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:55:59 -0000

Thor, from what I have been reading on this site, a birth certificate does not have to be filed with the FEC when running for president, its pretty much assumed that you couldn't get that far without one. I don't have any doubt that he is eligible to be President because of his birth certificate, I am more of a qualifications guy. But then I read your explanation, and, for the love of God, to use your own words regarding McCain, show some clear proof and let's get on to bitching about healthcare.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

poopshoot — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:43:01 -0000

You nailed it right on the head, Thor. It's all those white racist southern republicans driving this. Because you know all southerners join the republican party because they are just a bunch of racist bigots. And I think it is the most politically correct thing in the world to call most white southerners racist. It's true, isn't it? I mean, you have probably read alot of books and I know you have seen all the movies, so it has to be true. And when you have all objective second-hand information, there is nothing wrong with making a wide stereotypical assumption about a whole group of people, is there? I mean, what could possibly be wrong with making a spot judgement on a group of people based on a poll you saw with a 3.5% margin of error, as long as it proves what you already want to believe anyway, right? Do we all look alike, too? Is it hard to tell us apart in a line-up? Please, enlighten me!

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

thorswitch — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:28:51 -0000

Sorry to tell you this, but if you're unwilling to accept the Certificate of Live Birth published by the state of Hawaii and CONFIRMED multiple times by the state of Hawaii (including by it's Republican governor, and most recently by the head of Vital Statistics who said in plain language that Obama is a natural-born American citizen,) and which is also the exact same document that every other state and the Federal Government (including the Department of State and the Federal Election Commission) as PROOF OF AN AMERICAN BIRTH (in other words, as proof someone is a natural born citizen) then you ARE, in fact, a birther.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

thorswitch — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:21:38 -0000

And among the people who led the Senate in confirming that McCain was eligible to be president were Hillary Clinton (while she was still running for the nomination) and Barak Obama.

The big difference, however, between asking questions about McCain and asking questions about Obama is that there is CLEAR PROOF that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone - that part of it was never part of the discussion. The only question was if his being born there made him ineligible or not.

With Obama, INSPITE of his having a perfectly legal Certificate from Hawaii that all states, the Federal Government - including the State Department and the Federal Election Commission - all consider sufficient and valid for establishing an American birth, AND his having been sworn in by the Republican-appointed (and Bush-friendly) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (who you'd think would be someone who'd want to double check such things as eligibility before doing any swearing,) people are still questioning where he was born. And they're not just limiting their questions to where he was born, but they're also challenging if he can be a natural born citizen with a non-American father and what - if any - impact his mother's remarriage to an Indonesian man might have.

So, I really don't see the two situations as being comparable. With McCain, it was more of a clarification that his being born overseas didn't make him ineligible, where as with Obama, it's trying to prove to people who don't want to believe he's eligible that he actually is - and each time proof is offered, the goalposts get moved again.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

thorswitch — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:06:34 -0000

Oh, please, people, don't tell me you're so naive as to think that his showing the "long-form" birth certificate would shut down the complaints! It wouldn't even begin to make a dent. These people don't want proof he's legitimately qualified to be president, they want to prove he ISN'T, so anything contrary to that will be dismissed in one way or another.

Consider the reaction birthers have had to the revelation that this latest "Kenyan Birth Certificate" is a hoax: Many of them are already saying that the "Obots" made the fake Australian one to discredit the "real" Kenyan one, and then "discovered" it on the internet (never mind that folks at politijab have found a page at the wayback machine linking to the Australian certificate that is dated sometime in the 1990's.)

Besides, they're already ready with their next objection. So what if we can prove he was born in Hawaii? According to Orly Taitz and many of her followers, both of your parents have to be American in order for you to be a "natural born citizen" and Obama's father was Kenyan and a subject of the British Crown with British citizenship, so Obama still loses.

Oh, and if it turns out that it doesn't matter if neither, one or both of your parents were Americans as long as you were born on American soil (which, btw, IS how it works - you just have to be born on American land to be a natural born American citizen) then Obama is illegitimate because he was adopted by his mother's Indonesian 2nd husband (though as far as I know NO ONE has produced a record of such) and since Indonesia doesn't allow dual citizenships, Obama lost his American Citizenship.

And I'm sure they'll come up with something else when they found out that America doesn't give a fig whether Indonesia allows for dual citizenship or not, as far as America is concerns, if you're born an American you're ALWAYS an American unless - AS AN ADULT - you voluntarily give up your citizenship (or lose it as a result of clearly specified criminal acts.) So, even if they can prove his step-father adopted him, he's STILL a natural-born American citizen and STILL eligible to be President.

So, see, showing the birth certificate isn't gonna do a goddamned thing to shut the birthers up. They're not willing to be proved wrong - and given that a recent poll showed that most birthers are older, white, Southern Republicans, it's fair (if not exactly politically correct) to say that it's most likely because they don't want to have a black guy with a "furrin' sounding name" in the White House.

Re: ‘Birthers’ Latch Onto Forged Kenyan Birth Certificate

thorswitch — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:31:39 -0000

It became independent, but it didn't change it's name to the Republic of Kenya until 12 December 1964. During that first year of independence, it was known as the Dominion of Kenya and things like money and stamps used the designation of "Kenya" on them, so it would be reasonable to think that they would have used either "The Dominion of Kenya" or plain "Kenya" on a birth certificate issued during that first year of independence, not the name they didn't have yet.

Re: Eric Cantor Befriends Birther Orly Taitz (on Facebook)

thorswitch — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:12:45 -0000

I don't suppose it would EVER occur to her that maybe they accepted her friend request just to keep an eye on her? (As in the old "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" concept....) Not that I have any reason to think that's why - I doubt any of them (or, more likely, the staffers who manage their Facebook pages) gave it any thought at all, but it's at LEAST as plausible an explanation as them accepting her friend request because they support her, no?

Re: Five things NBC did right this season

thorswitch — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:54:45 -0000

IMO, best move #2: Letting "Law & Order" have it's 20th season. It'd be nice if the give it a 21st, too, so it can hold the record on it's own, but this is still good.

Best move #1: CHUCK

Re: It's The Story Of A Lifetime. Or Maybe Not.

thorswitch — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 08:12:47 -0000

"This is a little story about a potentially huge story that a lot of folks like myself want to be true but don’t know whether it is true."

I have to say, I find the idea that *anyone* wants this story to be true more than a bit disconcerting! I get the whole thing that if the story is true, it might finally force the current administration to actually look into prosecuting the Bush admin for war crimes, but when someone says they hope the story is true, what they're saying is that they actually are hoping that the USA has been going around and covertly dispatching commandos to kill people without even the faintest whiff of due process. Are people really that blinded by their hatred of Bush and Cheney that they seriously WANT the US to have fallen that far?

As much as I would love to see Bush and Cheney held accountable for the crimes they have committed, I absolutely and sincerely pray that this story is NOT true - that we haven't been going around and killing whomever we wanted for whatever reason a madman like Cheney might come up with. I would hope most people would feel that way. It's a bit scary to me to consider the implications otherwise.

Re: PETA Does It Again

thorswitch — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 19:45:11 -0000

On his "Headlines" feature last night, Jay Leno had a clipping from a Montana newspaper advertising a PETA "Animal Rights 101" class - designed to teach people about living a "cruelty-free" lifestyle, including a meat-free diet - being held at the local Black Angus Steakhouse.

Re: Because there will be some who will feel absolutely COMPELLED to make an issue of it....

thorswitch — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:22:02 -0000

Even re-taking the oath isn't enough, apparently, since in retaking the oath, apparently neither Obama nor Roberts brought a Bible with them, so no Bible was use. Not, of course, that one is required, but that isn't stopping Drudge and the Echo Chamber from questioning the legitimacy of the 2nd oath. I've already seen comments from people claiming that they "knew" Obama would find a way to avoid taking the oath on a Bible, to some suggesting it was the presence of the Bible the first time that caused the flub, and so on. I'm just beyond disgusted at the moment. Note: I'm not including links because I prefer not to give them any traffic.

Re: McCain Loses It: Calls Americans 'My Fellow Prisoners'

thorswitch — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 17:14:25 -0000

Ok - here's clear evidence it wasn't an intentional metaphor. The Chicago Tribune has the text of his speech as it was intended to be delivered, and it shows that he was supposed to say "my fellow citizens" *not* "prisoners"

Re: VOTE, damn it!

thorswitch — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 04:32:58 -0000

gibberish for test

Re: cccxxcfrr

thorswitch — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:09:29 -0000

Comment Text.....

Re: thunderhaven is undergoing some renovations….

thorswitch — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 07:37:06 -0000

And lets see how a 2nd comment looks!

Re: thunderhaven is undergoing some renovations….

thorswitch — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 07:36:30 -0000

Seeing if replying works and how it looks on the screen

Re: thunderhaven is undergoing some renovations….

thorswitch — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 06:54:36 -0000

Testing comment so I can work on the CSS

Re: Moved to a New Commenting Platform

thorswitch — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:50:52 -0000

DIscus is pretty cool - but it's being absolute putz about letting me customize the code at all. Maybe I should just break down and, like, actually learn CSS sometime - LOL

Re: I’ve Read Alot of The Books Palin Wanted to Ban

thorswitch — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:53:07 -0000

I didn't meant to imply that I thought you would want to pass on false info, sorry if it came off that way. But yeah, there's just way too much crap out there.

Re: I’ve Read Alot of The Books Palin Wanted to Ban

thorswitch — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:09:02 -0000

Just FYI, per Snopes, the list is a fake. Palin never actually banned any books at all. She *did* ask the librarian how she would reaction if Palin asked her to remove books, and when she didn't give the right answer, Palin tried to fire her before relenting and letting the librarian keep her job.

The list that's getting sent around, though, has been circulating for about a decade and keeps getting attached to each new conservative devil that comes along.

Believe me, I can't stand Palin, and it makes me feel a bit sick that I feel like I have to almost "defend" her, but I'm also a firm believer that if we're going to defeat someone, lets do it on their own merits, you know? :D

Re: RNC-McCain Ad: Obama’s a Liberal!

thorswitch — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 01:15:05 -0000

I've seen a different version of the ad that I find both hilarious and sad. Hilarious because everything mentioned can be applied to the Republicans and Republican-led Congress over the last few years, and sad because too many people will actually believe it:

"If you take away the crowds and the chants and all you have left are costly words. Barak Obama and out-of-touch congressional leaders have expensive plans. Billions in new government spending. Years of deficits. No balanced budgets. And painful tax increases on working American families. They're ready to tax, ready to spend, but not ready to lead."

Re: thunderhaven is undergoing some renovations….

thorswitch — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:20:15 -0000

Test comment to try and work on layout