FOLLOW US ON:
GET THE NEWSLETTER
CONTACT US
AZ’s pinhead Sec of State mocked mercilessly by Washington Post for birther antics

image
 
The Washington Post Editorial Board, under the paper’s collective byline published a scathing take-down of AZ’s idiotically partisan Secretary of State, Gomer Pyle Ken Bennett, who also happens to be the Romney campaigns co-chair in the state.

Think Bennett’s biased or just dumb? Or both?

Look deep into his eyes…

Imagine waking up and reading something like this about yourself as you’re rubbing the sleep from your eyes? It’s not often that a major newspaper chooses to mock someone this harshly, but I think a colossal fuckwit like Ken Bennett deserved it with both barrels.

IF ONE-FIFTIETH of 1 percent of Arizonans demanded that Ken Bennett, the state’s Republican secretary of state, go to work in the nude, would he comply? Not likely. After all, Mr. Bennett, the former Republican president of the Arizona Senate, is planning to run for governor in two years. It wouldn’t pay to pander to crackpots — and humiliate himself in the bargain. Or would it?

The question arises because Mr. Bennett, allegedly in response to e-mailed requests from 1,200 Arizonans, has demanded that Hawaii provide him with verification of President Obama’s birth certificate. If he doesn’t get it, he says, he might strike the president’s name from the state’s ballot this fall.

Never mind that Hawaii has confirmed publicly and repeatedly, since before the 2008 presidential election, that Mr. Obama was born there; that the Hawaii Department of Health has released both the short and long forms of the president’s birth certificate; and that all this information, along with clear-as-a-bell explanations, is available to the public online. Mr. Bennett insists that none of that is sufficient proof for the Show Me Your Papers State.

Remember that the Washington Post isn’t exactly what you’d call a liberal newspaper… They’re still just sharpening the knives at this point:

Mr. Bennett hastens to add that he is no birther. Of course he isn’t: Everyone knows that birthers — the few that remain against the overwhelming facts of documentary evidence — are half-baked clowns who live for their pet conspiracy theory. And Mr. Bennett, an energy company CEO and plausible gubernatorial candidate in a midsize state, couldn’t really be one of those. Could he?

Charity overcomes us, so we assume not. More likely, he is simply throwing a bone to the birthers, who in most states constitute a laughable fringe of the Republican Party.

Hawaii may yet furnish Mr. Bennett with the already-public documentation he wants. So far, in compliance with state law, it has invited him to provide the legal authority under which the request was made.

More on this below.

Fine. Let the buffoonery play through its final act. We’re confident that, in the end, Mr. Bennett will ensure that Arizona’s ballot includes the name of the president of the United States, all the while insisting, disingenuously, that his actions were merely an instance of due diligence.

But by threatening to exclude Mr. Obama from the ballot, Mr. Bennett transformed what should have been a farcical sideshow of the 2012 election into an actual menace to democracy. He legitimized the lunatic leanings of the United States’, and his party’s, most extreme elements. He put it in the minds of radicals everywhere that elected officials, for the shabbiest reasons (or none at all), can float the idea of bending ballot rules and suffer no adverse consequence.

In the process, he shamed Arizona on the 100th anniversary of its statehood, giving it the appearance of a banana republic that’s come unhinged under the influence of partisan fever.

Hilarious and justly deserved. That must’ve hurt.

Here’s how Bennett has responded to some of the more, uh, rabid emails of support his asshattery has received. I wonder if he’s feeling proud of himself now?

With all due respect, the MCSO investigation has not proven anything other than raised probable cause that the birth certificate posted on the Whitehouse website “may be” a forgery. The next lawful step would be for the Sheriff’s office to turn their findings over to the County Attorney for prosecution. Evidence would be brought on both sides and a judge should issue a decision. Whether or not that happens, if Hawaii can’t or won’t provide verification of the President’s birth certificate, I will not put his name on the ballot.

I can tell from the tone and language of your letters that the only acceptable outcome for you is that his name not be on the ballot, period. That may be what happens, but under my watch, it won’t happen based on opinions, petitions, probability or pledges to support or oppose me in the 2014 Governor’s race. My oath of office is to uphold the Constitution and laws of our State and country, and I’m going to do that by following the law. I look forward to continuing to work this issue under those parameters. Otherwise, I will respectfully agree to disagree.

So now he’s getting all coy??? Clearly AZ Romney co-chair Ken Bennett is a man of integrity! Why, to even suggest that he’d leave the PRESIDENT OF THE FUCKING UNITED STATES off the ballot in his state for A FRIVOLOUS REASON, is just beyond the pale!

Someone hit this guy on the head with a heavy wrench!

HARD.

Draw some blood!

But equally as good as the total drubbing that WaPo’s editorializer wrecking crew dropped on his dumb ass this morning was the oh-so-polite reply he got over the weekend from Hawaii’s Assistant Attorney General, Jill T. Nagamine, who demanded that Bennett provide his own qualifications before he wastes any more of her time. It’s pretty genius:

From: Jill T. Nagamine
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 3:38 PM
To: Bennett, Ken
Subject: RE: Request from the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office
Dear Mr. Bennett:

I am in receipt of your email dated May 17, 2012. As I have informed you and Mr. Drake, Hawaii law requires that for verification of a vital record the requestor must satisfy the requirements of section 338-18(g), Hawaii Revised Statutes, which provides:

(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
(1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;
(2) A governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities;
(3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;
(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings; or
(5) An individual employed, endorsed, or sponsored by a governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record in preparation of reports or publications by the agency or organization for research or educational purposes.

I asked you for legal authority that establishes your right to obtain verification, and your email of May 17, 2012 provides me with references to Arizona Revised Statutes 16-212, 16-301, 16-502, 16-507, and unnamed others. These statutes seem to deal with election of presidential electors, nomination of candidates for printing on official ballot of general or special election, form and contents of ballot, and presentation of presidential candidates on ballot, but none, as far as I can tell, establish the authority of the Secretary of State to maintain and update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of his activities. I researched other sections of the Arizona Revised Statutes and was unable to find the necessary authority.

If I have missed something, please let me know. My client stands willing to provide you with the verification you seek as soon as you are able to show that you are entitled to it.

Thank you,
Jill T. Nagamine
Deputy Attorney General
State of Hawaii

Ken Bennett may not have set out to make his name (and dumbshit dipsy-doodle Republican face) the definition of “moron,” but he sure did succeed spectacularly!

Below, Arizona Secretary of State, Ken Bennett sings “Thank God I’m Republican” at the March 17, 2012 Fountain Hills Republican Club meeting:
 

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
05.22.2012
03:24 pm
|
Why Conservatives and Liberals see the world differently

image
 
How absolutely grand it is to have a great American institution like Bill Moyers back on our television airways? After reading about Moyer’s reasons for returning to the public sphere—he feels compelled to re-enter the national conversation at what he believes to be a dark and critical juncture in American civic life—I had been greatly anticipating Moyers & Company. So far, the series has not disappointed, with a discussion on crony capitalism with Reagan’s budget director David Stockman and ace financial journalist Gretchen Morgenson, and a conversation on “winner-takes-all” politics with Yale professor Jacob Hacker and Berkeley’s Paul Pierson. We’ve only got him for two more years—Moyers will retire again when he turns 80—but it’s great to see him back conducting these meaty, intelligent and engaged conversations. Moyers & Company is among the very best programming that PBS has to offer.

On the most recent show, Moyers interviewed University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who many DM readers might be familiar with from his 2008 TED talk on the moral values that liberals and conservatives hold the most highly and how this influences their politics, and from his book The Happiness Hypothesis.

In his upcoming book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion Professor Haidt aims to explain what it means when the other side “doesn’t get it” to both sides. He makes some terrifically good points during his interview with Moyers, especially when it comes to explaining how “group think” and “the hive mind” work on both extremes of the political spectrum in America (and in other countries, too).

As you can see in this piece, Haidt’s research is fascinating indeed, but I found that some of his premises and conclusions were extremely unsatisfying. Some seemed downright counter-intuitive. Unhelpful. Don’t get me wrong, I think this entire interview is worthwhile, thought-provoking—even essential—viewing no matter which bit of the political spectrum you might fall on yourself, but the more or less false assumption that seems to be at the heart of Haidt’s work—that both sides have come to their positions through equally intellectually defensible routes—made my face scrunch up in in an expression that some might describe as a look of “liberal condescension.”

You could say that “Well, isn’t that just what he’s talking about? You’re a socialist, so of course you’d see it that way!” but even if that’s true, let me offer up Exhibit A in a lazy, half-hearted—yet utterly definitive—argument-ending rebuttal: Orly Taitz, WorldNetDaily and the whole birther phenomenon.

How is it “balanced” to give obviously unbalanced people the benefit of the doubt? What would even be the point of that exercise? What purpose would it serve to a social scientist? If someone’s political positions can’t be reconciled with actual facts, then their political opinions are absolutely worthless.

Try having a rational political discussion with a LaRouchie sometime! It can’t be done.

People who have difficulty grasping the complexity of the world they live in should not be seen as coming to the table as equals with people who are not as intellectually challenged! This seems self-evident, does it not? The birther phenomenon among Republican voters was never some fringe faction within the greater GOP. It still isn’t.

It would be a waste of time to try to catalog every instance of ill-informed right-wingers who can’t spell “moron,” vehemently protest policies that would actually benefit their own lives, and who think that every single word in the Bible is the infallible utterance of God himself, but at least in this interview (his book isn’t out yet) Haidt fails to demonstrate why stupidity, superstition and flagrant lies about established historical facts deserve intellectual parity alongside of opinions borne of widely accepted science, common sense and a commonly shared national history, as opposed to the made-up one the Reichwing subscribes to.

The age-old trusim of “There are two sides to every story and the truth is somewhere in the middle” is no longer the case when you’re having a “philosophical disagreement” with a Drudge Report reader or Fox News fan who lives in their own private Bizzaro World where there is no difference between facts and Rush Limbaugh’s opinon . Internet comments that invoke conspiracy theories about Frances Piven, ACORN, the Tides Foundation, George Soros, Saul Alinsky, Van Jones or that comically conflate “Socialism” with “National Socialism” are dead-giveaways of a stunted intelligence on the other end of the keyboard. Teabaggers who want to pressure school textbook publishers to remove any mention of the Founding Fathers being slaveholders or Christianists who argue that Creationism is as equally valid as Darwin’s evolutionary theories should not be in a position to influence policy and yet in many parts of the country this is exactly what is happening, to the detriment of the school systems, the intellectual growth of the students who will be ill-prepared for higher education, etc. Does Haidt truly feel that these people who deny history and science itself came to their positions honestly and rationally? And if he doesn’t feel that way, wouldn’t that admission require a caveat so huge as to at least partially invalidate much of his take-away?

I’m intrigued by what his research has found, I’m far less impressed by how he interprets it.

I get that Haidt’s thesis must be presented in a manner which bends over backwards not to appear partisan, but when it’s been shown that a statistically significant percentage of lower IQ children tend to gravitate towards political conservatism in adulthood (read “Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice” at Live Science) I feel like Haidt might missing the boat entirely: What if the REAL revelation at the heart of his research is that there’s an unbridgeable IQ stratification in America due to our shitty public schools, and the malign influence of the churches and talk radio/Fox News that may have already rendered this country basically ungovernable. (Jonathan Haidt regularly asks his audiences to raise their hands to indicate if they self-identify as “liberal” or “conservative” and notes that when he’s speaking to an audience of academics, that over 90% tend to call themselves “liberals”—is this merely a coincidence? I should think not!).

I respect what Haidt is attempting to do with his research, but ultimately, watching this, I saw so many flaws in his assumptions and methodology (at least as he explains it here, which I suspect is adequate) that I can’t help feeling that someone else is going to come along later and take up some of the more valid points of his work, discard the less impressive parts and get it right. He’s on to something in a big way, but I have deep reservations with much of what he concludes.

Still, as I was saying before, this is some must-see TV. Most thinking people will find something of value here, for sure. If this is a topic that interests you, it’s a fascinating discussion.
 
image
 

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
02.06.2012
12:15 pm
|
Wait a minute: What percentage of Iowa’s GOP voters are STILL ‘birthers’?
12.19.2011
03:37 pm
Topics:
Tags:

image
 
Lost in all the reporting of Newt Gingrich’s humiliating implosion in the polls leading up to the Iowa Caucus, is the fact that Public Policy Polling asked nearly 600 Iowa Republican voters if they thought that President Barack Obama was born in the United States and found that over half of them are “birthers” or “not sure” about his country of birth.

Only 47%  of the GOP voters polled in Iowa said that Obama was born in the United States.

For god’s sake… half?? Still? People this “reality challenged” and ignorant shouldn’t have such an out-sized influence on who gets to be leader of the free world. An electorate as uninformed and as unintelligent as this is a danger to all of us.

That’s why we should cut funding for education…it’s KENYAN SOCIALISM!
 
image
 

 

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
12.19.2011
03:37 pm
|
Republican birther kooks & Orly Taitz throw red-faced hissy fit in New Hampshire
11.30.2011
04:50 pm
Topics:
Tags:

image
 
Wait, I thought the whole birther thing died out. No?

Maybe the Republicans in New Hampshire are just stupider than they are in the rest of the country?

Right Wing Watch reports that crazy lady Orly Taitz and half a dozen loony Republican legislators threw a red-faced group hissy fit when New Hampshire’s Attorney General Michael Delaney declined to review their “evidence” and kicked that can down to the state’s Ballot Law Commission.

In a mostly overlooked episode earlier this month, the so-called “Birther Queen” Orly Taitz appeared before the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission to call for the removal of President Obama from the state’s presidential ballot. Taitz, the Soviet-born lawyer-dentist-real estate agent, has been on a multi-year mission to prove Obama is secretly Kenyan, and no amount of evidence will dissuade her. But she’s not alone – nine members of the NH state house signed on to her complaint.
 
It came as no surprise to see Taitz embarrassing herself in yet another venue, but I found it remarkable that there are still elected officials willing to lend their names to her effort. Then I watched the video of Taitz’s presentation and the angry antics of the state representatives supporting her, and it made more sense – they’re no better than Taitz.

 

 
Have a laugh at the expense of dumbshit GOP Rep. Harry Accornero who (STILL!) believes there is “overwhelming” evidence that Obama was not born in this country as he gets his panties in a twist with his incontinent anger towards the Ballot Law Commission asking them “Why don’t you rip up the Constitution and throw it out?” and telling them “You all should be accused of treason, and we’ll get people to do that.”

Oooooh, hollow threats from a Tea-brained birther moron. I’m sure the AG is quaking in fear over that one… Lawyers always love empty threats.
 

 
The Ballot Law Commision, of course, unanimously dismissed the complaint, causing several audience members to shout “traitors!” Then another Republican nutcase, Rep. Susan DeLemus, began berating NH Assistant Attorney General Matt Mavrogeorge. Repeatedly.

At one point Mavrogeorge and Assistant Secretary of State Karen Ladd locked themselves in an office “out of fear for their safety due to the aggressive behavior of the crowd that included several legislators.”

Regarding this preposterous incident, Attorney General Michael Delaney said, “No state employee should find himself in this situation, and I am asking the General Court to take whatever steps it deems appropriate concerning the standards of conduct exhibited by these elected officials.”

Via Granite State Progress/Right Wing Watch

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
11.30.2011
04:50 pm
|
‘Arrest Obama or arrest me’: Internet says Obama’s birth certificate is fake, so this guy went AWOL


 
And here everyone thought “Birtherism” had died out. Not so fast, there’s a new kid on the block(head): meet soon to be discharged Air Force staff sergeant Daryn Moran (yes, that’s his real name, this is not some anti-teabagger jibe).

Moran read on the Internet that Obama’s longform birth certificate is a forgery, so he’s decided to a) make a ridiculous YouTube video about it and b) chat with the “Uncle Ruckus” of the conservative wingnut blogsphere, “Dr.” James David Manning and c) go AWOL to protest Obama’s treachery. (Except apparently he lied about that last part.)

Via the AirForce Times:

Moran appeared to believe he was AWOL and thought arrest would be imminent.

“His birth certificate is a proven forgery. I will also not support any other military person who turns a blind eye to this fact,” he wrote on The Blaze, a conservative website founded by former Fox News personality Glenn Beck. “It’s simple. Arrest B. Obama or arrest me.”

In an audio report posted on BirtherReport.com, Moran said he previously served in the Marine Corps, left on good terms and joined the Air Force in the months following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In a follow-up email posted Tuesday on BirtherReport.com and attributed to Moran, the NCO wrote a discharge is imminent and “basically paperwork.”

He wrote in a letter posted Aug. 15 on The Post & Email website that he was a “high priority” for being discharged after meeting with mental-health evaluators. Moran wrote on The Blaze that he would soon receive an “administrative and honorable discharge for a ‘personality disorder’” because he told his leadership that homosexuality is a sin.

He wrote a letter to BirtherReport.com the following day that his discharge was “basically paperwork.”

His first sergeant “passed on the advice to refrain from more internet activity,” Moran wrote. “She knows I cannot do that, because I want to end this crisis. For my family, and for the Constitution and my country, and for B. Obama”

He said he tried to resign several times from the Air Force, but his first sergeant wouldn’t allow it. Moran also said he was removed from his position after a coworker complained that he asked a doctor in his unit about her Muslim faith.

“My conscience is violated,” he said. “I feel like I’m supporting the flag of whatever those Islamic countries are and the rainbow flag and not the red, white and blue. That’s not the kind of people I want to be associated with.”

Here’s the aforementioned YouTube video and it’s every bit as tragic as you might suspect. This idiot is… just an idiot. That’s all you can say about him. He’s an inconsequential twit practically guaranteeing that he’ll never hold a job again. It’s one thing to post pictures of yourself with a lampshade on your head on Facebook, quite another to do this. Who would do a Google search on Mr. Moran and think “This is the bloke I’m gonna hire”?

Good luck in life, Daryn, you’re going to fucking need it as dumb as you are, pal. His wife probably wants to strangle this fool.

If you enjoy listening to crazy people who aren’t very intelligent talking nonsense, this is a classic of sorts…
 

 
But it just gets worse, here’s the Uncle Ruckus “Dr.” James David Manning interview that Moran did. Oh my! Towards the end, he advocates that all the birthers and Christians move to Texas and live under the constitution and not, of course, under Obama’s Islamic tyranny and shariah law and stuff.
 

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
08.17.2011
08:35 pm
|
More than half of Republicans are complete idiots new poll finds


 
I mean, come on, honestly, is there any other way to interpret the news that over half of all Republicans are STILL unsure—if not hostile to the idea—that President Obama was born in the United States? That’s right, a new poll out today from Public Policy Polling (which is a Democratic polling firm) found that an incredible THIRTY FOUR percent of Republicans still believe that Obama was not born on domestic soil. Another 18 percent didn’t know where he was born or were unsure.

This is some stupid, stupid, low IQ shit going on here.

And this is the Republican BASE. Over half of ‘em! Who can argue with that?

My easy to reach, rather unavoidable conclusion: More than half of the Republican party are fucking idiots.

From Slate:

Those numbers are a far cry from the percent who questioned where Obama was born before the White House released his long-form birth certificate last month.

Still, when those who answered the question, “Do you think Barack Obama was born in the United States?” with either a “No” or a “Not Sure” are taken together they represent more than half of those surveyed and, obviously, make up a formidable bloc of primary voters that can’t be discounted in a wide-open GOP primary contest.

Mitt Romney looks to be the candidate most likely to be hurt by the persistent “birther” faction. He placed second in the PPP poll with 18 percent, trailing Mike Huckabee by one point. But if you remove those who remain unconvinced that Obama was born in the U.S., Romney leads Huckabee and the rest of the field with 22 percent. (Huckabee remains at 19 percent.)

It’s…ah… telling which of the current crop of GOP midgets presidential hopefuls circling around the early primary states these flatearthers afterbirthers support:

Meanwhile, the candidates who appear to be benefitting most from the remaining birthers are Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachman and, ever so slightly, Donald Trump.  All of those candidates fare better among those who answered “No” than they do overall with GOP voters.

Palin support moves up from 12 percent to 17 percent, Michele Bachman support increases three points to 10 percent, Gingrich climbs two points to 15 percent and Donald Trump inches up from 8 percent to 9 percent.

 

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
05.10.2011
08:26 pm
|
Trump Unable To Produce Certificate Proving He’s Not A Festering Pile Of Shit

image

Via The Onion

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
04.28.2011
12:40 pm
|
World Net Daily reacts to Obama ‘birth certificate’

image
 
As if this wasn’t THE most predictable response of all fucking recorded history, the batshit crazy “journalists” over at “news agency” World Net Daily (aka “birther central”) had this to say about Obama’s “birth certificate”:

If the document proves valid, it could answer the questions raised by those who have alleged he was not actually born in Hawaii. But it also could prove his ineligibility because of its references to his father. Some of the cases challenging Obama have explained that he was a dual citizen through his father at his birth, and they contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born citizens.

Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, the only news agency that has waged a relentless investigative campaign on questions swirling around the Obama’s eligibility for nearly three years, was elated at the turn of events.

“We’re gratified that our work has begun to pay off,” he said. “The certificate of live birth is an absolutely vital foundation for determining constitutional eligibility of any president. We look forward to reviewing it like so many other Americans do at this late date. But it is important to remember there are still dozens of other questions concerning this question of eligibility that need to be resolved to assure what has become a very skeptical public concerning Barack Obama’s parentage, his adoption, his citizenship status throughout his life and why he continues to cultivate a culture of secrecy around his life.”

Now that this “matter” has been definitively put to rest—for SANE people with IQs higher than carrots—it’s probably time for the reality-challenged idiots at WND to move on to Donald Trump’s new buffoonish conspiracy theory about how it was affirmative action that allowed a “poor student” like future president Barack Obama to attend first Columbia, then Harvard (a view that got talked up on Hardball the other night by an increasingly senile-seeming Pat Buchanan).

I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE I GOT AN ALL-CAPS EMAIL FROM MY GRANDMOTHER ABOUT THIS THAT SHE GOT FROM HER NEIGHBOR, MRS. JEROMIE WHO GOT IT FROM A LADY AT HER CHURCH. SO WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THAT, SMARTYPANTS LIBTARDS!!!!

Posted by Richard Metzger
|
04.27.2011
10:53 am
|