Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs writes "I will not publish against Barack Hussein until we see IF he gets the nomination." She had broken the birth certificate story through her work with Techdude. I had heard that Larry Johnson of No Quarter Blog, who is a Clinton supporter, had obtained a copy of the Obama birth certificate. He blogged this over the weekend. Now, Pamela of Atlas, is skeptical of Johnson's claims and wants to avoid helping Hillary. Therefore, she will not publish against Barack Hussein Obama. Pamela contends that Hillary is still a bigger threat than Obama.
I don't agree and I give my reasons below, but in a nutshell, the American public has the right to an electoral system that functions coherently. Partisanship created an electoral system that does not require identification, birth certificates and fingerprinting of candidates. This is a more important problem than Hillary v. Obama, because I don't believe that either can win anyway.
Pamela writes:
>Pro- Hillary blog's are reporting: *BREAKING* Barry Soetoro’s Birth Certificate in Republican Hands [UPDATE]. Just for knowing, it's total bullshit.
>"This "Republican Operative" meme is being spread by Hillary's camp. Operative? Ha! Republicans can barely find their ass with both hands. They are so politically correct they are afraid of their own shadow. They have not touched any of the O-bombshells."
>"This has Clintonostra written all over it...The African American constituency of the Democrat party is not gonna be happy if the nomination is "stolen" from Obama. Hillary wants to deflect blame and direct the nasty anger towards the Republicans...
It ain't the Republicans behind this story...I will not publish against Barack Hussein until we see IF he gets the nomination. BHO is McCain's dream opponent, HRC his nightmare. McCain's 96-year-old mother could beat BHO. The Republicans cannot even run a campaign. HRC is competent, which makes her so dangerous, should she get elected. And she is a lot more ruthless than competent...Rush revealed today that HRC's people were out there long before the Rev. Wright thing got traction, trying to get Republicans to push it forward, so they could keep their hands clean... Do NOT support anything prior to Denver which would further weaken BHO in the event that HRC has plans."
I disagree with this analysis. If Hillary wins, the Democrats lose regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats broke a story about Obama. Moreover, I am unconvinced of the claim that Mr. Obama is not a serious threat. I think that he is a bigger threat than Hillary. One reason is that Obama's followers will drop the Democrats if he does not get the nomination. They will drop Hillary regardless of who obtains any adverse information.
Nor is there any evidence that anyone is going to obtain any information. I haven't seen anything approaching a practical result yet. It may well take several months to obtain the birth certificate. Waiting to cover this until September may make it impossible to get anywhere by the election.
Obama's followers will not care if Republicans or Democrats obtain the birth certificate. A large percentage of them are under-25, Paris Hilton types who are the products of "progressive" education. Thus, they can't even read the birth certificate. They will be upset that Mr. Obama lost, and 30% of them will not vote. That 30% doesn't vote much of the time anyway. Hence, if the birth certificate is revealed before the convention, then Hillary gets the nomination and 30% of Obama's supporters drop out, and therefore McCain wins because more Obama supporters will drop out than McCain supporters will shift. If the birth certificate is revealed after the election, same result.
There is another, more crucial point. The issue of the birth certificate is a matter of ethics, not just politics. The public has a right to know. Whether that results in Hillary Clinton's nomination or not is not the core of the issue. There are weaknesses to a partisan system, one of which is that both sides collude in avoiding improvement in order to enhance each others' capacities to exploit the system. I want the Republicans to win, but I don't want them to do it by gaming a corrupt electoral system. Perhaps this kind of attitude is why, since 1994 when Rush's henchman Newt Gingrich gained power, there have been massive spending increases, increased corruption, corrupt subsidies to Wall Street Banks and increasingly bloated federal budgets. Maybe partisanship is not the solution.
I see no need to suspend coverage of this or to avoid attacking the most likely Democratic nominee. The Republicans should aim to win with good ethics, integrity and principle, not venom and anger at Democrats. Hillary right now is unlikely to get the nomination, so the real target is B.O.
Pamela certainly aims to continue to cover the story. In another blog she writes:
"There is more to come on Obama's citzenship issues. It is well beyond the COLB now. Stay tuned."
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Obama Birth Certificate, FEC Petition Update
The FEC Obama birth certificate petition will close in a day or two. We've got almost 4,700 signatures. If you haven't signed it yet, please consider signing it and passing the url along to your friends. The petition reads:
The signers of this petition request the Federal Elections Commission and Mr. Donald McGahan, FEC chairman, to take responsibility to verify the eligibility of Mr. Barack H. Obama to be President of the United States. Mr. Obama has refused to produce a physical certified, stamped copy of his birth certificate. An electronically-displayed image displayed by his official campaign website has been alleged to be a forgery. We request that the FEC require Mr. Obama to authorize the FEC to obtain an official copy of his birth certificate and if he does not produce the authorization that the FEC reject his registration as a presidential candidate; that the FEC not monitor his campaign finances during the primary or election; that votes cast for Mr. Obama and reported by the states' boards of elections not be recorded and displayed by the FEC; and that Mr. Obama be considered in violation of 2 USC 437g for filing a false statement on FEC Form 2, as specified on that form.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Federal-Elections-Commssion/index.html
The signers of this petition request the Federal Elections Commission and Mr. Donald McGahan, FEC chairman, to take responsibility to verify the eligibility of Mr. Barack H. Obama to be President of the United States. Mr. Obama has refused to produce a physical certified, stamped copy of his birth certificate. An electronically-displayed image displayed by his official campaign website has been alleged to be a forgery. We request that the FEC require Mr. Obama to authorize the FEC to obtain an official copy of his birth certificate and if he does not produce the authorization that the FEC reject his registration as a presidential candidate; that the FEC not monitor his campaign finances during the primary or election; that votes cast for Mr. Obama and reported by the states' boards of elections not be recorded and displayed by the FEC; and that Mr. Obama be considered in violation of 2 USC 437g for filing a false statement on FEC Form 2, as specified on that form.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Federal-Elections-Commssion/index.html
Lisa From Illinois Comments on Birth Certificate, Petition
I bet we will have over 5,000 by tomorrow!
A good story for National Enquirer?
Rush Limbaugh's pain killer addiction - True
John Edward's Mistress - True
Barry Soetoro and not Barack Obama - True?
It would be fun to know because Obama is my US Senator.
I like to see him off the POTUS Ballot and lose his seat in the US Senate.
He has done unsavory things to advance his crooked career.
He challenged Alice Palmer's petition signatures during the State Senate race and ran unopposed.
He opened sealed divorce records on his opposition during the US Senate Race. Blair Hull and Jack Ryan had to drop out of the race and Obama ran unopposed.
Obama stoled the primary from Hillary.
It's time to kick this Confidence Man off the bus!
Thank you for your courage.
Sincerely yours,
Lisa
A good story for National Enquirer?
Rush Limbaugh's pain killer addiction - True
John Edward's Mistress - True
Barry Soetoro and not Barack Obama - True?
It would be fun to know because Obama is my US Senator.
I like to see him off the POTUS Ballot and lose his seat in the US Senate.
He has done unsavory things to advance his crooked career.
He challenged Alice Palmer's petition signatures during the State Senate race and ran unopposed.
He opened sealed divorce records on his opposition during the US Senate Race. Blair Hull and Jack Ryan had to drop out of the race and Obama ran unopposed.
Obama stoled the primary from Hillary.
It's time to kick this Confidence Man off the bus!
Thank you for your courage.
Sincerely yours,
Lisa
Bureaucracy and None of the Above
The Progressive movement and its social democratic system put considerable faith in bureaucracy. In part, this was because the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw bureaucracy as improvement over the paternalism of the early nineteenth century, and they were right. However, by 1940 right as the New Deal reforms of 1932-7 were drawing to a close, it had become evident that bureaucracy does not work so well as its proponents thought. In the 1940s the sociologist Robert Merton wrote an article about the rigidity of bureaucracy and bureaucrats' fetishization of rules at the expense of efficiency. In the 1950s Taiicho Ohno of Toyota pioneered the principles of lean production and total quality management. Even going back so far as the 1920s, Alfred Sloan of General Motors, along with executives in other leading firms, pioneered the use of decentralization, federalized organization, realizing that large firms did not permit global or functional forms of organization. The information and flexibility requirements of large firms are too daunting for anyone to handle.
Strangely, though, the Progressive and social democratic movement continued to emphasize centralization. The result is that increasingly, American life has been dominated by unresponsive, unproductive government bureaucracies that spin regulation and do not care what the public thinks. This is the result not only of centralization but also of the increasing emphasis on expertise in the expansion of government at the expense of the spoils system.
The result is a considerable degree of dissonance between the public's experience and the "facts" it is fed in school, through the news media and through public opinion leaders who are committed to the Progressive, social democratic solution because it enforces their status as professional experts, elite business leaders and the like.
The public has become increasingly alienated from public institutions because they are distant; they do not work; and they are held forth as far superior to the processes and systems that in the public's own experience work. As a result, the public experiences what psychologists call "cognitive dissonance". On the one hand, they are taught that "experts" know better than they do. But when they interact with state government, the department of motor vehicles and the like, they experience systems that do not work so well as ones that they themselves could devise. They are taught that scientists can solve problems. But then they hear that cancer has become an industry characterized by avoidance of effective remedies, politics, waste and regulation of innovative ideas out of existence. They are told that the state equalizes inequity, then they learn that the federal government subsidization billionaire investment bankers through direct bounties and a central banking system that sees its primary role as to support stock prices.
Cognitive dissonance has unpredictable effects, but one of them is potentially withdrawal. Others include anger, attempting to intervene and correct the situation, and denial. All of these are present in today's society.
Both left and right have become increasingly strident as the remedies that they advocate, central banking, expertise in government, efficiency, a corporatist state that supports the public interest, have failed to materialize. Political correctness, left wing intolerance of dissent in universities and other institutions, reflects the left's inability to confront the failure of the mercantilist solution to which it has been wedded since the late eighteenth century. Likewise, the right wing increasingly fights within itself, unable to arrive at a coherent picture of reform. As well, much of the right is in denial about its own Progressive spirit. The split between libertarians and conservatives has permitted mercantilists of the Progressive (Republican) and social democratic (Democratic) stripe to dominate the electoral process.
The public faces declining real wages, yet has refused to confront the decline and has borrowed, consuming about six percent more each year than it creates. There is avoidance of the causes of economic decline. Firms have heavily relied on public subsidy, especially through the banking system, yet corporate executives claim prerogatives of private property in extracting ever-increasing salaries that at most weakly reflect corporate performance. Few in the news media suggest that corporations that do not see a public role ought not to be subsidized by the public, and that the Federal Reserve system is little more than a crutch for inefficient American firms.
Americans increasingly feel alienated. The reason is that the obsession with size and economies of scale has been pursued too far. The large scale of industry; the large federal government have not yielded increases in wealth. Rather, they have become vehicles by which corrupt special interests extract wealth at public expense and as the public has reacted to cognitive dissonance by increasingly withdrawing or by becoming ever more strident in its demand for "change", a noun that describes an unnamed verb.
The remedy for too much centralization is decentralization.
Strangely, though, the Progressive and social democratic movement continued to emphasize centralization. The result is that increasingly, American life has been dominated by unresponsive, unproductive government bureaucracies that spin regulation and do not care what the public thinks. This is the result not only of centralization but also of the increasing emphasis on expertise in the expansion of government at the expense of the spoils system.
The result is a considerable degree of dissonance between the public's experience and the "facts" it is fed in school, through the news media and through public opinion leaders who are committed to the Progressive, social democratic solution because it enforces their status as professional experts, elite business leaders and the like.
The public has become increasingly alienated from public institutions because they are distant; they do not work; and they are held forth as far superior to the processes and systems that in the public's own experience work. As a result, the public experiences what psychologists call "cognitive dissonance". On the one hand, they are taught that "experts" know better than they do. But when they interact with state government, the department of motor vehicles and the like, they experience systems that do not work so well as ones that they themselves could devise. They are taught that scientists can solve problems. But then they hear that cancer has become an industry characterized by avoidance of effective remedies, politics, waste and regulation of innovative ideas out of existence. They are told that the state equalizes inequity, then they learn that the federal government subsidization billionaire investment bankers through direct bounties and a central banking system that sees its primary role as to support stock prices.
Cognitive dissonance has unpredictable effects, but one of them is potentially withdrawal. Others include anger, attempting to intervene and correct the situation, and denial. All of these are present in today's society.
Both left and right have become increasingly strident as the remedies that they advocate, central banking, expertise in government, efficiency, a corporatist state that supports the public interest, have failed to materialize. Political correctness, left wing intolerance of dissent in universities and other institutions, reflects the left's inability to confront the failure of the mercantilist solution to which it has been wedded since the late eighteenth century. Likewise, the right wing increasingly fights within itself, unable to arrive at a coherent picture of reform. As well, much of the right is in denial about its own Progressive spirit. The split between libertarians and conservatives has permitted mercantilists of the Progressive (Republican) and social democratic (Democratic) stripe to dominate the electoral process.
The public faces declining real wages, yet has refused to confront the decline and has borrowed, consuming about six percent more each year than it creates. There is avoidance of the causes of economic decline. Firms have heavily relied on public subsidy, especially through the banking system, yet corporate executives claim prerogatives of private property in extracting ever-increasing salaries that at most weakly reflect corporate performance. Few in the news media suggest that corporations that do not see a public role ought not to be subsidized by the public, and that the Federal Reserve system is little more than a crutch for inefficient American firms.
Americans increasingly feel alienated. The reason is that the obsession with size and economies of scale has been pursued too far. The large scale of industry; the large federal government have not yielded increases in wealth. Rather, they have become vehicles by which corrupt special interests extract wealth at public expense and as the public has reacted to cognitive dissonance by increasingly withdrawing or by becoming ever more strident in its demand for "change", a noun that describes an unnamed verb.
The remedy for too much centralization is decentralization.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
