daily caller: Page 1
Yes, he did, but he said it sarcastically. Like if you don't like brocolli, but say "I like broccoli!". If you say that sarcastically, that doesn't mean you actually like broccoli.
Garcia was engaging in hyperbole, claiming that everyone in El Paso is employed by the government to stop illegal immigration, and that El Paso having a supposed low crime rate proved that Communism works: by employing everyone, the government can reduce crime. Watch the video below where he laughs about it.
[SEE 6/17/14 UPDATE BELOW]
"The Kronies" is a series of slick, live action videos that promote a libertarian message. The effort comes complete with not only its own site, but a fake site for the "company" behind the figures, a "Chimera Global Holdings Inc.".
You might not expect the Daily Caller to delete a comment on a thread taking Popular Science to task for shutting off comments, yet that's exactly what they did .
On Sep. 25, Sean Medlock (the real name of "Jim Treacher") posted "Popular Science shuts off comments, so take your climate denial somewhere else" .
Conservative bloggers who support amnesty (Rubio; Hot Air, Morrissey, Johnsen, Loesch, Moran, Mataconis...) - 01/21/13
This post will maintain a list of those supposed conservative bloggers who support some form of comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty), specifically the amnesty proposed by Marco Rubio. This post doesn't list GOP politicians or pundits, just bloggers and other low-level members of the GOP establishment.
Needless to say, there are far too many examples of the incompetence of rightwing bloggers than I could ever cover. However, to pick one out of the hat, take a look at the reaction to "The Puzzle of Black Republicans" by University of Pennsylvania professor Adolph L. Reed Jr (link).
Fiscal conservatives side with America-denouncing billionaire (Cato, Dan Mitchell, Heritage, Brownfield, Sean Medlock, Daily Caller, HotAir) - 05/11/12
Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin recently denounced his U.S. citizenship to avoid paying U.S. taxes he'd owe when that company goes public. Hopefully to most people the idea of turning your back on your country  to save money would be abhorrent.
Earlier today, the Washington Post published allegations that Mitt Romney was a bully back in prep school (link). I didn't read the story, but that's not what this post is about.
As can be seen on the tea parties page, I have a very, very low opinion of their movement. However, there is one good thing about them: they're dumb enough to help me show how they're vile idiots. And, they've done that many, many times.
And, I'll be compiling them into a series.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it's with a heavy heart that I bring you today's post. I didn't want to have to write this post, and I didn't want to have to think about what I'm going to reveal. However, someone has to be looking out for the United States when she's under attack by forces who will do anything - and say anything - to bring her down.
I'm sorry, I choked up a bit there. But, I will persevere. Ladies and Gentlemen, I have shocking news for you.
Jonathan Strong of the Daily Caller offers "Earth to birthers: the facts about Obama’s birth certificate" (link). A supposed reporter offering "facts" about the Obama citizenship issue designed to put that issue to rest and finally quell the concerns of the great unwashed is a certain guarantee that they'll get their facts wrong, and Strong is no different.
1. Strong claims that "[t]he evidence shows Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961" and that "[w]e know Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961".
In fact, the most that we can say at the present time is that the evidence strongly indicates that he was born in Hawaii. All the evidence presented so far is full of holes for the reasons outlined in the posts on the Obama citizenship page. If it were already proved then the evidence presented would be irrefutable and Obama's many supporters in the mainstream media and politics wouldn't have to run around lying and misleading on his behalf about the basic, indisputable facts of this matter.
2. Strong writes:
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama released a “Certification of Live Birth,” a document produced by the state of Hawaii certifying the state holds records that a person was born there.
Give him credit for - unlike dozens of other reporters - getting the name of the document right. However, it's not correct to state that Obama "released" a Certification of Live Birth ("COLB"). He posted on his website a picture of a COLB. As anyone knows, sometimes a supposed picture of an item and the item itself are different. While it's very unlikely that Obama would have edited that picture in some way, it can't be ruled out. Especially since the state of Hawaii refuses to authenticate that picture. If everything were proven as Strong would have us believe, then Hawaii would have authenticated that picture or Obama would have released the original paper copy of whatever he received to an impartial panel for them to verify. (The pictures from FactCheck are questionable for the reasons outlined at that link.)
3. Strong states:
Further, two Hawaiian newspaper announcements from 1961 tell of Obama's birth. Janice Okubo, a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health, told the Honolulu Advertiser in July 2009 that such newspaper announcements were based on notifications from the Health Department, which received information directly from hospitals.
That's a reference to . Those announcements aren't proof. And, relying on the thoughts of Janice Okubo is a risky endeavor indeed. In the past she's contradicted herself in the same article and in a telephone conversation I had with her she indicated that she's just a spokeswoman and doesn't directly deal with the certificates. It's also doubtful whether she was even born in 1961. Yet, here she is trying to tell us how things were done five decades ago? Walk into any government office and ask a supervisor to tell you how things were done there in the 60s and see if they have any clue.
The truth about how such announcements were handled would only come from the testimony of those who handled such announcements at the time, from contemporaneous policy manuals and other documentation, and so on. Not from someone who probably wasn't even born then and who's more or less just a confused PR flack.
4. Strong states:
The certification of live birth Obama released is legally sufficient documentation to apply for a U.S. passport, but it’s not the same thing as a “long form” birth certificate, called a “Certificate of Live Birth” in Hawaii. That document is issued by hospitals and includes additional information not on the certification.
Here's a test: put a picture of your birth certificate on a website somewhere, then take your laptop in to the State Department and ask for a passport using that web picture. That's not going to work, wouldn't you agree? While the original paper copy of a COLB might be enough to apply for a passport, all we've seen so far is a picture on a website of a supposed COLB.
5. Strong states:
Though Obama has not released the long form birth certificate, a state official in Hawaii says she has personally viewed it... July 27, 2009, the then-director of the Hawaii Department of Health, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, stated she had personally viewed the long-form birth certificate. “I…have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen,” she said in a written statement.
Strong is, at the least, jumping to conclusions. On October 31, 2008, Fukino stated that she had seen Obama's "original birth certificate". In the statement that Strong references, she only said she'd seen his "original vital records". Hawaii governor Neil Abercrombie only referenced a "recording of the birth" that was "written down".
We certainly could be like Jonathan Strong and *assume* that those are references to a long-form birth certificate such as we've seen, but making such assumptions is generally not a good idea. They could be referring to something else.
While it's highly likely that Obama was born in Hawaii, he still hasn't definitively proven it despite what those like Jonathan Strong would have you believe. This issue is vitally important from that perspective: we can't allow the media to strongarm their version of the truth on the U.S. The mainstream media has consistently lied and misled about this issue and has waged a smear campaign ("Birther!") against anyone who has questions in order to paper over their lies. That's extremely dangerous for the U.S. and it emboldens the media to lie about other issues.
* Did Hawaii gov Abercrombie lie about seeing baby Obama?
* The highly incompetent response to this issue by the GOP and their leading supporters.
* The long list of others who've lied and misled about this issue on the Obama citizenship page.
 From July 28, 2009's "Hawaii officials confirm Obama’s original birth certificate still exists" from Dan Nakaso, a reporter who's lied about the facts of this matter before (link):
Birthers wave off those birth announcements, saying that Obama family members 48 years ago could have phoned in false information to both newspapers.
Such vital statistics, however, were not sent to the newspapers by the general public but by the Health Department, which received the information directly from hospitals, Okubo said.
Birth announcements from the public ran elsewhere in both papers and usually included information such as the newborn's name, weight and time of birth.
"Take a second and think about that," wrote Robert Farley of the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times' Pulitzer Prize winning Web site PoliticFact.com on July 1. "In order to phony those notices up, it would have required the complicity of the state Health Department and two independent newspapers — on the off chance this unnamed child might want to one day be president of the United States.
On a sidenote, Robert Farley misled about this issue.
Current Indiana governor Mitch Daniels spoke at CPAC earlier today and gave a speech that's received rave reviews from such fellow worthies as Mary Katharine Ham of the Daily Caller (full text here). The speech concentrated on (no big surprise) spending rather than issues that are actually more important and more fundamental such as immigration. The speech didn't mention immigration at all. But it did include this incredibly ironic bit:
If a foreign power advanced an army to the border of our land, everyone in this room would drop everything and look for a way to help.
Yes, but which side would they be on, or would that depend on who made the better offer?
For years, Mexico has been advancing what amounts to a very soft invasion of the U.S., sending us their unwanted population in order to receive money in return. It's not an actual invasion and illegal aliens aren't foreign soldiers. However, millions of illegal aliens live in the U.S. against the wishes of the great majority of Americans. And, some regions do in fact resemble war zones, with foreign criminals in effect holding U.S. territory. At least Arizona is fed up and is fighting back.
And, that very soft invasion is aided by those who are various degrees of quislings, whether the active variety such as George W Bush or those who simply would ignore the issue and concentrate on other, less important topics like spending.
UPDATE: Earlier I referred to Daniels as Indiana's former governor. In fact, he's still governor of that fine state.
Author Paul Kengor has uncovered several documents in the Soviet archives showing that, in the 1930s, the American Civil Liberties Union was not at all unfriendly towards Stalin. From :
Kengor found a May 23, 1931 letter in the archives signed by ACLU founder Roger Baldwin, written on ACLU stationery, to then American Communist Party Chairman William Z. Foster asking him to help ACLU Chairman Harry Ward with his then-upcoming trip to Stalin’s Russia.
Tea Party "Patriots" mostly silent about anti-American DREAM Act (and rightwing bloggers too) - 12/07/10
The "patriots" in the tea parties aren't exactly going all out to oppose the anti-American DREAM Act amnesty. The loudest voices against the Obama administration have mostly gone silent against an amnesty which could cover between one to two million illegal aliens and which would allow those illegal aliens covered by it to take college resources away from their fellow citizens.