And it's about damn time. Erick Erickson posted Friday on Redstate:
"We’ve always banned truthers at RedState. Increasingly, we have also banned a number of individuals who think Barack Obama is disqualified from being President because despite the Republican Governor of Hawaii confirming the legitimacy of the Democratic President’s birth origin as a citizen of the United States these birthers (”birfers” because it sounds as crazy as they are) refuse to move on.
Today I want to reaffirm and make it more definitive. If you think 9/11 was an inside job or you really want to debate whether or not Barack Obama is an American citizen eligible to be President, RedState is not a place for you.
Birfers and Truthers are not welcome here. Period. End of Story.
But I want to expand on this too...." Redstate ban
Erickson's proclamation generated nearly 400 comments. There were more than a few birthers who didn't like it, to put it mildly, as these emails show: example 1, example 2, example 3, and example 4. One blogger went so far to accuse Erickson of being a closet leftist and said the fact Erickson practiced law in the same courthouse as the Judge who sanctioned Orly Taitz $20,000 there was indeed a conspiracy between Erickson and other Obama supporters.
Just one problem. Erickson practiced in Macon and Judge Land's courtroom is in Columbus. Not to mention Mr. Erickson quit practicing law before Judge Land assumed his seat on the bench. But little details like that rarely stop the Orly clones. He didn't stop there, calling Mr. Erickson a few more names:
"He is also that kind of Republican effete who runs when Democrats shout “Boo!” on any issue, not wanting at all to seem politically incorrect to liberals.
He is also that kind of clever progressive..."
So if you don't agree with these people you are now a progressive? Oh, this is rich. Read the rest of the fun here. Erickson is doing the right thing. Obama and the Democrats are having problems because of their policies. They rammed through a stimulus bill, injected Bush's economic policies with steroids, and then tried to cram down our throats a health care bill no one wanted. Oh, and don't forget Obama and Geithner continued the same ass-kissing to Wall Street that Paulson and Bush perfected. Obama's approval ratings are in trouble and Democrats are running scared. Have conservatives learned NOTHING from the 1990's?
Does anyone remember how Clinton and his media allies used the Oklahoma City bombing to smear and discredit the conservative movement? Kind of took the wind out of their sails for a few years, didn't it? Why give the Democrats a weapon with which they can use to paint conservatives as a bunch of kooks? Besides the politics of it, the chances of success in this fight are practically zero. No court in America is going to say Obama is not President because of a birth certificate. Congress is not going to impeach him over this issue and the military is going to take his orders. If it ever got to the Supreme Court, they would likely call it a political question and hand it off to the legislative branch. The truth is, none of our recent Presidents have provided their birth certificates when they ran for office. That's right. George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush, Ronald W. Reagan, Jimmy E. Carter. None of them provided a copy of their birth certificate.
The birther jihad is stupid and makes conservatives look like a bunch of kooks. Right now, the grassroots movement actually has the Democrats on the run and the last thing it needs to do is imitate past Republican leadership and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We laughed at the Daily Kos-types who ranted Bush knew about 9/11, its time to start laughing at these people and treat them with the same contempt. Anyone who can sound like this:
doesn't really deserve access to a serious forum (By the way, here is a copy of her most recent complaint. Read it for yourself.). Its about time the conservative movement followed Buckley's lead when he threw out the Birchers and throw out the Birthers as well. You do remember the Birchers, right? They wrote books claiming Eisenhower was a communist. Kudos to Erickson for taking the lead and hopefully more conservatives will follow suit.
Note:Here is some additional commentary:
19 comments:
Well it's about damn time!
I wish both parties would consistently denounce their nutcases so we MIGHT get to have a reasonable poltical dialogue again.
Both parties share a dirty little secret -- they LIKE their nutcases. When election-time comes and they need people to innundate the internet with the evils of the opposition, it's the nuts they use. I'd say one-quarter to one-half of each party's "base" could qualify as nuts. But who are the best at running GOTV efforts on a local level? The base.
Neither party is going to give up such valuable tools (in every sense of the word). They take "true believing" to the nth degree and they show that passion by spreading ridiculous rumors about the other guy, whoever it is, and by manning phone banks and stuffing envelopes, etc.
It's why you see two distinct groups in both parties -- the nutjobs and the pragmatics. In order to get elected, you have to appeal to the fringiest of the fringe. But in order to GOVERN SUCCESSFULLY, you must embrace pragmatism.
But the nutjobs equate governing pragmatism as treason to "the cause," whatever the hell the cause is.
You could see both parties publically dismiss all their nuts and it still won't end -- because there will always be at least one more person on each side who will claim to possess REAL ideological purity and, therefore, ownership of the party. And because the people in power want to STAY in power, they will quickly back away from sensible pronouncements and spend time and money courting their fringe elements.
When Americans decided that "compromise" was a dirty word, and that not getting 100% of what you want equals a complete loss, we handed control of our political processes to the craziest among us.
It's only going to get worse. The fringe have AMAZING voter participation rates and are the most able to impact late-deciders with their "believe me else there will be disaster" messages.
Depressing as hell, it is.
And Kudos to you Sir for saying in concise terms what I have been thinking for the longest.
What is "reasonable poltical dialogue"? Please define.
'Bout time.
2:17 -- "reasonable political dialogue" is made of many elements, but the most relevant to this discussion is the idea that your EVIL ENEMY is the mullah in a cave overseas who wants to blow up you and all your kind (except for the women, whose genitals he will have scraped off with pottery shards), NOT the guy across the aisle who happens to disagree with you on physician reimbursements in Medicaid or on flag burning. "Reasonable political dialogue" is damned near impossible when all reason has disappeared.
Gal: Don't you have that backwards? Isn't our enemy someone "in a cave overseas?" and not someone who happens to disagree on a small political issue?
" A reasonable political dialogue"
The word " reason" is your big hint for a definition. A rational, and informed rather than emotional,ignorant and far fetched debate would be a nice change. It be nice if we could recognize The Big Lie or at least TRY.
Yes, both parties are well aware that people who are frightened and emotionally worked up are the ones who go door to door and who open their wallets. The rest of the ranks are filled with the politically ambitious, the profit seekers ( yes,Virginia, politics can be a lucrative business) or those who need political favors and then there are the " true believers" who the higher echelons see as incredibly gulliable.
Look at what happened to the Tea Party folks in Nashville...the organizers laughed all the way to the bank.
The book/speakers racket is the biggest con of all. Get a PAC or deep pocket contributor to buy BOXES and BOXES of books and then donate them or gift them. Overnight bestseller and lots of money to an obligated politician.
Our ELECTED officials who are supposed to SERVE us and who WE pay, charge big bucks for us to hear them speak!?! Did Lincoln and Douglas charge? How is it we're sitting still for THAT little money maker?
Do you consider what takes place at the JFP to be reasonable political dialogue?
Surely reasonable political dialogue is available somewhere on the net. Give us an example.
The film clips are hysterically funny!
A tiny scary though when you think about how dumb people have to be to fall for this nonsense.
More frightening to me, is I personally know people with post graduate degrees from our Mississippi institutions who are BIRTHERS!
How do you get through college and graduate school or without reading or hearing enough about illegal immigration to know that to be a citizen you only have to either be born on our soil or have ONE parent who is an American? Did they miss all the MOVIES too about WWII romances with Europeans or GREEN CARD?
I really don't GET how supposedly well educated people can be that damn DUMB.
Because they are not attorneys and shysters like Taitz and Berg come along making these statements with a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo that sound right and lawyerly but are actually bogus arguments.
You don't have to be an attorney to know the requirements of legal citizenship. Just bothered to THINK!
How in the hell does a college educated, native American miss knowing that being born on American soil or having ONE American parent is enough(!?!) ESPECIALLY a conservative who OUGHT to have heard about illegals coming here to have BABIES born here so their CHILDREN are citizens!
WHY IS THIS HARD?
By the way, as Stewart pointed out, when you hear ANYONE,especially a politician or pundit uses the phrase, " as far as I know", you should KNOW they are trying to pull the wool over your eyes!
There are so few victories for common sense, but here is a clear one. Perhaps we should have a parade.
I know my devotion to balance and moderation is boring, but I hope to soldier on. I do admire passion; it's zealotry that disturbs me.
Beautifully said Burke!
I'll bring the confetti!
Ironhost -- my bad, take me by what I MEAN, not what I actually SAY/TYPE!
;)
Now I can be a politician, too!
Thanks, 9:04. I'll wager that Kingfish gets tired of my tepid additions, but it's too late for me to change my spots. And I like it here in the center. Good view.
Mr. Kingfish, if I may be allowed to offer a compliment, I would say that I admire your passion, and am happy to say that you are not a zealot. You have proved yourself a trustworthy source of hard news. You also come up with some valuable surveys. I voted for Ms. Westbrook, by the way.
I must confess, I voted for Julie, several times, as I have several years in a row.
Ms. Straw is a radiant beauty, and I understand your supporting her. It is finally a matter of De Gustibus Non Disputandem Est.
Carry on as before, sir.
Post a Comment