Well, Beck is half right. That’s a far better performance than usual.

Oh man, the birthers are gonna go nuts! I’d love to hear MSNBC’s take on this.

SWWT says:
January 5, 2010 at 10:53 am

I’d love to hear MSNBC’s take on this.

They’re gonna be really confused. They hate Beck, and want to mock him… but agree with this POV. They’ll probably say something like, “Even this idiot Beck knows that…” and so on. It’s tough when you’re guided but such strong hatred to say anything positive (just look at the shots Glynnis had to get in before saying she and Beck agreed on something).

The only way to find out how the birthers will react is to go to Free Republic, or do it the safe way and wait for Freeper Madness to have a new post regarding their reaction to Glenn Beck’s opinion on the birthers. Chances are they’ll call him a liberal traitor and call for his removal from television and radio, and eventually call for his assassination.

I love freepers.

Snipzor says:
January 5, 2010 at 11:22 am

Yes, they’re much better than the KOS kids… who dance when a political opponent falls ill.

*rolls eyes… again*

Beck’s stance on birthers is not news to regular Beck viewers/listeners, as I pointed out in the thread in which Glynnocchio lies about “Birthers [Comparing] Obama To An Ape”.

We are now in Day 36 of that bald-faced lie.

Also from that thread, my stance on his refusal to release the copy of the original 1961 Certificate of Live Birth:

I believe he was probably born in Honolulu. However, there HAS to be a reason why he won’t authorize the release of the vault copy of the original long-form 1961 birth certificate (and not the 2007 computer-generated printout with only partial information that his campaign released on his website).

The most likely realities are, IMHO:

1. What is purported to be the official 2007 printout from the state of Hawaii is a forgery (explaining his lawyers’ dedication to preventing inspection of it in court), or…

2. The 2007 printout IS authentic, but the data has been altered so that it differs from the 1961 copy of the original in a way that punches at least one huge hole in his well-worn, constantly-repeated life story.

Bottom line is this: Because of the revelation of the birth certs of his grade-school classmates born in the same hospital within hours of him, we know what Obama’s 1961 birth certificate looks like if it says what he says it does.

But he STILL won’t let us see it.

That doesn’t necessarily mean he’s lying. He could be playing possum with a purpose, like Saddam Hussein. Hussein didn’t have weapons of mass destruction in any of the places he prohibited UN inspectors from searching, but he pretended he was hiding something to prevent IRAN from knowing he had none.

Maybe it’s a “Hussein” thing, and we just don’t understand.

Maybe, the President has taken a page from the W Playbook. You’ll remember W refused to discuss his DWI conviction and his drug use, deeming the same personal matters. Similarly, W wouldn’t discuss his daughters’ various alcohol convictions. Personal matters.

I love the fact that Beck dismisses wildly insane cospiracists with his own conspiracy theory.

Only in Glenn Beck’s world.

LN – Here’s my theory. BHO is sitting on the porch with his daughter; they are watching a storm come in. His daughter asks him to make her a paper airplane and he grabs the nearest piece of paper, which just happens to be his birth certificate. Anyway, without noticing what was written on it he makes a wonderfully aerodynamic paper airplane and hands it to his daughter. She gives it a toss and watches it float skyward, and just in time to catch the outflow of the oncoming storm. Away it goes. Probably someplace in Iowa by now.

Either that or he buried under a rose bush. Probably a “garden thing” that we’ll never really understand.

The Real Royal King wrote:

Maybe, the President has taken a page from the W Playbook. You’ll remember W refused to discuss his DWI conviction and his drug use, deeming the same personal matters. Similarly, W wouldn’t discuss his daughters’ various alcohol convictions. Personal matters.

1. The record of Bush’s DWI arrest was in plain sight, waiting for someone who knew of its existence to uncover it. It was not sealed by anyone, it was not prohibited from view by privacy procedures. Its recovery on the final weekend of the 2000 campaign is suspicious, but doesn’t appear to be a conspiracy.

2. While Bush was open about his alcoholism, he was coquettish about his record with illegal drugs. He knew that it was a never-ending question: Once he addressed the subject at all, he knew it would be the only thing anyone in the MSM wanted to talk about. To wit: In a Newsweek mag issue published five years ago this week about rising stars in the U.S. Senate, the fact that then-Sen. Rick Santorum smoked pot in 1970s was prominently featured in the text of the article and as a caption under a photo of him. On the other hand, the admitted marijuana and cocaine use of the other Senator profiled — Barack Obama — was not mentioned at all.

3. The arrest record of Bush’s adult daughters doesn’t say any more about his fitness to be President any than Al Gore III’s arrest record says anything about Gore Jr.’s fitness to be President. Those are indeed “personal matters.”

4. Most importantly of all, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that says drunk drivers can’t be President. There IS something saying that you must be a “natural born citizen” in order to be President. And it speaks volumes that efforts to pass a law saying that one must prove their citizenship in order to be on a Presidential ballot — in other words, making the Constitutional requirement codified in the law — have been condemned as attacks on Obama. Why? If Obama has nothing to fear from such a law, why not pass it?

Nice try, RRK.

Ted — why don’t you just go back to incessantly calling people “dumb ass”? You make more sense when you keep it short.

LN – Jeez – I thought I was keeping it short.

LNS: My analysis did not condemn W. In fact, I think he acted wisely. Similarly, I think President Obama is acting wisely. It’s a shame that you have fallen into the Beckish trap: If an allegation is made and your don’t deny it, you have admitted it. Whether the law merely reflects or informs our social principles, your formula does not seem to follow a methodology we have accepted in America. At least until the unfortunate Beck, Coulter, Dobbs, Hannity, Limbaugh, Malkin sorts crawled out from behind our baseboards.

There is an angle that a lot of people are missing in this whole ‘birther’
story. It is the fact that Obama promised transparency and bringing the country
back together, yet when something like this crops up where he has a chance to
prove it he ignores it.

While I admit I think the birthers are being used by the left to marginalize
conservatives it could backfire bigtime.

I think Beck’s point (or how I interpret the point) is well taken. Obama knows that he could end the whole thing pretty easily… but instead, he’ll play coy. Doing that allows the loons to keep on being nutty, allows the left to accuse the right of being aligned with the loons, and puts the right in a position of defending the President and themselves. It’s really a win for the President… and a loss for the opposition to keep talking about it. I think that’s what Beck’s point is/was… it’s just good political strategy.

The Real Royal King wrote:

Similarly, I think President Obama is acting wisely.

He may be acting wisely in the sense that his continued refusal to prove what he says (through proxies) is true keeps the “birthers” standing in the political battlefield as easy targets. But it contradicts everything he said about openness and transparency. Fortunately for him, the birth cert controversy is far from the biggest example of his insincerity about that; Today, C-SPAN is calling him out (a month too late) on his multiply-repeated campaign pledge to drag healthcare bill negotiations out in the open on live television.

It’s a shame that you have fallen into the Beckish trap: If an allegation is made and your don’t deny it, you have admitted it.

I hope you’re smarter than to reduce this to an anti-intellectual, anti-Beck sound bite that doesn’t address any of the issues he has raised. But — if you want to go there, I can play too. You, RRK, have fallen into Obama’s trap, if you will — you think his refusing to answer Beck’s allegations is the same as denying them.

It’s not.

Let me ask you directly: Do you think it matters that Van Jones — the deposed “green jobs czar” — is a self-described communist? Do you think it matters that he said unlike the image-conscious Obama, “I can be an a**hole” in terms of activism on Obama’s behalf? Do you think it matters that he’s a 9/11 truther? Do you think it matters that he formed a Maoist activist group in Oakland? Do you think it matters that Valerie Jarrett is on video saying they knew all about him from his days in Oakland, indicating they knew how radical he was? (Click here for a stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day moment from CBS News about that.)

If it doesn’t matter, they should have no problem answering. It’s not “crazy” to ask any of these questions of the people who are running the country. It’s cowardly of them to refuse to answer them.

If Glenn Beck were smarter and had more integrity, he could use the “birthers” issue to his advantage. And, he could do that all without giving any time to obscure theories. All he’d have to do is be logical and tell the truth, and he could make a lot of BHO supporters look bad. So, why doesn’t he do that? Please read the link and then ask him about it on air.

If Glen(n) Beck were smarter and had more integrity, he’d be Brian Williams. Actually, my gratuitous snotty remark aside, I think your point is very, very well taken.

Who first coined “Birthers” to try to discredit these Patriotic individuals, and make them a laughing stock? Who is responsible? Have you considered who, and why?

Give me the definition of a “Birther”.

Who gave birth to the idea that “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President”, which we find in The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1? What unpatriotic mental midget would be the first to ridicule the “Birthers” that gave us Article 2, Section1, of our Constitution?

James Madison said, “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, basterdized form of illegitimate government”.

Job 34:30 states:
That the hypocrite reign not, lest the people be ensnared.

Ps. 12:8 states: The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.
Think that God does not know where we are today?

Ecc. 7:6 states:
For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of a fool: this also is vanity. LAUGH ON!

Facebook User wrote:

If Glenn Beck were smarter and had more integrity, he could use the “birthers” issue to his advantage. And, he could do that all without giving any time to obscure theories. All he’d have to do is be logical and tell the truth, and he could make a lot of BHO supporters look bad. So, why doesn’t he do that?

Beck’s POV on birthers has been that the issue’s a distraction from the attempt at “fundamental transformation” of the USA happening in real time, which it is within the power of a well-informed populace to prevent. The birth cert issue is solely the domain of the courts, out of the reach of individual Americans, and the likelihood of success is next-to-nil.

Please read the link and then ask him about it on air.

OK, I read it. You and the people behind that site couldn’t be more wrong. (And if you want to ask him, YOU call him up. You’ve got a phone.)

The MSM — who, despite the new media revolution, are still in charge of what most people see, read, and react to — were dragged kicking and screaming into acknowledging the birth certificate issue at all. They have never treated it seriously despite the fact it is as serious as the Constitution itself — who knew there was no legal mechanism for enforcing Article II, Section 1? — and are especially reluctant because it causes stress for Obama.

I dare say most people didn’t understand the Electoral College system before they were forced to learn about it in 2000, and explaining the minutiae of Federal statutes, fifty individual state election statutes, Hawaii statutes regarding citizenship and tribal records, and who knows what else would be an exercise in futility. The only reason the MSM would bother to help break it down would be a court decision in favor of “birthers” over Obama, forcing the issue into hyperdrive the way Paula Jones’ SCOTUS victory did for her sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton.

Orly Taitz has made a fool of herself before the world chasing forged Kenyan birth certs and other nonsense. Let her be the face of birtherism. It’s a better use of Beck’s time, effort, and high profile to mobilize resistance to Obamunism.

The Real Royal King — do you think it matters, or not?

Having read three of Mr. Beck’s books and viewed his TV program from time to time–something liberals are afrraid to do with an open mind–I am confident that Mr. Beck possesses in abundance the qualities of ethics, passion, love for his country and its Constitution, and just plain old common sense. I therefore tend to think that Mr. Beck is rational in his remarks that the liberals use the “birther” claims made by some (and believed by many) to marginalize the conservatives. The fact still remains, however, that Mr. -0bama, who campaigned on the false promise of transparency has obfuscated the great majority of his personal records, including a certified copy of his birth certificate. That said, it is not the fact that Mr. -0bama has sought to withold his personal records that troubles me the most; it is his policies and his associates that should be of great concern to anyone who might claim to love this country: His policies are indeed destructive in that they seek to work in contradiction to our Constitution and for the first time since making this wonderful nation my homeland, I find that I worry greatly about its future.

And Glenn certainly does know bout puppets!!!

Nachi Says,

He exposes so many of them right? :)

The topic of “Birthers” is what distinguishes the better talk-radio hosts from the poor ones. The poor ones seem to have nothing else to talk about (see: Dobbs).

Rush has never given credence to these people, so it seems a little odd that anyone would think Glen Beck was inadvertently criticizing Rush.