VIDEO: Sheriff Mack Calls Out Glenn Beck, “You Ought To Be Ashamed of Yourself!”

By: Jay Syrmopoulos
352

Bunkersville, Nev., April 22, 2014- In this video Sheriff Mack breaks down the Bundy Ranch situation, while calling out Glenn Beck. He states that the Bundy family simply wants to be left alone and highlights how the federal government has run all 53 of the other cattle ranchers in Clark County out of business, while questioning how these types of authoritarian acts will subsequently affect the food supply system. Sheriff Mack goes on to question what this will do to liberty in America.


“This is still America, lets put freedom and liberty first. Lets have the people who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution be legally liable for that, lawfully, legally, and criminally liable for that. If they don’t keep their word then kick them out of office, fire them or charge them criminally. But this incident here has shown me one thing… the federal agents and the mercenaries that they have hired are willing and able, and have made this very clear. They will shoot at unarmed people, they will shoot at unarmed citizens. They are willing to kill, and over what? Grazing fees or the desert tortoise? How ridiculous can you get and they will do that here and then turn around and then blame the Bundy’s. The Bundy’s will not be responsible for that, I’m guaranteeing you that right now,” says Sheriff Mack.

Follow Jay on Facebook and on Twitter @SirMetropolis

The following two tabs change content below.

Jay Syrmopoulos

Jay Syrmopoulos is a journalist and political analyst living in Winona, Minnesota. He received his Bachelors in Political Science from Winona State University and is currently pursuing a Masters in Global Affairs from the University of Denver. Jay is a liberty activist dedicated to exposing the facade of reality by shattering the left right paradigm.

  • Phil Asophical

    Sherrif Mack you made the decision to say put women and children in front and it has made the Bundys and those involved look like jackasses.

    • kevin barter

      Federal agents firing on women and children over some cattle eating some grass and Bundy is the jackass? Sorry, not really following that logic.

      • Jose C. Alvarado

        No,what Mr. Phil here is saying is that suggesting to use women and children as a human shield IN CASE they get fired upon by federal agents is what made them look like jack asses.

        • Jester

          If you listen carefully to the 10 minute interview Ben Swann conducted with Sheriff Mack, you would have a more informed version of what he said.

          He thought the BLM was willing to open fire and slaughter protesters en mass if they tried to approach the BLM camp and reclaim cattle.

          He knew that women would likely be part of that crowd. He thought that if the women went to the front, that the BLM would be less likely to open fire, especially because of the large media presence. He said nothing about children. He said he would ask his wife and daughters to engage in this tactic if they were there, and that he would be right behind them. His daughters are not children, they are grown women.

          So his logic was to suggest the crowd arrange itself with the women going to the front, visibly. To REDUCE the chance of a massacre. And if the BLM opened fire anyway, then there would be an even greater backlash upon the tyrannical federal government.

  • doodls

    AHAHAHA!! Been saying for years that Beck is a poser… stop giving that ignorant alcoholic a platform to misinform and mislead.

  • RobertMahoney

    Why is he calling out Glenn Beck and not the state Governor and state politicians? Beck covered what was going on, but unless they get out there in front they should be ashamed? Should Ron Paul have been out there in front? Alex Jones? Ben Swann? Should they all be ashamed of themselves?

    • kevin barter

      Glen Beck is a phony and probably only actually believes a very small portion of the crap spewing from his mouth.
      Although, I do agree that more politicians should be called out and shamed publicly. peace

      • RobertMahoney

        Maybe you should email Nick Gillespie and the folks at Reason and fill them in on all the details.

    • Jason Sellers

      I think he’s calling-out Glenn Beck because Beck is standing completely against everything that the Bundy’s, and all the rest of us who love freedom, are standing for. Glenn Beck is actually siding with Harry Reid! And no, Beck’s job isn’t to cover what’s going on, but to interpret it for his listeners (he has said so, himself). So it’s not that Beck wasn’t literally on the front lines; it’s that when someone with as much influence as he has, who claims to fight for liberty, essentially gives the finger to Mr. Bundy, his family, and everyone else who’s been used and abused by our government, he really ought to be ashamed of himself!

      • RobertMahoney

        Ummm, I listen to Beck off and on when I’m on the road and he completely supported the Bundy family. Back has a problem with people are are just itching for a civil war. Let’s be honest, there are some people out there who would love nothing more than to kill a federal agent. Those are the people Beck doesn’t support. That is why he stresses over and over to be like Ghandi and MLK, don’t resort to violence. You do that, and you lose.

        I have an idea, let’s have Ben Swann do an interview with Beck over this. I mean, might as well present both sides.

        • Tim

          “Beck has a problem with people are are just itching for a civil war.”

          No, Beck was trying to castigate the Militia who showed up to defend Bundy. And remember, until those Militia showed up, the Government were BRUTALIZING those people and FRIGHTENING THEM WITH SNIPER RIFLES and destroying their property.

          Every unlawful thing the BLM Agents were doing to Bundy, STOPPED once the Militia got there with their guns. THEN the Government actually started ‘listening’ and treating Bundy with some respect.

          The violence from the BLM agents CEASED and the criminal damage of Bundy’s property also ceased once ARMED guardians stood to protect Bundy’s life, liberty and property……….um, isn’t that the GOVERNMENT’s JOB???? But what we saw was the REVERSE of what reality SHOULD BE in this nation. We actually saw the GOVERNMENT acting like the CRIMINAL and the MILITIA acting as a GUARDIAN OF RIGHTS.

          And yet, Glenn Beck was acting like these Militia were “terrorists”. Nope. Glenn Beck is an idiot and I urge people to please stop patronizing Glenn Beck. He’s not going to lead people responsibly. He’s not organizing people to vote properly and he’s not taking a stand for true Liberty when it’s desperately needed.

          • RobertMahoney

            I’m sure you’re correct Tim, as I said, I don’t listen every day.

            Like I said above, I would like for Ben Swann to interview Beck and get his take on it.

          • Eileen Wright

            Go to Beck’s web site and read what he said

        • Jason Sellers

          I used to listen to Beck pretty often, but a couple years ago I started to listen to him only about as often as you described. Just a couple days ago I was driving, thought I’d see what was on the radio, and heard Glenn Beck say very explicitly that the Bundy family were criminals, that they deserve the full weight of the law to fall upon them, and that Harry Reid was actually in the right in this case. But then again, maybe I misheard him (it wouldn’t be the first time, lol!), so yeah, if Ben Swann interviewed Glenn I think that would be very beneficial for everyone!

          • Eileen Wright

            He did not say those words…’ that they deserve the full weight of the law to fall upon them” You are spreading false rumors….in other words, lying.

          • Jason Sellers

            Whoa! Whoa! I never said he said those *exact* words! I was paraphrasing, NOT lying! Yes, he was explicit in what he said, whatever it was that he actually said. And did you read the rest of what I wrote, or were you just looking for something to offend you? Are you still even reading these words right now??

            I wrote: “But then again, maybe I misheard him (it wouldn’t be the first time, lol!), so yeah, if Ben Swann interviewed Glenn I think that would be very beneficial for everyone!”

          • Eileen Wright

            OK, but you did say… heard Glenn Beck say very explicitly that the Bundy family were criminals, that they deserve the full weight of the law to fall upon them, and that Harry Reid was actually in the right in this case…and he didn’t say that…

          • L.C. in Texas

            Yes, Mr. Bundy himself admitted that he was a criminal in the eyes of the administration. What he is trying to show the people, is that the administration has gone array from their purpose and the people. We need to back up Mr. Bundy since he is already in the game and help bring back the true purpose of the united States of America.

          • SickOf BeingCoddled

            bundy admits that he is breaking the law, and says the Law is wrong. and he is willing to suffer the consequences to make the point raise awareness and get the Government reigned in. Glenn always says that if you are going to defy the law you have to be willing to take the consequences. you are a criminal indefiance of the law and the law is wrong. does not mean he thinks Bundy should sit down and shut up.

      • Eileen Wright

        Beck is not siding with Harry Reid. He was calling out people who wanted violence.
        I suggest reading what he actually said

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        did you not see bundy on the Beck show TWICE!! and he talked on the phone with him and he relayed messages right from what Bundy said about the RADICAL protesters that were in danger of making things worse. And asking for prayers and love to prevail??

    • Gregg Braddoch

      He’s already called them out previously.

  • kevin barter

    I actually bought into that fear mongering, gutless, sell out piece of caca. Glen Beck is a coward and spews his trash only to sell more books.

  • Brimstone Hill

    Beck is not a patriot, he is a charlatan in every sense of the word.

  • Eileen Wright

    Whether you like Beck or not, I suggest you go to his page and read what he actually said instead of lying about it. Call him names, tell the world you hate him; I don’t care, but read what he actually said.

  • Philip Marcum

    You can be mad at Glenn Beck and all that jazz, if you want, and that’s fine but why would anyone care what this guy (Sheriff Mack) has to say? This is the same guy that wanted to put women and children in the front hoping they got shot first as a kick off to civil war. He is an Extremist, he strategizes like a terrorist would. He is not the person to look towards for leadership in the Bundy movement. Glen Beck (who I don’t really like) asks a few questions and happens to know about grazing fees himself since he also has cattle already knew that “technically”, the Bundys legally had no legs to stand on. The issue should be on overreaching government deciding to take what they want, imposing fees as they feel like it, having nobody to be accountable to, and coming in to a simple cattle rancher with several hundred agents in full battle gear and launching a campaign of intimidation and brute force. They had their way with the Bundys until it angered the American people that the FEDs was using excessive strength of arms against them.

    I hate to break it to everyone but nobody cared about the government coming in to take care of the Bundys breaking the law, they cared about the fact of HOW they came in to execute the law. You all want to declare who is a patriot and who is not is only going to split the American people when before you even had some independents like me and even some of the left actually on your side. The more you add crazy extremists to the mix, the less you are getting supported. You think that the Bundys was the first case of the FEDs over exercising their near limitless power and resources to crush someone under foot? You are just noticing this time because Bundy is a God fearing, heavy right leaning, white guy.

    When Occupy happened, instead of those on the right supporting them and protecting them from police brutality, and mass arrests all over the country, you all just called them communists and that they got what they deserved. Many on the right were thrilled mostly young adults were getting the crap beat out of them and in this case almost all were completely unarmed in peaceful protest and civil disobedience. Called them criminals for breaking the laws in civil disobedience because they felt the laws were unjust. If a single or couple of crazy persons mixed into their group that claimed they wanted America to become Communists or looted a shop somewhere in America, the right latched onto it as if the entire movement was about that.

    As an American people as a whole (which we ALL are supposed to be in this together in the end and making sure our government works for us) we failed to support Occupy’s true grievances because of foolish right vs. left politics. Issues the right even sometimes agrees with like over reaching government (part of what the Bundy issue is supposed to be about) and the fact that most our politicians are bought and paid for these days with no term limits in Congress. Both the right and the left complain about these issues all the time yet act like they hate each other. The left and the right actually agreed on some things for once but because the movement started left, the right wanted nothing to do with it. As an independent, I think when the left bucks against the right and the right bucks against the left just because you belong to different parties, thats what will destroy America. The left and the right are SO divided in who is right and who is wrong that they are United in destroying America together using their weapons of division.

    So Sheriff Mack is your alls leader and patriot? I happen to know he was not at the protest March but he wishes he had been, I know because he stated it that he wanted women in the front to be shot first, he was thinking in the sense of engineering and premeditating the “shot heard around the world” for a NEW civil war. Thats who you think is the patriot of America? If a civil war was to happen, thats the kind of mind that was going to set a new America on track? A new founding father of a single party America under the political right whose founding principle was to engineer a way of civil war by making sure women were shot first to light a fire under Americans?

    I would call him an evil mastermind accept he was too stupid to be one. He actually told his plans out loud to the world on camera. Evil masterminds don’t describe their smoking gun plans to the world, this is not Dr. Evil in some funny spy movie, it’s an extremist who automatically gave the protesters a black eye because now politicians on the left are using his foolish words as ammo to misdirect the left and independents back into their base camp using him as the poster child of your movement to stop the government from using near limited resources against American citizens. Politicians like Henry Ried is using a man who was not even there as a way to make Americans think he was and that they really did put women and children in the front.

    Thats your battle folks, it’s combating misinformation. You think FOX news or any other cable network tells it like it is and gives you the right of it? Hell no. They don’t care about issuing the facts, they care about drama, which creates ratings which generates money, and if they can serve the political base they aim at while they are at it and push their agenda, then thats great to for them. It’s not news folks, it’s a propaganda battle. The politicians serve money, the cable news media serves the politicians, which in turn gives the cable networks money, and both the media and politicians use the citizens as pawns to keep both parties in power. Yes, Democrats and Republicans want to be the majority, no doubt, but in the end the politicians work together when needed because why? The one thing NEITHER party wants is to be knocked out of the titles of Majority or minority. They want to make sure they are the only two parties that can EVER claim those even if they have to trade power back and forth every 2 – 8 years.

    • DusterAz

      your full of crap u communist Obama supporter.. don’t you have a Hillary campaign to run to..

      • Philip Marcum

        Interesting. Well there is no way I can argue with grammar skills like that. You got me. Being an independent, and implying in my original statement that perhaps 3rd party was a wiser thing to look into then the status quo, naturally that was just my clever ruse you saw through and I clearly voted for a Democrat which is really the Communist party in disguise or at least I am trying to turn it into that and my tool will be Hillary Clinton bhwahahaha….hahaa…ha….and junk.

        Since I am full of “crap” though and Communist, maybe I didn’t vote for Obama and tried to trick all of America by voting for BaraMitt Rombama to confuse the right. The clever wooden duck picture guy is right, don’t fall for. This brave patriot with his alias name so he can post anonymous troll behavior saved the day.

        • DusterAz

          I’m sure your suckling off the government you independent or atheist are the same preach one thing and do another. Your an Obama supporter or whomever will give you money/food. Your disgusting. Sheriff Mac is a good man and you can’t see it. You are a liar.

          • Philip Marcum

            If you must know, I am Agnostic, I’ll wait while you go google that so that you understand what you’re angry at and can ready your new salvo of “mean words” I swear though, if you call me a triple dummy head….it’s on!

          • DusterAz

            See you voted for the left. You suck.

        • DusterAz

          hey dildo breath don’t talk about grammar when you don’t know who your even talking about.. Who is “henry Reid” you ass hat?

          • Philip Marcum

            Oh, was that your burn Mr. Az or shall I just call you Duster? If you would stop kissing me, you would not have to deal with my dildo breath anymore. This seems to be less and less constructive though. Do you actually have something that proves you have actual thoughts and words past a 8th grader or is this all you got in your arsenal? School yard name calling, what are you 12? Say something that might actually make me rethink my position. Do some research anything, just show you have the ability to think on a level higher than Simian poo slinger.

          • DusterAz

            stupid ass you didn’t and still don’t know what or who your talking about. And i wouldn’t piss on your head if it was on fire ;).. See how i did that… LOL

    • Chris D

      This is the same guy that wanted to put women and children in the front hoping they got shot first as a kick off to civil war

      No this is a man who strategized…brain stormed on video. That video was cherry picked and on air 5 whole days before Mack was even there or involved on the ground. Use your head, if you can find it

      • Philip Marcum

        I already said that in my above statement if you would have actually read it. I already know Sheriff Mack’s statements was cherry picked, I specifically said Henry Ried used it to try and swing the center and left back to the left using a guy who was not even there. I will attempt to recover my head though, I hate when it goes missing.

        • DusterAz

          psst who is Henry Ried asshole.. its Harry Reid shit for brains!

          • Philip Marcum

            I’ll never believe your leftist claims! Why don’t you go back to this “Harry Reid’s” office and wait…conspiracy theory starting…You know Harry Reid’s name well and your angry I chopped it up, your name is Duster…a code name to hide your identity…Hmm…Duster…Nevada is Dusty…Henry Reid is a Senator from Nevada….his former top Aide heads the BLM….they were in a dusty place. Oh save us! DusterAz is the head of the BLM! Please don’t send hundreds of agents to my home Mr. Az!

          • CrackedGenstone

            Profiteers and rent seekers are the worse. Seems that the good guy empire has found it reasonable to destroy mid sized farming through regulations, not only that, but salt on the wounds when congress is filled with a ton of crazies who can make money through it all. Regarding Sheriff Mack, he’s itching to make a point it sounds, to me though the point is ‘Americans wont tolerate a federal government that murders Americans over taxation.’ I’ve been scrutinizing governments as a hobby for a while now, the economy reminds me of the soviet union pre-collapse; certainly the bailouts, bundles of freshly printed bills that end up in a bubble, only visually different than post soviet notes, the fact that ‘aid’ is only going to the business sectors that have proven fiscally incontinent is insane. I could have put my 2 cents everywhere but your last post made me laugh.
            Take care.
            Gen

          • Philip Marcum

            I agree with your statements. Obviously I was just being goofy of course on my last post here about Mr. Duster. He was just trying to be trollish instead of debate so I was having some fun with him.

    • Sparky McBiff

      First you start off with a lie that Sheriff Mack “Put women and children in the front to get shot first” and then claim that anyone who stands up for the Constitution and the Rule of Law is an “extremist”.
      Hear that everybody?
      This is the sort of person that this Philip Marcum guy is.
      You can’t get a more perfect example of someone who is a supporter of tyranny and an enemy of freedom than this.

      • Philip Marcum

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF0md6f0oF4

        Go to 4:42 in the radio interview. I did not make it up. Hell I am not even saying the right said it or did it, I am simply saying Sheriff Mack said it. I did not lie, it’s what he said, it’s upon you to prove me wrong. I never claimed standing up for the Constitution and the Rule of Law is an extremist. I said Sheriff Mack’s idea to put women up front is an extremist idea. I also made it clear that I did not believe that those protesting agreed with Sheriff Mack on putting them up front. I said he was not actually there. Are you saying that Sheriff Mack is right to want that? Is standing up for the Constitution include wanting women to be shot down first?

        I believe in the Constitution, I will protect it first over you, or the left, or anyone that wants to rewrite it for their own belief system. I am against what the BLM did, yet, what exactly are you hoping for here….Sparky…a target for your clearly blindy right anger? Does it irritate you I am not left enough but good enough in a pinch? What’s sad is, I actually support the right on this issue of the government overreaching and acting like they got a dick bigger than the state of Nevada. What boggles my mind is some of you still want to insist on hating even an independent. Yes, I am not on the right, but I will not go to the left either, both sides apparently are crazy, if you guys want to destroy each other, I have no ability to stop that.

        You want to hate each other and think you’re going to “win” when it comes down to it? Win what exactly? What are you going to create? A single party system ruled wholly by the right? Thats no longer freedom, thats a country dominated by a single party, they call that a dictatorship, all are completely dominated by single massive majority party. Stalin, Hitler, modern dictatorships, all have a single party system. So let’s give you your fondest dream of getting rid of Democrats and independents that don’t convert to the right. Now what? Utopia?

        • DusterAz

          go look at the video of when the feds backed down. Tell me how many women let alone children you see you communist.

          • Philip Marcum

            You still have not read my original fully have you? Had you, It would have explained I already know that. I do not support the idea that people are trying to say that women were put in the front. I saw the video, I completely agree they were not put in the front. I never said thats what they did. I merely pointed out, I am not sure you want Sheriff Mack who did actually say thats what he wanted to do as the leader because it would give this whole movement a black eye if you support his idea of women first. Americans as a whole simply are not going to support that and just think he is a giant douche. People are right about government overreach, why would you destroy the momentum made by saying we pick as our leader of this movement the guy who wanted women to be shot first for the “cause”?

          • 1Finngal

            @ Philip Marcum ~either you dont know what you’re talking about, or you express yourself very unclearly. You’re very good at cherry-picking words to blame the right for putting women on the front line. Do your homework first, Phil ~ http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/21/new-republican-platform-excludes-women-from-the-front-lines/

          • Philip Marcum

            I cherry picked nothing, again, I never blamed the right about putting women on the front line, not once. I specifically said that never happened. I simply said Sheriff Mack wanted that to happen, is he the guy you want as the leader of this movement because you all are acting like he is the “good man” for wanting to put women on the front line. He failed in doing that, he was not able to get to the protest in time but he DID make as many phone calls as he could while on the way trying to convince some to do that. Thankfully the protesters rejected his idea.

            Before assuming I did not do my homework, try actually reading what I actually said. It just so happens I am with the right on the actions taken by the BLM as overreaching and wrong and you all STILL are determined to think I support the BLM, it’s mind boggling. Is it because I did not say first before I said I am against the BLM to impeach Obama first? Was that the secret code words I missed before I wrote my statement?

          • For My Liberty

            FYI….It was a SUGGESTION that the women stood in front…SUGGESTED by the Sheriff because IF the BLM was going to shoot, it would be at WOMEN. It did NOT HAPPEN. It is called STRATEGY.

          • L.C. in Texas

            Don’t forget the women and children, many children who died in Waco at the hands of the administration. And for What ? They were self sufficient, clean, healthy and cared for by their peers – not walking the streets and smoking dope because their family was torn apart by some unhappy social worker or judicial system wanting revenue.

          • Philip Marcum

            Strategy huh? Yeah I get that…It’s also a “strategy” for Saddam Hussein to stick his own innocent civilian citizens on important bridges and military spots to keep the US from bombing them but that don’t mean it has any honor in it. There is no honor in even suggesting putting unarmed women up front to be the first to be shot in the hopes it justifies open civil war.

            Yes, killing unarmed women would be a highly justified reason to take on the government, I would to at that point but his strategy was to either hope they turned away (which they did even though it was men they were facing and not women) or if the BLM was hell bent on an attack, killing women would start open civil war to drag in Americans all over the country because to not support a civil war after women were killed would mean to the rebels that you support the idea of killing unarmed women.

            It is a strategy, it would force the country into open revolt, It would be a convenient hate cry for those against open revolt saying these people are for the BLM and FEDs shooting innocents. Opens up all kinds of possibilities to do horrible things to those against America being split in two. Yes, his strategy would have been all nice and neat and a civil war handed to him with a great big bow on it…

            Had he not said thats what his intent was, and nobody found out assuming open revolt happened as a result of his “strategy” His side would think naturally that they were fighting for honor not knowing he planned it. Since he openly admitted it however, had it happened, nobody would have thought his strategy had any honor. It was him trying to force a “Remember the Alamo” moment on the American people using women. There is no honor in premeditating and attempting to engineer a trigger to wake the sleeping giant within the American people. They call that a False Flag moment and there is no honor in such machinations.

          • Austin

            You make perfect sense and have a lot of evidence to back up your claims, but it is a lost cause trying to change these people’s minds. They don’t listen to reason, are highly irrational and, and want violence to ensue. I don’t want you to tire yourself out typing by trying to change their minds. Just know that you’re completely right, and it is now up to these people to hear what you have to say and be rational. If you want to keep trying, be my guest, but I can’t guarantee that these trolls will not wear you down.

          • L.C. in Texas

            Question, who was the aggressor ?

          • SickOf BeingCoddled

            I think the level of reading comprehension has deteriorated to the point where you are wasting your breath, Philip. thanks for trying. I do that too, but some days it is grueling!! God loves Liberty so I keep on. LOVE is the way to win a heart. But even that doesn’t guarantee the mind comes with it.

        • L.C. in Texas

          From another independent, the women were not forced to be in the front line.

          • Philip Marcum

            Yes…I know…for the what? 80th time…I NEVER said they were forced or even put on the front line as volunteers. I cannot stress enough folks how important it is to watch Reading Rainbow apparently and listen to your hooked on Phonics tapes. Reading what people actually wrote is so important.

      • L.C. in Texas

        And he is long winded too !

        • Philip Marcum

          Yes, thats true at least

    • For My Liberty

      Sounds like you have all your talking points together…You forgot ONE THING…

      Do the Fed’s Really Own the Land in Nevada? Nope!

      http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/04/19/do-the-feds-really-own-the-land-in-nevada-nope/

      • http://batman-news.com/ We The Eloi

        I agree and for the feds to threaten to shot protestors, and to have the feds kill cattle and prize bulls, to have the government steal cattle and euthanize them with no due process is an even bigger offense on behalf of the gov. The only thing the gov should have done was place a lien on the property but they can’t collect fees on something they don’t own per the Enclave clause. This is a states issue not a federal one.

        • Philip Marcum

          I agree with this as well.

      • Philip Marcum

        I agree with you on that. Nevada land should belong to the Nevada people and the state should be able to decide how to deal with that land.

      • COMALite J

        Interesting history if accurate. Will research further. That said, only the Supreme Court can actually officially declare this unconstitutional, if it in fact is. Hopefully this will cause a case on it to be brought before them.

        So, for now, until the Supreme Court rules, the Feds do legally own the land, whether rightly or wrongly, no matter how unconstitutional you or I may think it.

    • Legatus legionis

      You do not understand strategic thinking, or tactics. I understand your shock at the mere idea of having women in the front. Sheriff Mack was correct in asking them to lead. BLM’s agents are paramilitary thugs who think nothing of killing. Sheriff Mack properly deduced that they would kill unarmed citizens. Ghandi did the same thing and defeated the British Empire without firing a shot in anger. The fact that BLM pulled out is evidence that Sheriff Mack’s decision lead to a peaceful resolution of an otherwise tense situation. Your comments remind me of another time too. Then, 3% of Americans rose up to fight against King George for liberty. Then, as now, men like you spoke out against war. Then, like you, men called the revolutionaries traitors. So, my message to you is simple. You are either with the likes of BLM, or with the citizens. There is no middle ground.

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        Ask the Bundys what led to the back down and they will tell you praying for guidance and then following the prompting of the spirit .

      • Philip Marcum

        Finally, a reasonable person willing to offer a differing point instead of just “You communist Obama supporter!” haha Thank you, genuinely for attempting to actually offer your differing thoughts, this I have no problem with. I do not agree though for a couple reasons. One, Sheriff Mack was not there, he just wanted this to happen but failed in getting it to happen. Two, the BLM pulled out in the face of mostly men marching on the line. A few women were sprinkled throughout the marching line but none on the front line that I saw. They did not pull out thanks to Sheriff Macks strategy because no women were on the line to cause that. The BLM pulled out sans any women with a crowd mostly made up of men. So there is no evidence his strategy worked since it was never implemented. My issue was with Sheriff Mack even making the suggestion and should not be the one to lead this movement.

        I have called nobody traitors for standing up for what they believe. I actually side with the right against the BLM’s actions just not willing to throw my hat in with a man like Sheriff Mack who seeks to engineer a false flag way into civil war. I am not against war if it is justified. I can promise you, my gun would be on my back to and ready to march if at any point the government turns on it’s citizens and fires at unarmed peaceful protestors. There is no honor in the Government doing that regardless of your political affiliations. We are all Americans in the end, and I would stand with it’s citizens if the Constitution was ever in danger by the government.

        IF there is no civil war, like there in none now though then there is still a chance to bring the understanding between the government and the citizens back around again so naturally I would prefer the government understand it’s place among the people over a civil war starting and killing likely millions. I want all our children to grow up in peace and prosperity. War should always be the last option if possible. In the end though, I side with the American people should the government turn against it’s citizens.

    • Jose C. Alvarado

      Well said sir.

    • Austin

      Amen.

    • http://batman-news.com/ We The Eloi

      I bet by now you have discovered how misinformed you are about the Bundy’s. If you believe in the false left right paradigm then you have exposed yourself to not being truely awake. You said, “but why would anyone care what this guy (Sheriff Mack) has to say?” Well he has a strong constitutional stance as a sheriff for which I applaud him for and being the highest power inside any county above and beyond governments usurped power I think he can have the floor in support of that local sheriff and to urge him to do the right thing and be on the right side of history. He’s the leader of a consttutional sheriffs organization that is recruiting good constitutional minded sheriffs to join forces to eliminate the threat from within our government and the UN working against our public and private lands which is the core of our economy. Ownership of land is what drives an economy to fluorish when those owners take out loans using land as collateral. That’s how many businesses get started. There are only two sides to this right or wrong there is no fence walking by so called independents. Either your defending the constitution or your hurting it. Either your a patriot or your otherwise. Together we stand divided we fall.

      • Philip Marcum

        Thats all fine and dandy there “We the Eloi” I am all for people supporting the Constitution and I have no problems with that aspect. You cannot just simply say though, because this guy supports the Constitution, any bad he does is cancelled out. He is automatically a great guy because of that? If you go home and beat your wife at the end of your day and get sloshed ACCEPT you fully support and defend the Constitution, I am STILL going to think you’re a dickhole. My point was and always had been, Sheriff Mack wanted to pull a dick hole move which luckily the people defending Bundy did not accept as a proper and honorable way to uphold the beliefs and values of the Constitution, so they rejected his idea to put women up on the front line to be shot first.

        He may be outspoken when it comes to the Constitution but a when you strategize things like unarmed women on the front line hoping them to be shot first so as to enrage the nation into a civil war. I have to question his honor, his end intent, his sanity, and what good is the Constitution anymore if one uses any and all techniques (including those of dishonor or evil intent to fight back against a possible government with dishonorable intent and clearly evil actions had they shot non violent Americans). I am all for defending the Constitution with my life if need be so that others may be free but I will not adopt underhanded dishonorable tactics to make that happen or the words on that document mean nothing.

        Some of you folks may be angry enough and of low enough character that the “ends justify the means” in your eyes and maybe I am too idealistic to think we can hold on to our American values without resorting to dishonor but I shall maintain my position as long as Sheriff Mack resorts to such tactics. If he truly believes in America and the Constitution, the last thing he would do is stoop to dishonor just to attempt to break America up into Civil War by using unarmed women to be shot. His tactics are wrong. I have nothing against women also protecting the Constitution if protecting it from our Government ever became needed but I got a lot against wanting to stick unarmed women in the front to be shot to enrage America into Civil War. I am only glad the Bundy protesters were against the idea.

        So do I support the Constitution? Yes I do, with all my heart but if zealots were ever to sully it’s words in dishonour just to start civil war because they think fighting evil with evil is ok because “they” started it. Then you do not believe in the Constitution truly, you believe in a modified version and a darker America. As I said before, if the government fired on unarmed civilians that day, I would have realized the government no longer works for the people and I would have marched with everyone else, it would not have taken the slaughter of women to realize the government has lost sight of it’s purpose. They did not though, rather than see American bloodshed, they backed off.

        The government is not lost yet, just very sick with corruption from both sides. Not all of them, but the majority is bought and paid for and it is not us that owns them, it’s corporate America and the powerful Lobbyists that owns the law makers. If we do not remove their power over our lawmakers, they will never make another law that favors the average citizen again. Whats the last law they made just for us? The ever shrinking middle class and poor? Our rights and freedoms are being loop holed to death. We are taxed far beyond what the founders ever intended and a temporary measure for war has become a permanent part of Americans lives and it only gets higher and higher every year and yet the National debt gets more and more out of control despite record tax revenues this year.

        We can blame Obama for doubling the National debt by the end of his 8 years in office but most presidents and state governors, and Mayors have been putting every part of this country in increasing debt for decades now and it belongs to both parties. The democrats, the Republicans have not done anything to actually reduce our debt in the slightest. It grows with either party. Dwight Eisenhower was the last Republican President to preside over a balanced budget. He had a balanced budget in 1956 and 1957. Since then, there have been two presidents to preside over balanced budgets, LBJ in 1969 and Clinton in 1998 through 2001. During the last 40 years there have been five budget surpluses, all five were under Democratic Presidents: 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.

        So no, nobody plans on either side to fix this issue, they both plan on kicking the can until America implodes from debt and THAT is the crime against the American people and one day it will bring us into a time and the world of financial ruin and may cause civil wars, riots, or wars between nations. We should be focusing on saving the nation from itself not looking to Sheriff Mack as the guy who can dishonorably start a civil war. If we want to have a chance, we have to remove the power from lobbyists, corporations as “people” which is idiocy, reform how politicians can get donations with donation limits and has to come from a real person not super pacs and corporations and lobbies but individuals.

        We also have to get rid of probably 90% of Congress, Audit the Fed and put term limits on our Congress. We have to take heavy cuts from both Military by limiting the budget to new technology, taking care of vets and current soldiers, stick more to National defense and pull out of any no longer needed military bases. (put the bases on stand by and maintenance instead of fully operated accept in times of ACTUAL declared war by congress. If countries want us to protect them they need to pony up some of our damn expenses we CANNOT police the world, we are going broke trying to.

        We need to make general cuts on waste programs, force Congress to stop borrowing from social security, we will have to cut from welfare to. We have some 80 something welfare programs, some of them can be eliminated, some can be maintained minimally if they are a program that semi pays for itself, some can be turned off and only enacted in times of great need, some have to be paid for. We could probably easily cut both the military and welfare in half each and we would STILL have the largest military budget on earth of ANY country. Our welfare programs are a mess but this may force proper use of the budgeted money. We should invest in America’s infrastructure and pull foreign aid to non allies, use it to invest in Americas issues. We should go back to America being a Neutral country at the very least until we pay off out debt again.

        There should be laws against Congress putting us back into debt unless they balance and pay back the crisis budget within a few years after the crisis that required the borrowing is over. This is all off on a tangent but this is stuff Americans should be doing together regardless of party affiliation. If we don’t take the government to task over their blatant misuse of money and power these last 3 to 4 decades, they will do it until America self destructs and they, and corporate America will take their accumulated gold and silver and either leave the country, or rebuild it as an Aristocracy or Oligarchy.

        In 4 decades, our leaders, some that have been in Congress over 30 of those years!, have put 19 Trillion dollars, a number that cannot easily be fathomed by most on just how big that is compared to other countries debts and printed money. It’s so large, the number does not even exist in printed money, it’s purely a digital number. There is not enough gold and silver in the whole world both mined and yet to be mined to cover this number. It’s backed by faith alone. A faith that is wavering by the American people and the world which is why we are finding it so difficult to recover.

        The American dollar is backed by nothing but the world’s faith in it and every year we make it more and more worthless, more and more nervous while China buys every sliver of gold it can get it’s hands on because they know we cannot maintain this bubble forever and when we burst once and for all, they will step in with a currency the world will not be able to help but accept and they do NOT play by international rules. We better get it together or there will not be an America for us all to bitch at each other over and weather or not the government may or may not have broke a Constitutional right with Bundy will seem like “good times” in comparison.

        • http://batman-news.com/ We The Eloi

          Show me whats so bad, to put women in front with their empty hands up? Women that now are in combat zones around the world, it was not suggested by Sheriff Mac the women wanted to do it themselves with their empty hands showing and knowing they could advance and be less likely to get shot as opposed to a guy on a horse. Sheriff Mac never said so they can be shot first! I am saying for someone to defend the constitution that’s heading in the right direction but hey look it up yourself his background speaks for itself. An honorable sheriff doesn’t suggest letting women get shot first that’s pure propaganda. Sheriff mac is an honorable guy. Find me a video of him saying that then I will agree with you.

  • DusterAz

    I got your back Sheriff Mac!!!!

  • DusterAz

    Glenn Beck is a turncoat.

  • charlestonvoice

    The Beck has been evangelized and neo-conned.Write him off as another clown.

  • Carly

    Once upon a time in US history there was a majority of people who were itching for a fight over a pretty big topic. Well, they got it – it was the Civil War. A most bloody war, indeed. This is what Beck is trying NOT to start, because if he fell in line with some conservatives blood would be on his hands too. Words matter in critical times and can make the other side look bad. I’m still getting flack from people over Mack’s words which they are even tying to the cause of Oath Keeper’s in general. Oath Keeper’s are valuable and they shouldn’t have such a pock mark put upon them, nor the militia’s who are there to hopefully there to keep the peace.

  • theLAB

    All I can say is welcome to my World – theLast American Bastard for a reason – For them and theirs at the continued cost to yours and mine – theLAB

  • Rick Ferguson

    Beck talks a good game when he is hocking gold, his books, and survival food, but he is far too big and important now to be bothered with things like actually doing something now that he is going to be a movie executive.

  • raven6

    Very interesting article. As a research analyst, the material I found, I put into a short powerpoint,
    that illiterates the challenges and the continual dividing of the population into even smaller groups within groups.

    See: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/30361471

    A large dysfunctional family, with the Fed at the head.

    Raven6

    • gomurr

      Divided we fall……

  • kevinbarry

    This guy has it exactly correct, and Beck should be called out for his take on this event.

    • SickOf BeingCoddled

      you are an idiot on this matter

      • kevinbarry

        Well who the f**k deemed you master of the world. I’m sick of aholes like you, who don’t see the abuse of the Government that we pay for, and the destruction of the Constitution. You’ll recall Waco and Ruby Ridge, where the full force of the Jack booted thugs, resulted in the murder of American’s we do have rights you idiot, even if we don’t agree with you. Climb back in your hole Sheeple, and wait for Obama to tell you what to do next. Another mindless drone.

    • gomurr

      Look at all his “supporters” in the media who jumped all over him yesterday as being a racist, based on a 10 second blurb, taken out of context, published by the NYT. Not one of these “professional journalists” took 5 minutes to seek the context or listen to the whole interview. Way to go, guys. That shows just what kind of journalistic integrity they have in the search for the truth.

  • Nate

    Glenn Beck was created to take libertarians away from the Alex Jones crowd. Glenn has always worked for the NWO, they just tasked him to win patriots to his side so that he can lead them astray.

    • Bob Loblaw

      I can’t believe people actually buy his propaganda. He said he supports the Bundy cause and acted like he’s some kind of humanitarian and say he doesn’t want the protestors to incite violence when the BLM were the ones inciting violence. He’s pretending he’s on the right side, while simultaneously painting supporters as violent. In doing so he’s siding with the state- where people like Reid call anyone defending against treason ‘domestic terrorists”.

      That is clear cut statist propaganda right there. Beck has been a high level propagandist for the state for a long time and any time any of you are foolish enough to think he might be honest you need to remember that he’s an agent posted in the media to levy a propaganda war. Then you might scrutinize him and see the layers of propaganda rather than just the facade it creates.

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        he only was finding fault with the ones the BUNDYs themselves said were getting out of control. He had bundy on his show twice. the video where the dogs were lunging at the protesters was mentioned by bundy as the ones Bundy wanted to leave. they were instigating and looking for a fight. Bundy said he didn’t want a fight he wanted his cows and he was going to go and tell them “do what you want I am here for my cows” and that is what he did.

        • Bob Loblaw

          I know what was said. Do you? He said protestors were calling for violence when the only ones calling for violence were the BLM. He pointed to facebook posts to support his statement. It is pure state propaganda.

  • Rusty Shackelford

    So, it’s ok to say that the United States government does not exist, which basically nullifies any argument here, and that its ok to steal from other Americans, and its ok to feed your cows at the taxpayers expense, and it ok to lie about how long your family has been in the area, (about 65 years, not 150) but god forbid that you pay your rent like 10,000 other ranchers do? Commie, pinko, anarchist.

    • r3VOLution is not republican

      Actually Bundy has said FROM THE BEGINNING, that he is more than willing to pay THE STATES grazing fees, AND HAS ATTEMPTED TO. NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, because they DO NOT OWN THE LAND (per the Enclave clause).

      Try again?

    • gomurr

      His claims of his family settling the area are true in 1877 are true. Don’t take the first facts you read and run with them. That’s the MO of people like you. You look for a discrepancy and run your mouth, half informed, mostly with the intent of justifying your largely propagandized beliefs and causing trouble and discord.

      I wonder why the BLM has removed the General Land Office Records 1820-1908 from their site?

      Calling the man a Commie, pinko really does show just how ignorant you are.

  • r3VOLution is not republican

    Glenn Beck is SNAKE VENOM. His propaganda is designed to DULL, MAKE LIMP AND PARALYZE the victim… while his republican/democrat (same thing) snake easily and calmly SWALLOWS THE NATION!

    I’ve watched this HUMAN GARBAGE poison my Tea Party, rendering most of it USELESS FOR ANYTHING, but electing republicans.

    • SickOf BeingCoddled

      is freedom works not TEA party? is Mark Levin not TEA PARTY? I don’t understand the skitsophrania (sp) in some of the comments here.

      • Bob Loblaw

        No, they aren’t. The true “tea party” is what it was the first time around- a bi-partisan tax protest and call for reform. Anybody claiming to be a “tea party” person that talks about anything but abolishing the IRS is just trying to co-opt and pervert it into being something it wasn’t meant to be.

        • COMALite J

          The Boston Tea Party, according to actual accounts from actual participants who were actually there (such as George Robert Twelves “R.T.” Hewes), was actually much more like Occupy Wall Street than like either of the modern movements that have claimed the name “Tea Party.” It was a protest not against taxes being high, but against corporate taxes (for the world’s first multinational megacorporation, the British East India Company, and its subsidiary, the East India Tea Company — the corporate tax breaks granted them by the Crown undermined the ability of local tea growers to compete, thus the Boston Tea Party). So neither is really entitled to the name on those grounds. If anyone in modern times was, it’d be OWS.

          Of those two, the one you appear to be talking about, namely, Ron Paul’s followers from 2007 and even 1987 who initiated (ill-informed and historically wildly inaccurate) “re-enactments” of the Boston Tea Party to protest the IRS (or “IRStapo” as we called it back then — I was one of them in 1987. having actually campaigned for Ron Paul then, so I know whereof I speak) is the one more entitled to the name, under the sole grounds of having used it first and were still using it when the jumped-up Johnny-come-lately movement now known as the “TEA Party” formed on February 20, 2009.

          They’re not entitled to that name, either for reasons of historical accuracy, or for the simple reason that your group already claimed the name and was still using it.

          Given that, there’s only one name left to call them, namely, the name that their own founders chose in the actual FreeRepublic thread in which they first formed (note the dates of the thread and of the posts therein — this was exactly one week before the first-ever protests featuring this group, and months before Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, the AP, NPR, or anyone else would use the name against them), knowing full well what it meant (even having been warned by their own!) and yet choosing it for that very reason! (read the posts in the thread) — namely, Teabaggers.

          • gomurr

            You don’t have any power or authority to decide who has the right to use “Tea Party” and who doesn’t. T-taxed, E-enough, A-already.

            OWS had nothing to do with taxes. In fact, most of them, at least in the beginning had no idea why they were there, or what the issues truly were, except they wanted their school loans paid and hated the bankers.

      • COMALite J

        “Schizophrenia.”

        • SickOf BeingCoddled

          Thank you. it was late and I was lazy. LOL

  • http://offnow.org/ CJS

    Glenn Beck is an entertainer and that’s it.

  • Liberty

    First things first. Tge people need to take back and mandate tge limited government clause be used. 1. No person who works for government, not any person who receivers aid from government should be allowed to vote. No elected official should earn more than the national average wage, and none are due pay for life nor any benefit. All elected officials will be held accountable to the literal interpretation of the constitution and no law or regulation which infringes upon those rights shall be allowed, and those who make such proposals be put to death. That no person may introduce new spending until the government has cut 80% of existing spending outside of military funding

    • John the Patriot

      I agree, although I believe that those who are on “disability”, or those who are “retired” and have paid into the Social Security System, should be exempt. They paid for that insurance.

    • http://batman-news.com/ We The Eloi

      You said, “1. No person who works for government, not any person who receivers aid from government should be allowed to vote.” Your going to tell average citizens who just happen to have a job with the government (who do you think makes up the government?) that they can’t vote? Or maybe someone needs food supplements but still works in the crappy economy he’s handed in his area so now he can’t vote for something better for him/herself because you would say so? How in the hell do you call yourself liberty? For you to suggest someone should have their RIGHTS taken away while they are down on their luck (designed by banksters) is somehow relieved of their right to help themselves when they are down, so as to keep them down. Where do you think gov money comes from? The same people who can’t vote now? You guys need to change your names you starting to sound like gov shills

  • MadSpartan

    Glenn Beck calls himself a Christian. A Christian is supposed to be someone who has a spiritual relationship with Jesus Christ. Someone who try’s to follow the life and actions of Jesus by emulating them in his own life. Jesus despised the State. Glenn Beck is a statist, regardless of the pablum he spews from his lips about loving liberty and being a libertarian. He should use his influence to rebuke the state and cast it off as a symbol of idol worship, and an enemy of all that is good and just. I’m certain that if Jesus were physically present with us here today, and the leviathan state known as the United States of America were in pursuit of Him for some nebulous law that was broken, Glenn Beck would condemn Him, much like those who condemned Him to die.

    • Bimpah

      Glenn Beck is a Mormon so is Richard Mack so is Bundy. I have a great friend who is a mormon he is a wonderful guy, but they are not Christians. Their are big….HUGE… fundamental differences, one being who Jesus is and what we are as human beings. Mormons believe that they will become a god which would be considered blaspheme and idolatry by Christians. Mormons worship a different Christ of their own making not the Christ of the Bible. Christians believe God is the creator of the universe, Mormons believe their god is an exalted man and that Jesus and Satan are brothers.

      • MadSpartan

        Agree with everything you said. Beck does refer to himself as a Christian. He should refer to himself as a Mormon since he is not truly a Christian (follower of Jesus of the Bible). That also makes him a liar.

        • Seth Ludwig

          So when you say “Jesus of the Bible,” you actually mean “Jesus of the Nicene Creed.”

        • SickOf BeingCoddled

          ditto the above to you too

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        you are such an ignorant dope on this subject.

      • COMALite J

        Do you use the NIV Bible?

    • SickOf BeingCoddled

      Jesus said render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasars and unto God that which is God’s.-not exactly and indictment of the state. The constitution while it still stands is the framework through which we try to resolve issues. Standing against those who disregard it is proper, but you do it peacefully for as long as possible. Are you as willing to get out and campaign for a true constitutional conservative as you are for us to take up arms and start a civil war? we have a lot more work and a lot more pain to go through before war is the only answer.

      • LocalHero

        He also said repeatedly, “Do not add to my law.” As soon as you can point out where the constitution is in the Bible, I’ll be happy to follow its guidelines. And your interpretation of Christ’s instructions regarding Ceasar and that what he was saying applies to today’s governments is just plain wrong.

        • COMALite J

          Romans 13:1–7.

  • Dave

    Ben, I follow you and have your app on my Android devices. I also follow Glenn Beck. Net: Glenn has been following this issue and is reporting just about the same information. Do not make the same mistake other have made and make Glenn Beck your enemy. I will just have one less feed to monitor. Btw.. Live in Cincinnati area and watched your programming. Also enjoy following you when you are on other programs – one of which is an enemy of B.

    • Rothbard

      “Do not make the same mistake other have made and make Glenn Beck your enemy.”? Why? Will he send the Feds after you? It’s obvious that Beck is already an enemy of those who see the state as the true enemy of all Americans.

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        if you mean the enemy of corrupt ones who are in elected office right now, yes Glenn is their enemy, if you mean the constitution of the USA, you are barking up the wrong tree. He has as much respect for the constitution as any one could pray for.

  • DarthSyphilis08

    I subscribe to both Alex Jones, AND Glenn Beck. Beck DID NOT EVER call the Bundy family terrorists. Beck sided with the Bundy family. Beck has only criticized those who were instigating violence. He also criticized the suggestion to put women and children up at the front lines. That suggestion didn’t sit right with me either. Its a cowardly decision in my opinion. That’s the type of crap I expect from radicals, and communist types, but not from people who want God on their side. The lies need to stop. Beck never sided with Harry Reid. He’s been supportive of the Bundy family. IN FACT, the Bundy family had to ask some provocateurs to leave because they were encouraging violence! Those are the people that Beck was criticizing, and I agree with him on that.

    I’m a huge Alex Jones fan, but Infowars is wrongly reporting on this.

    • Jester

      If you listen carefully to the 10 minute interview Ben Swann
      conducted with Sheriff Mack, you would have a more informed version of
      what he said.

      He thought the BLM was willing to open fire and slaughter protesters en mass if they tried to approach the BLM camp and reclaim cattle.

      He knew that women would likely be part of that crowd. He thought that if the women went to the front, that the BLM would be less likely to open fire, especially because of the large media presence. He said nothing about children. He said he would ask his
      wife and daughters to engage in this tactic if they were there, and that he would be right behind them. His daughters are not children, they are grown women.

      So his logic was to suggest the crowd arrange itself with the women going to the front, visibly. To REDUCE the chance of a massacre. And if the BLM opened fire anyway, then there would be an even greater backlash upon the tyrannical federal government.

      I disagree with the idea, but it is not as gross as people are making it out to be by a long shot. I chalk it up to perceiving a dire and desperate situation and thinking maybe a little too far outside the box with an honest desire to avert a massacre.

      • DarthSyphilis08

        I understand where you’re coming from. I disagree as you do with the idea. I also agree that sheriff Mack is not as big of a monster as the media is portraying him as. I guess what I’m really bothered by is the misinformation going on amongst ourselves. We may not agree on everything, but the liberty movement can’t be divided like this. I get irritated with the way that Glenn Beck and his fans go after Alex Jones, as well as Alex Jones and his fans go after Glenn Beck. I think there is more that we agree on then there are things we disagree on. We are all Americans. I can tell that everyone here posting believes in America and loves the constitution. That makes you my friends. But lets try to get the facts straight. Beck has not attacked the Bundy family at all. He was praising their peaceful civil disobedience. That’s the same type of thing that Ron Paul was all about.

        • Jester

          I didn’t see where Beck was calling the Bundy’s terrorists. My opinion on Becks words on the situation is that he was out of touch with the realities on the ground, so he failed to make a distinction between those who were righteously and necessarily angry and directing that anger properly, including threatening violence to meet violence, and those who were letting their anger get the best of them and advocating measures that would be counterproductive. His knee jerk reaction in pursuit of his personal ideal was obvious to many and this is what brought the backlash onto him. Beck is a bit of a sophist and it showed.

          I wish that we all would be more careful when we offer out opinions on such emotionally charged issues. I jumped on Mack’s case immediately for broadcasting his “ploy” idea on Fox news AFTER the event was over, when there was really no need to mention it. Talk about out of touch. But the fact that good men are making these mistakes points to how serious and even desperate these times really are. Which is why I agree with you that we should correct one another but NOT hold anything against the few allies we have, unless their activity is unforgivable.

        • Jester

          I didn’t see where Beck was calling the Bundy’s terrorists. My opinion on Becks words on the situation is that he was out of touch with the realities on the ground, so he failed to make a distinction between those who were righteously and necessarily angry and directing that anger properly, including threatening violence to meet violence, and those who were letting their anger get the best of them and advocating measures that would be counterproductive. His knee jerk reaction in pursuit of his personal ideal was obvious to many and this is what brought the backlash onto him. Beck is a bit of a sophist and it showed.

          I wish that we all would be more careful when we offer out opinions on such emotionally charged issues. I jumped on Mack’s case immediately for broadcasting his “ploy” idea on Fox news AFTER the event was over, when there was really no need to mention it. Talk about out of touch. But the fact that good men are making these mistakes points to how serious and even desperate these times really are. Which is why I agree with you that we should correct one another but NOT hold anything against the few allies we have, unless their activity is unforgivable.

        • medic2003

          I have to say Alex doesn’t go after Glenn the way Glenn goes after Alex. Beck and his cronies sit there and mock Jones regularly. I listen to Alex more but I do watch beck some too. Dana loesch is a reason for me to watch the blaze. She’s a fellow missourian and she’s got spunk.

      • medic2003

        Not to mention that if you read comments of women who were there, they stated they would have freely volunteered to do it.

        • Jester

          True. That brings up another subject which is sensitive in these times. And many will not agree with me because sometimes the truth is hard to accept especially in regard to our weaknesses. As a rule, people in general suffer from certain weaknesses inherent in their psychological and emotional make up and these differ according to gender. Whether these weaknesses are a result of nature or nurture or a combination, is beside the point, they are what they are.

          If you think about why this is particular issue is controversial, you get a hint of this, and there is a double edged sword here. Arguably the best out of very few valid reasons offered to keep women out of combat is the distractive psychological affect it has ON THE MEN due to their protective instincts toward women.

          No need to analyze it further. It is a fact of life. And since the majority of any fighting force is highly trained men, who will be depended on for victory, the best tactics are those which will enhance their ability to remain focused, disciplined, and lethal. I am sure you see where this is going.

          Which is exactly why a serious military tactician will only consider the ploy Sheriff Mack envisioned under the most dire and desperate of circumstances.

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        reasonable, and the way it was passed along through the media, the story lost some of its context. That is the trouble as thes things are unfolding. NO ONE person has the details of everything ad who knows where the original source is and who has a different agenda. Glenn staying out of the way and calling for love and patience and calm was NOT a cowardly action.

      • kevinbarry

        The only thing I would say is that according to a free lance reporter, who later appeared on FOX, in support of Bundy, after interviewing him. He said that FOX was the only news truck out there. Which is troubling in the sense, that this could have been a massacre and there would be very few camera’s, I don’t think this was by accident.

        • Jester

          I think Mack is up to speed on the conspiracy of mass media censorship due to its narrow ownership and editorial bias. He probably knew that there were independents there, and may have known fox was there, and considering the potential of the internet to turn any cell phone video into a world wide sensation, the media angle was covered in case of a slaughter, at least in terms of the physical act being available for all the world to see.

          As we know, the spin in the reporting is a different animal.

    • Bob Loblaw

      Beck characterized putting women up front as using “human shields” as though everyone standing united as a line of what is clearly peaceful protestors (rather than a line of armed men who they could shoot and paint as criminals) is cowardly.

      That disingenuous propaganda is disgraceful. Beck has been part of a long-standing propaganda campaign to gain trust, co-opt the liberty movement, discredit it, and demonize it all while covering up, ignoring or mis-characterizing various facts as he did here.

      The reason Mack is saying he should be ashamed is because rather than being there with the protestors, he’s painting them as violent extremists simply because some are armed and willing to defend against violence that the BLM was threatening. He’s tried to pretend he supports the cause, while demonizing the protestors and in this way he shows that he is actually levying propaganda on his listeners in an attempt to get them believing Bundy and his supporters are violent. Beck is a high level propagandist and this is a prime example.

      • SickOf BeingCoddled

        he said— there are reports and audio of someone saying that a former sheriff war gamed putting women in the front so if anyone got shot the public will see the BLM people killed women. he said he thought the sheriffs name was Mack or something like that. Again The ire of the left, which you all seem to be aware of , is especially strong against Glenn and having him in Nevada would have made the situation much more volitil.

        • Bob Loblaw

          He knows who Sheriff Mack is – he spoke at an event last year that Mack also spoke at with three other speakers. That “some guy” garbage is something he and Bill O’Reilly and other state propagandists always say when referring to patriots to marginalize them even when they have met them personally.

          They posted the video to demonize Mack’s strategy as using “human shields”. The ire of the left isn’t against Glenn Beck as he works for the same people they do. He’s there to fold people back into the left-right paradigm instead of challenging the people that run both sides.

        • gomurr

          How could it? We have Harry Reid, and he’s still alive (damn).

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    Being that “Doctrine and Covenants” (one of the Mormon’s holy books) declares the Constitution a divinely inspired document–to which Sheriff Mack and the Bundys have sworn an oath to defend–they need to defend all of it, including the Amendment 5.

    Thanks to Amendment 5 of the federal Constitution and its establishment of eminent domain (including via the BLM), leading to the appropriation (theft) of private land turned into public land, and the Constitutional Republic’s insidious property taxes, every square inch of land in
    America is owned by the government of the Constitutional Republic (something impossible under Biblical law, see Exodus 19:5, Psalm 24:1, Leviticus 25:23) and therefore the Bundys and the protesters ultimately don’t have standing in this situation. Appealing to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights in this and similar situations is the epitome or irony!

    For more, see online Chapter 14 “Amendment 5: Constitutional vs. Biblical Judicial Protection” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt14.html.

    Americans need to wake up and realize what’s been done to them, as far back as 1787. And, in order to do that, they need to isolate, expose, and address the vehicle by which it’s been accomplished. Find our how much you REALLY know about the Constitution as compared to the Yahweh’s perfect law of liberty, take our Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar at the site above, and receive a FREE book that EXAMINES the Constitution by the Bible.

    • DarthSyphilis08

      The problem is Ted, that our government doesn’t follow the constitution. AT ALL. Its not hypocrisy. Mormons believe in what the founders did for freedom, and believe that they were inspired men. Are the founding fathers hypocrites for fighting against King George? I’d like to point out that Nazi Germany also used the bible to convince Christians to not oppose their criminal government either. Do you think the Christians who supported the Nazis won’t stand guiltless before God? Ridiculous.

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        I think you should go back a read my post. I think you missed my point entirely.

        • DarthSyphilis08

          Sorry Ted, I did misread what you said. My apologies.

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            No problem.

          • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

            No problem.

        • DarthSyphilis08

          Sorry Ted, I did misread what you said. My apologies.

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        I think you should go back a read my post. I think you missed my point entirely.

    • COMALite J

      Hey, Ted, when are ya gonna tell me why Yahweh allowed the Godless Anti-Christian Constitution to come into existence if, as your Kinist and Christian Identity and other BritAm Israelist buds believe (despite hard DNA proof to the contrary), Britain and the USA are Israel, and (as many others here believe) Yahweh intended the USA to be His chosen nation in these pre-Rapture times?

      Was His Divine Almighty and Irresistible Will that easily thwarted for centuries (even if you somehow succeed in your goals, and you really are doing His will) by a few dozen mortal men in powdered wigs?

      Ted, I’ve been hinting at this for some time, but now I’m gonna come right out and say it: years ago I was in online communications with someone who believed as you do, that the United States Constitution is anti-Christian and godless, and yet who, like you, was an extremely devout Christian. But, he went a bit further than you.

      He also claimed to be none other than one of the Two Witnesses of Revelation. He went by the handle “Bands,” after one of the Two Staves of Yahweh in Zechariah Chapter 11 (the other being “Beauty”), whom he claimed was the Yahweh-given names for the Two Witnesses. His former website (which I have backed up onto an old hard drive somewhere which I may still be able to access) even had a very detailed account of him being caught up into Heaven and personally witnessing the Courtroom of Yahweh in action.

      While I of course don’t believe his claims, he does back them up quite well from the End Times Prophecies of the Bible. He also made some real-world prophecies that seemed to come true, such as cursing a certain town in Texas whose authorities had persecuted him so that they would only receive a third of their annual rainfall that year (shutting the “windows of heaven” that it not rain is one of the stated powers of the Two Witnesses). It was exactly a third, to the ¹⁄100th″ accuracy, the maximum accuracy that meteorologists and climatologists record!

      Would you be interested in hearing more about what he had to say? I think you’ll find it fascinating. It answers the question I’ve repeatedly asked you: Why did Yahweh allow the Constitution to happen!?

    • COMALite J

      Oh, on another matter: you bring up the Doctrine & Covenants in a thread about Glenn Beck, a Mormon. Have I got something for you!

      Watch this YouTube™ video. Dylan Ratigan goes into much detail exposing the fraudulent nature of Beck’s endorsements of Goldline on his TV show, without clearly indicating them as advertisements as required by law (not to mention Goldline’s own fraud).

      But even Ratigan misses an even bigger issue: listen carefully to what Beck says in the first ten seconds of the video. That’s all you really need to hear. If you know the Doctrine & Covenants, then you should easily understand the ramifications.

      Remember, this was years before he Vice Presidential Debates in October, 2011 when Chris Matthews interviewed an elderly (almost certainly Mormon) woman nicknamed “Cold War Connie” who called Obama a “communist” on national TV outside the VP debate venue, and when he pressed her on it, she repeatedly replied: “Study it out!” That’s an odd phrase, and prior to her saying that, it was not an Internet meme. It didn’t become an Internet meme until she said it, and because she said it,

      But look who else said it years previously. long before it became an Internet meme!

      Where does that phrase come from? What does it mean in Mormon dog-whistle-ese? Do you know?

      And what does it mean for a Mormon to use that language (especially when followed by, “Pray on it”!) to unethically shill for a corporate sponsor, for money, for filthy lucre, for mammon!?

    • Shawn Hansen

      Land can only be taken through eminent domain if it is for “public” use. Thats what the supreme court has ruled. SO when did we start handing out SS cards to the desert tortoise? Do they pay taxes? Derp…..

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        Regardless what the Supreme Court has ruled (it’s record is pretty lousy for getting things right, particularly righteous), eminent domain belongs to one and only one entity-the Creator. Thus, the Constitutional Republic’s claim to eminent domain is a claim to divinity:

        “…The Fifth Amendment’s provision for property confiscation is applied in eminent domain, which is nothing more than a form of organized theft:

        ‘Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance….’ (Deuteronomy 19:14)

        “Eminent domain – the Constitutional Republic’s alleged right to seize property for the “betterment” of the people – is one way the government moves boundary markers and steals from its citizens. Bouvier’s Law Dictionary defines eminent domain, in part, as follows:

        ‘The superior right of property subsisting in a sovereignty, by which private property may in certain cases be taken or its use controlled for the public benefit, without regard to the wishes of the owner…. The right of every
        government to appropriate otherwise than by taxation and its police
        authority … private property for public use.’21

        “This property appropriation and redistribution is allegedly justified under the guise of urban renewal, by which private property is condemned for private use or sometimes transferred from one private owner to another. This occurred in the infamous 2005 case of Kelo v. City of New London,22 in which the Supreme Court decided five to four in favor of stealing a private owner’s home and property and transferring it to another individual under the auspices of furthering economic development. These types of decisions were made possible when, in 1954, in Berman v. Parker,23 the Supreme Court expanded the government’s “right” to confiscate private property to include “eliminating blight” as justification for such theft. Because Deuteronomy 19:14 offers no exception clause, no individual or body of individuals has the authority to steal land by moving boundary markers, regardless the reason:

        ‘Eminent domain is … an attribute of ultimate sovereignty, and therefore it is an attribute of divinity…. The right of eminent domain, then, is a divine right and power. Moreover, there are no degrees of divinity: divinity is a total concept. A deity is either divine, or he is not; he is either a god, or he is not. Thus, when the state lays claim to divinity, it lays claim to total power. The right of eminent domain ostensibly limits the state to the confiscation of properties necessary to the common good, or to the public welfare. But the state is the judge of the common good and public welfare, and so the power of eminent domain expands steadily towards the total possession by the state of all properties within the state. The state, being viewed as the higher or supreme power, and the possessor of eminent domain, is seen as the natural guardian and agency of the public welfare. In terms of this presupposition, private ownership is seen as hostile to the common good, whereas state ownership advances the public welfare…. The right of eminent domain, therefore, by associating a “necessary common use” or good with the state, makes the state into a benevolent god whose control and ownership are
        necessary to the welfare of man.’24….”

        Excerpted from Chapter 14 “Amendment 5: Constitutional vs. Biblical Judicial
        Protection” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The
        Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt14.html.

      • gomurr

        And when are deals made by Harry for his cronies public use?

        According to their own rules (BLM’s), any change in land usage on public lands must be presented to the people of the state. Still haven’t gotten word on any public hearings (surprise), only Harry and his dirty, underhanded politics, which benefit only Harry and his cronies.

  • Ward Damon Hubbard

    One thing is fast becoming clear, the feds presently rallying a choice stands as to the fed response to take everything they can, weather it is along the Red River valley, or in Nevada, and if not stopped now, they will Agenda 21-alize, as much of United State property as they possible, and push for as many citizens into an urban setting as they can, where they are easier to control, where the become more dependent upon services from the government, and are more like the very cattle of these ranchers, we as American need to stand fast and together to start the restoration of this republic, in Nevada, Oklahoma, where ever, they may label us as Domestic Terrorist, another “new” category label, by the career politicians’ who fear loosing the power that they love wheeling, selling, profiting from, and they need to go. This situation is going to get only worse, we need to stand together and know that this fight will be a battle for the LONG haul, the government is betting that the energy from the movement will die down, people will get tired and go home, but this can not happen or we will loose the momentum that this has started, and will require logistical and supportive roles, need to be addressed, to stay vigilant together, and organized, this is the opportunity of grass roots to restoration of the republic that is need, for the entire world to see, more importantly for the United Nations, to know that this is America “Get The Hell Out Of Here”.

    • kevinbarry

      Father Alinsky would be proud, his little drones are following the play book perfectly. A hard working tax paying American Rancher is now a “Domestic Terrorist” seems they want to put us Veteran’s in the same class. The Government sends a soldier to Iraq or Afghanistan, to fight in a war they created, when he returns home, POOF, he’s now a Domestic Terrorist, according to Nancy Pelosi and Diane Finestein, and the compliant dupes in the State run media, pick it up and repeat it. Any of you sheeple out there see a problem with that ?

      • 7LibertyForAll

        What’s even more sad, is that young men and women are continually sucked into the military by the promises of money, education and so-called patriotism. In fact, they’re just being used and discarded by the same filth who have instigated every single war since probably the beginning of time–and they always profit from those wars.

        • gomurr

          From a “great statesman”, war criminal, and all around disgusting human being:

          “Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”
          Henry Kissinger

          • 7LibertyForAll

            Yep.

    • gomurr

      First they need to “disarm America”. Ha,ha, ha…..

  • Ragman69

    Who is Glenn Beck? Is that the same guy I watched for years on HLN, until he moved to Fox, spend 7 years praising GW and Cheney and then he finally figured out in Bush’s 8th year what an idiot GW is, something I knew the minute Jeb ensured GW his win in the first Presidential bid? Same guy? I tuned that idiot out in ’07. I believe what this Mack guy is referring to when talking about Beck is Beck’s “about face” when push comes to shove….Beck is a sissy making money off of fools. Yea! Where was Beck in Nevada? Hiding behind his homemade pulpit cowering like the crybaby he is far away from any crisis he throws fuel on.

    • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

      The guy sucks. You got it.

    • kevinbarry

      Well if he were a Democrat, they would say he’s “Evolving” !

  • Ward Damon Hubbard

    One very important thing you failed to incorporate into this dialog, that is the other 52 ranchers, who were systematically forced out over a short amount of time, this is the variable of unknown, that is a very important part of that which has happen here, if 150 years count for anything it for a deeper look as to what has happened here, these ranchers know each other, trade with each other, go to church with each other, unless you have lived in a small rural community, you can not know what that means, and value what it has done for this great nation of ours, those other 52, or 53 matter, MATTER a hell of a lot, I don’t know but, I bet you’ll kind that the time line, of when he stopped paying taxes and the slow systematic losses of the other 52, reveal a pattern, and just that question, “what about the other 52?” needs to be answered.

    • glenn47

      The laws of the land were printed this week, and low and behold, the BLM does NOT own that land.

    • gomurr

      That number is just the ranchers in Clark County.

      When the fee was instituted, the ranchers were told they would help the ranchers pay for the upkeep and improvements to the range, something they have always paid for themselves. When Bundy saw they were using the money to drive the ranchers out, and buying their land for a pittance using their own money, he “fired” the BLM because he felt they weren’t doing their job. He began to pay for all the up keep as he always had, by himself, without their “help”. He offered to pay the fees instead to Clark County, but they refused his money.

  • Where’s the Birth Certificate?

    Sheriff Mack is a good guy. He knows the law, he abides by the law, and he obeyed his oath of office when he was sheriff.

    He also knows that Obama is not eligible to be President and that he is guilty of multiple felony charges with respect to releasing a forged birth certificate.

    Only a very – sick freak – would not want Obama removed from office, when he is not eligible and is destroying what’s left of America.

    Richard Mack is a good man – are you?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Koz7Ahjkmo

    • BeJebus

      stfu you tinfoil teabagger

      • Where’s the Birth Certificate?

        Is that you, Michael Lofty?
        Or are you Bathhouse Barry?

      • kevinbarry

        Another brilliant response BeJebus, Man you’re really hitting them out of the park today, High five yourself, and jump up and down.

      • 7LibertyForAll

        Ah, you’re exposed.

      • CorrectionPlease

        Once you find your true sexual identity,
        perhaps you’ll also avoid vulgar expression like . . . tinfoil . . .

        Meanwhile,
        Even The Pope says it’s ok.
        Be proud!

      • gomurr

        God, you are sooo smart!

    • BeJebus

      is he your mack daddy?

  • http://batman-news.com/ We The Eloi

    Unless agenda 21 becomes the central core cause of this then everybody is on the wrong boat with a hole in it. This isn’t about fees or turtles it’s about our rights and sovereignty being stripped away by the UN and the globalist. 50 plus families have already left and Bundys’ family are the last men/women standing. Agenda 21 has already gobbled up so much already and we must stop the progression of oppression and theft of our lands by these domestic agents of the UN. Land and property rights are the backbone of any economy and A21 aims to destroy it. Senator Reid is acting as an agent and so is everyone defending the governments actions.

    • 7LibertyForAll

      They’re very good at smokescreens to hid Agenda 21 but it seems that more and more are waking up and becoming aware of this treason in our midst.

  • Celtic Knight

    Open criminal investigations regarding the cattle rustling land grab of Senator Harry Reid, Rory Reid and the BLM.

    Search for that at the WH we the people site and sign the petition.

  • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

    Every time I see Glenn Beck’s name or dumb face, I want to puke. He “came out” last year as a Libertarian and ever since then, all he has done is the opposite of what a real Libertarian would do. He is a fraud!

    • Memphis Viking

      He didn’t “come out” last year as a libertarian, he’s claimed to be a libertarian for as long as I’ve been listening to him, and I started listening in 2006.

      • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

        It was recent that he changed his views on a lot of libertarian issues and realized the err of his ways, so to speak. Regardless of all that – he’s not a libertarian. He is a dirty liar.

        • Floyd Horn

          If you are going to call the man a liar put forth proof of what you are saying about him or learn to be silent.

          • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

            One instance that really turned me off of him was when he basically joined in and ramped up a smear campaign against Robert Sarvis (2013 LP candidate for Governor of VA). He basically took a half-truth and spiraled it into some conspiracy which was completely unfounded and false. It was near the end of the campaign and certainly did damage to Sarvis’ outcome. I happen to know Sarvis personally and know for a fact that that Beck was spreading was all lies.

            Regardless, running an LP candidate’s name through the mud is not something a Libertarian would do. It doesn’t help the cause.

            Glenn Beck will say whatever he is paid to say – at least that’s what I’ve come to find.

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/05/revealed-obama-campaign-bundler-helping-fund-libertarian-in-tight-va-gubernatorial-race/

          • Shawn Hansen

            So the truth comes out, he attacked your buddy, so now you dont like him.

            Thats called bias, thanks for playing though.

          • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

            That’s a single example. But whatever – that’s my impression of him. Maybe I’m wrong or I’m misinterpreting him. But spreading unfounded lies as he did is unforgivable.

    • paulrph1

      There seems to be no assemblance of order in the Libertarians (that is why I have not become a Libertarian but now remain in limbo, without a party but am still registered Republican so I can vote). There is so much discord one has a hard time knowing that they think. According to my understanding of what Beck thinks, it is not that he is a Libertarian but it is the fact that the GOP is no long a conservative organization. So he elected to be a Libertarian by default. I suppose he could have become a Democrat but that would have been suicidal.

      • http://www.joshuascottmccullough.com/ Josh McCullough

        Perhaps. But libertarianism happens to be one of the easiest ideals to define: don’t do things that harm other people, oh, and keep the gov’t small (and quit stealing from us). Simple!

        • paulrph1

          So that is their platform? It sounds so easy. But you know what they say about easy. If it sounds to good to be true is usually is not true.

  • SOUTHERN GENTLEMAN

    I have no use for the Lincoln lover, Beck. He is wrong on so many issues.

    • http://www.sonofthesouth.net/uncle-sam/brother-jonathan.htm Brother Jonathan

      I have no use for anyone who is not literate enough to read the words Lincoln spoke.

      • Where’s the Birth Certificate?

        Abraham Lincoln Quote

        “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

        Abraham Lincoln
        (1809-1865) 16th US President

        Source:

        Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858

        • http://www.sonofthesouth.net/uncle-sam/brother-jonathan.htm Brother Jonathan

          Another quote out-of-context. You people are dishonest and unethical. Read the rest of the speech.

          The entire point of Lincoln’s introduction in that speech was that the general government does not have the power or authority to make people equal.

          Here is Lincoln’s Charleston, Illinois speech in-context for honest people seeking to learn the truth.

          http://www.nps.gov/liho/historyculture/debate4.htm

          September 18, 1858

          Eleven railroad cars of people from Indiana were among the approximately 12,000 in attendance.

          Answering Douglas’ charge made in Jonosboro that he favored racial equality Lincoln explained his views on race. Lincoln then charged that Douglas was plotting to create a constitution for Kansas without allowing it to be voted upon by the people of Kansas. Lincoln gave a detailed “history” of the ‘Nebraska Bill’ [Kansas-Nebraska Act] and explained a conspiracy existed to nationalize slavery.

          Douglas denied any conspiracy with Roger Taney, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan and restated the charge that Lincoln favored equality of the races.

          Mr. Lincoln’s Speech

          Mr. Lincoln took the stand at a quarter before three, and was greeted with vociferous and protracted applause; after which, he said:

          LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: It will be very difficult for an audience so large as this to hear distinctly what a speaker says, and consequently it is important that as profound silence be preserved as possible.

          While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. [Great Laughter.] While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it.

          I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing. I do not understand that because I do not want a negro woman for a slave I must necessarily want her for a wife. [Cheers and laughter.] My understanding is that I can just let her alone. I am now in my fiftieth year, and I certainly never have had a black woman for either a slave or a wife. So it seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either slaves or wives of negroes.

          I will add to this that I have never seen, to my knowledge, a man, woman or child who was in favor of producing a perfect equality, social and political, between negroes and white men. I recollect of but one distinguished instance that I ever heard of so frequently as to be entirely satisfied of its correctness-and that is the case of Judge Douglas’s old friend Col. Richard M. Johnson. [Laughter.]

          I will also add to the remarks I have made (for I am not going to enter at large upon this subject,) that I have never had the least apprehension that I or my friends would marry negroes if there was no law to keep them from it, [laughter] but as Judge Douglas and his friends seem to be in great apprehension that they might, if there were no law to keep them from it, [roars of laughter] I give him the most solemn pledge that I will to the very last stand by the law of this State, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes. [Continued laughter and applause.]

          I will add one further word, which is this: that I do not understand that there is any place where an alteration of the social and political relations of the negro and the white man can be made except in the State Legislature-not in the Congress of the United States-and as I do not really apprehend the approach of any such thing myself, and as Judge Douglas seems to be in constant horror that some such danger is rapidly approaching, I propose as the best means to prevent it that the Judge be kept at home and placed in the State Legislature to fight the measure. [Uproarious laughter and applause.] I do not propose dwelling longer at this time on this subject.

          • Reality Check

            You are insane, that’s the craziest comment I’ve ever read.

          • http://www.sonofthesouth.net/uncle-sam/brother-jonathan.htm Brother Jonathan

            That is not an insane comment. What is insane is people who have never read the words, or biographies, of Abraham Lincoln, yet they try to destroy his character by taking his words out-of-context because someone else told them a lie about Lincoln. Lincoln was truly a peaceful man before Jefferson Davis and the Confederates waged war on him for winning the 1860 Presidential election. And Lincoln was a forgiving man as well.

            “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.” – Abraham Lincoln – March 4, 1865

          • COMALite J

            @Reality Check!? Please tell me that you’re not actually Ben Swann! Please tell me that you’re just some staffer of his, or, better yet, someone using that handle who has no connection to him,

            I have great respect for Mr. Swann (especially since his exposé of the teleprompter–rigged pre-scripted delegate votes at both the RNC and DNC in 2012), but if Ben Swann himself actually posted that incredibly lame Argumentum ad Hominem Reply to @brother_jonathan:disqus, then I will have lost considerable respect.

    • paulrph1

      So we are still fighting the Civil War? That was over 100 years ago. It is now time to move on.

  • BeJebus

    beck is a moron and so is sheriff mack. bundy is a goddamn freeloader.

    • kevinbarry

      Wonderful, you have past judgement on everyone. Beck the rags to riches guy is a moron, the Sheriff who wants to uphold the Constitution is also a moron, and Cliven Bundy the rancher, who works and pays taxes, who has a land dispute with our Government is a free loader. You know it’s amazing how brainwashed you people on the other side have become. Up is down, right is wrong and your fellow American’s are Terrorist. It’s people like you who would give up the freedoms, that we fought and died for, throw your fellow American’s under the bus, because you don’t know the facts, but MSLSD told you he was a bad guy, and walk away thinking, HEY, I’m pretty smart. You have no idea of what you’re throwing away, in your arrogant statements. I’ll leave you with a thought from history, I hope I won’t tax your brain too much, but the implications are as relevant today as they were in Nazi Germany in 1938, Hope you’re smart enough to understand it http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

    • paulrph1

      Move so you can freeload off a Communistic society.

    • gomurr

      How many “freeloaders” do the taxpayers support who give nothing back to our society, not even an idea?

      Cattle ranchers who graze open range spend their own money to improve that land through conservation methods, putting up miles of fences, installing water lines and towers, as well as paying taxes on their allotments. Get educated and get a life.

  • SickOf BeingCoddled

    I don’t think with the animosity from the left against Glenn, that it would have been at all supportive or helpful for him to be there. He has the same opinion of Bundy as Mack does. He pled for cool heads and gave the credit for that to the Bundys and their true supporters. He also called out the ones who are too willing to touch off a firestorm and called for peaceful prayerful actions. In the face of standing up and not backing down, the round was won, the cause was made public and the future is changed. God wants liberty and right to prevail, but we must do it his way with love and peace.

  • glenn47

    FOTM printed the laws concerning NV and the BLM. In clear print, the BLM does not own that land. Read it for yourself.
    They are taking land all over, including taking cattle from a Shonshone Chief, that we’re grazing on reservation land. They are going after land with water on it also.

    • paulrph1

      The problem is the BLM somehow thinks they own the land when in all actuality they do not. The problem is we the people have let them take the land by force and get away with it. The Feds will continue in its expansion until they are stopped. It is up to the people to stop them. Vote for a person that believes and will obey the Constitution. Read know and understand the Constitution. It is your salvation for freedom. There is no other document that will guarantee your freedom.

  • poetopoet

    Silent Screams

    I tried to crawl away screaming I live!
    Stop killing me, I want to live and love!
    My limbs are useless in a prison of flesh!
    I’ am a little baby nobody hears or wants!

    Someone help me! I’m alone, please help!
    Something is ripping me apart as I scream!
    Why do you all deny knowing? I want to live!
    I’m defenseless to your butchery as I scream!

    What kind of person does this to me? I scream!
    Who let this happen to me? I scream even louder!
    Someone paid someone to do this to me? I scream!
    My dream of life torn apart I scream No not by you!

    Who murders their own baby? Why did you help her!
    A baby no more I scream! I want a mother to hold me!
    I’m not theirs to kill! They remain silent to my screams!
    I wanted a mother’s love; I damn her and you I scream!

    Poem 357 by Thomas G. McGowan: “poet.us” ©

    • hiernonymous

      I scream!
      You scream!
      We all scream!
      For ice cream.

      Poem 623 by Clem G. Kadiddlehopper

  • Mike Morris

    The funniest part of this is Richard Mack. The whole “retired sheriff” legend is about as dishonest as it gets. He was primaried out of office because the people of Graham County tired of his using their office in pursuit of his own agenda. He called for the use of human shields. But best of all Mack gets out of the begging for supper business if this explodes. That is always his angle. The complete avoidance of the fact that Cliven Bundy in Sept. 2013 told the LA Times he would do this sort of thing if the BLM followed the court order is for the sole purpose of deceiving people into the thought that the BLM brought too much force. In the LA Times story Sheriff Gillespie says he isn’t going to endanger his personnel tangling with Bundy. On top of that the activist media has largely ignored is that the events portrayed happened no where near Bundy’s home. The entire event was, by Bundy’s own words, solely about using force and human shields to perpetuate his continued free use of the public lands that netted him at least an 18% advantage over those that regard paying their bills as a cost of doing business.

    • thompsoj

      Sounds like you buy the mother government theme. Doesn’t matter where it happened…..it happened and that’s enough. government has gotten too big and overbearing. Time to go back to the constitution which every member of government is sworn to protect and defend. They are not living up to their oath.

      • Mike Morris

        It matters a lot when the claim is BLM was coming to kill him. Of course that sounded better than they came to evict his cattle off the permit of another that did pay. Which version of the Constitution do you mean? The real one or the one that is purported with no regard to its history. You seem to sound like the fringe around the flag crowd.

        • thompsoj

          The constitution as written. It clearly detailed a limited government with strong state rights. and three EQUAL branches of government. Seems our executive branch as forgotten that. If you think that the BLM was strictly enforcing the laws what about the laws on immigration that the government has chosen to ignore along with many other laws that the administration has chosen to ignore. Seems they only want to enforce the ones they like. You have to do alot better than that. We are losing freedoms daily and if you don’t think Obama Care is a BIG infringement on your freedom then you better take a deep breath and hope you still have a country you can recognize in 20 years.

        • gomurr

          No one needs that much force. By the way,

          “….that sounded better than they came to evict his cattle off the permit of another that did pay.”

          No, they didn’t. There are no longer any ranchers but Bundy left in Clark County in Southern Nevada. They have all been driven out or forced to sell out below value.

    • kevinbarry

      So I guess the people only have rights if you agree with them. Don’t call us when they kick down your door, The fact is you don’t have to send a 200 man paramilitary force, complete with ex Spec Forces Mercenaries, and a choppers, to do what ? Collect a disputed rent check. REALLY, you think that’s OK, And there’s a lot more to this case than meets the eye, I can’t find a single reference to this interview Bundy gave the LA times in 2013, maybe MSLSD or CBS and Dan Rather made it up, you know they are good at things like that. Despite what you or I may think this case is all about, it should bother every American that this type of force is being used on American citizen’s. What next, I couldn’t pay my Obama Care tax./ fine so they sent the Gestapo and killed my family, and took my house ? Yeah that worked out well for the Nazi’s in 1938. I’ll leave you and the other “American” free thinker Sick of being coddled, with this thought from History.
      http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

      • Mike Morris

        Maybe they did. It must have been pretty convincing since I initially found the interview in a post on the Bundy blogspot page. Maybe they hacked his site and planted it. Maybe if you guys simply applied yourselves in some form of economic activity you would not feel the need to make a common thief and thug into a hero.

      • Mike Morris

        Well here is the deal. I am watching it play out right in the heart of the territory. The only difference is the livestock owner is not a public lands rancher and the supposed property rights activists around here refuse to do anything for her, so that is sort of a non-issue. This is all about protecting their little public teat simply wrapped in the flag and a claim of patriotism.

    • Chubby Freen

      Since the US Constitution forbids the feds from owning any land except for NECESSARY office buildings, dockyards, forts and magazines (munitions storage facilities) where does the govt get off claiming ownership of ANY other land, or claim the right to charge ANYTHING for its use? And the right to KILL anyone over unpaid fees?

      • Bigolfascist

        They must preserve those lands and ecosystems for future generations—-that’s why there is limited, or no, public access to public land, including our national parks? Wonder if any of that “public” land out West was “appropriated” and used to intern the issei, nisei, “dangerous” Italian Americans, and German Americans during WWII? And were the lands returned to private ownership after the war?

        • gomurr

          Did you see how the BLM left the land? The “endangered tortoise” burrow they trampled, as the turtles were emerging from winter? The cows and prize bulls they slaughtered?

          “Conservation” tactics used by the BLM and Forestry Service have resulted in some of our worst wild fires. They have proven time and time again, they are not good stewards.

          The grab for total control of the Western states public land (water, minerals, access control, and most importantly, cronyism and greed) has been ongoing here for generations. There has been a very deliberate effort against independent cattle ranchers, to drive them out of business.

          People in the East who think they know what’s going on here, don’t. Every effort is being made to discredit this man and portray him as something he’s not. Reports make it sound like hundreds of crazed and armed civilians were lying in wait for the government thugs to arrive. Yes, thugs. That’s exactly what they are. No.

          200 plus snipers and BLM agents in full body armor, with the support of hired contractors, attack dogs, and helicopters descended upon the ranch in the early morning hours while some family members were still sleeping. Fearful, Mr Bundy called his neighbors to let them know what was going on. The rest was spontaneous.

          All states retain the land within their borders, except the 9 western states and Alaska. That is how it is meant to be, as states are sovereign and have Constitutional rights as to how they are governed and run. The Federal government is not given the power to seize this control for themselves and “own” the public land. It’s just one more “control”. If Nevada is an independent state like Georgia or Michigan, where the hell is it? The Feds claim they own 86% of our state.

          The real issue is not grazing fees, it’s not endangered species. It is a Federal government, bloated, and full of self-imposed power who wants total control, who think only they “know best” how to manage our lives, and this is just the beginning.

          7LibertyForAll is absolutely correct in his assertion of this being UN Agenda 21. People’s refusal to entertain, or give credence to, Agenda 21 has resulted in local governments, city councils, the Better Business Bureau, and HOAs all over the country being infiltrated in order to initiate this on a local level.

          After they seize the public lands, they will start on private ownership. Actually, they already have, working through several GAs, besides the BLM, most notably the EPA.

          The executive orders have already been signed (and are unlawful) giving President Obama (as per the authority of President Obama) the right to seize all private property, all vehicles, land, and our food and water supply, even in a time of PEACE. He, along with his enforcers from the DHS, EPA, TSA, USDA, FDA, etc, will then have total control of all aspects of our lives.

          Using, the warm and politically friendly “Sustainable Development” doesn’t make it any less tyrannical than calling it what it is.

          • Bigolfascist

            Has the Fed Gov’t used the term “land reform” yet. Anytime I hear “REFORM” and Fed Gov’t in the same sentence, I buy more ammo.

      • Mike Morris

        Because you say it is so does not make it so. That’s an important distinction. What you are saying is that the law is nothing more than a collection of individual opinions all of equal weight. That is a little silly, don’t you think?

    • Craig Robinson

      Any moron who condones the BLM’s actions is either a communist, has ties with Harry Reid, or works for the Obama administration. You’d think Putin was the BLM supervisor not an American citizen.

      • Mike Morris

        Or a taxpaying thriving American that has little sympathy for a bunch of angry failures propounding a Daniel Ortega style brand of communism land redistribution. Maybe if you guys did a little something in pursuit of the American dream you would not feel the need to hate the place.

        • Craig Robinson

          Being stewards of the land for over 100 years is the pursuit of an American dream. If the land is such a high priority and so sacred to the government why would you test nuclear bombs in Nevada. Were any desert tortoises hurt during these tests??

          • COMALite J

            I have to admit, that’s a really good point. Of course, such tests haven’t been done above ground in a long time.

          • gomurr

            I live in Nevada and can tell you with absolute certainty, the desert tortoise is not endangered. People in other western states will tell you the same.

            Meanwhile they, along with birds, some truly endangered, are being fried, daily, by the solar installations in the desert.

    • 7LibertyForAll

      Ever hear of Agenda 21? Perhaps you should investigate this before saying what you said.

  • Joe

    Any way you look at it the Feds have no need to be there. This is an issue for the state. Furthermore that thief Reid has his dirty paws all over this stink!

  • http://wsimpson.wordpress.com William D Simpson

    Nothing will ever change until the people charge criminally and prosecute criminal politicians and the lawyers that reside as judges at both federal and state levels. Take from them everything and then those in government will honor the trust given to them by the people. All the talk has led to only more intrusive infringements upon our rights as citizens. The time to act is now. We are far more in number then they! But should we continue to do what we always do, then the day will come that we will no longer have freedom nor this land we call our home.

    • paulrph1

      They claim that 20% of the people are swayed by the media. I believe that during the last election it was more than that. People have been dumbed down and in many cases cannot think for themselves. That is why Reid keeps getting elected. He is one of the biggest contributors to the destruction of America. We cannot let Reid get away with this and we must keep the pressure on until he is recalled. Nevada get to work.

  • Rham

    The federal government would contribute more to society and to the US deficit by unloading 50% of their work force. Unemployment paid to these workers would do far less damage than the monster in redundancy and lack of efficiency that has become the federal government.

  • Where’s the Birth Certificate

    Ben Swann is no better than Glen Beck.
    Swann is the only “alternative media” who won’t cover the birth certificate.
    And watch out for malware when visiting

    • Philip Marcum

      He won’t cover the Birth Certificate because it was already proven the Birther movement was wrong and they showed both his long and short form and a newspaper in Hawaii of birth announcements with him listed in the paper. Let it go man…just let it go. You got two years left and then he has to leave office unless he is convicted of a felony and impeached. It is not illegal for him to have family from another country, he was born here so he was allowed to run, ya just gotta be born here.

      For the record, even if he was Muslim as well, that is not illegal to be Muslim and become President. There is no religious requirement for the presidential office because that would break our Constitutional rights. I only mention that because if you are a Birther (which you seem to be), you also likely think he is a Muslim….even though he has a proven history of attending a Christian church….but I know…thats just not good enough cause he is a Lefty black man. What’s the country coming to? Am I right?….go back and tell the on it’s last legs KKK you did your best here.

      If you want a man out of office, do it the right way and call them on their policies and actions. I don’t have to like Obama’s policies and can disagree with him without being petty and turning to wild conspiracy theories. Put up or shut up. Copies of his long and short form birth certificate along with the newspaper archives showing his birth announcement in the paper back then are all there for you to look up. Show your evidence he is not a citizen. Course…you would be breaking a story nobody has yet been able to do so I await you. There is no reason for anyone to believe you or Donald Trump just because you like to scream he is not a citizen from the highest mountain tops with no proof.

      • Where’s the Birth Certificate?
        • Philip Marcum

          I am mentally ill for asking for proof? Is that what mentally ill people do these days? Question peoples claims instead of simply taking them at their word? I REALLY need to catch up with this whole blind following of anything said by others concept, I seem to suck at it.

          Anyways…

          So thats your evidence? A couple of people saying a whole lotta “we think”? Thats not very convincing. Look if it was clear the birth Certificate was fake, the Republican side of Congress would have been dancing in the streets to the tune “We are the Champions” while they went to setting in motion his impeachment and arrest. They are frothing at the mouth to get him impeached, why haven’t they picked up on this guys supposed wondrous ability to see through the charade when this is exactly what could solve all their problems? A fake certificate would be open and shut.

          If it was a fake, I too would say, get him out of there but you NEED ACTUAL proof. CONGRESS, has to have ACTUAL proof. Conspiracy theory videos are made daily, Speakers at Birther Movement get togethers saying such and such says this is a fake (allegedly) but apparently not under oath in a court where it matters is not proof. If it’s proof, put these “experts” they claimed they had in a court of law to testify. Let’s get some action going here and not a bunch of BS fake flossin.

          • Where’s the Birth Certificate?

            “I am mentally ill for asking for proof?”

            We are demanding proof of Obama’s eligibility. I didn’t read past the sentence above, because you are mentally ill, and anything you have to say isn’t worth reading.

            Get it through your head – traitor – this issue is not going away.

          • Philip Marcum

            Well that showed me. You have clearly come to this debate unarmed. I can no longer in good conscious slap you about in this debate as their is no honor in beating up the defenseless. You have your beliefs and you need no facts, likely just a prophet like Rush Limbaugh perhaps or Donald Trump. Go back to your leaders and await with bated breath on their next words successfully teaching you to hate your fellow Americans and have a target of blame for all your woes.

          • HopalongCassidy

            Take your mental illness somewhere else troll.

          • Philip Marcum

            Your line isn’t even good it’s just repeating the OP responder and adding troll as if by you repeating it automatically makes it true. I second his mental illness of asking for facts! He’s a troll for asking questions! I cannot debate him so; “Take your mental illness somewhere else troll!

            The best you got is instantly go into name calling? No debate at all, just straight for playground tactics? The mentally ill troll can out debate you? That does not say much for your skills son. Now get off the computer it’s getting near your bed time, your mom needs the computer back.

          • Shawn Hansen

            You are not seriously looking to see the truth, posting laws that you dont understand doesnt make you right. You are here to argue, which is pointless. This site obviously has a bias against what you believe, you came to troll. You act as though you want real discussion, but you arent really listening to what people have told you. Your listing of the law actually supports the birther side of the argument, but you cant see the forest for the trees because your mind is already made up.

            I use to try to speak with people like you, but time and time again it proves to be a waste of time. Good luck to you.

          • Philip Marcum

            Says the man equally unable to see any argument but his own but yeah, good luck to you to. Jesus and I love you and all that. I am here to argue as in, have a different opinion. It’s pointless to have a different opinion then yourselves you mean? The site has a bias, as in, this is a refuge for the Birther movement which has nothing to do with the original article posted. You guys come in to just change the subject completely and expect nobody to respond to it? I’m just simply a troll for disagreeing. I who debated y’alls claims, unlike yourselves who have gotten very emotional right from the start and made almost no attempt to debate but launch straight into name calling shows little restraint or intelligence from you all. It just shows frustration that someone is not willing to shout “You go girl!” in harmony with you just because you claim it to be so.

            You considered yourselves seekers of truth? You guys cannot even stand the idea that the authorities already determined the eligibility of both McCain and Obama from the start of their campaigns and that it held up. Those with experience in doing this it held up to for both candidates and yet all 12 Birther conspiracy theorists left in the country still cannot handle it. You guys have no choice anymore but fanatically cling to that hope because for you to see that you were wrong will make you look like complete paranoid haters that could not stand the idea of a Black Democrat in the White House.

            Never in history has a president or a presidential candidate had such an attempt to make his natural born status revoked. I honestly don’t mind you guys being this way, I just wish more of you would admit to the reasons why you’re so hung up on something thats already passed authorities as legal and true multiple times. Birther is just another name for, “To hell if I ever allow a liberal black man in the White House without a fight!” So if I am a troll…maybe I am, I don’t know if asking questions and quoting laws counts as being a troll but I did not hijack the comments section of this article, you all did. Still if I am a troll against you all, I can think of far worse things to be a troll over then being against some racists and their force all Americans to be Christian under Christian bible laws, that plans to get rid of anyone not like them including the oldie but goody quoted from many Birthers that when we finally get Obama out, we are gonna ship him back to Kenya, that Muslim loving Communist!

            Thats one of my favorites since I have a few known Birthers in my own extended family and they just assume everyone agrees with them everytime they open their mouths. Not to mention other choice words on occasion as to what he is for being black thats not polite to recount. I am sure you are very familiar with the use of the word among your circle of friends and family you trust to say it outloud to. Birthers pretend it’s to protect America from what they perceive to be a man not born in America, thats what you present PR-wise but thats just the PR. On the news and such leaders of your movement have to deflect thats it’s a hatred towards a liberal black man that made it to the White house but I go to family gatherings, I live in the south, most my extended family is angry hard core Republicans who want Jesus to rule the White House and sadly not all of them have lost sight of that whole; “The South will rise again” motto. Luckily my immediate family taught me much different growing up then my extended family.

            I could spend all day debunking everything you guys say, I could throw up link after link on specific rulings, there was 11 court rulings on the Obama issue alone on if his being born in Hawaii even counted as Natural born citizen. Tisdale v. Obama in Virginia court, Purpura v. Obama in New Jersey Court, Voeltz v. Obama in the Florida Court, Voeltz v. Obama (2nd suit Florida), Allen v. Obama in Arizona court, Farrar (et al.) v. Obama in Georgia court, Paige v. Obama et al. in the Vermont court, Fair v. Obama in Maryland Court, and this was just some of the ones from 2012 alone not even including ruling back in 2008 when it first started. Your alls “supposed facts” you like to claim that keep getting debunked and thrown out of all courts in EVERY single case brought against Obama by citizens and states has failed every time. It is you that are determined to believe what you want and not look at facts, laws, and rulings in Supreme courts of the states and the United States supreme court.

            I could spend all day with you all pointing you to actual ruling in court cases, quoting United States law, but you guys will not read them anyways, and if you did, most if not all would completely discount them as “in on it”.

            So now I will end my several days attempt to debate y’alls whacked out ideas by leaving you with a true troll remark and let you all have the final parting shots after this. Screw you and the burning cross your racists asses rode in on until you rejoin society as a kind and tolerant people. There is few others in the world I would rather be a troll to then the likes of you. However! I still love you all anyways and hope that one day you all will let all the anger go. Ok, now you can have at me. I promise not to retaliate with more talk debating the Birther movement here as it is way off track from the article anyways and thus dragging it out further.

          • Shawn Hansen

            I stopped reading after you stated that you could spend all day “debunking” everything we say. You have yet to debunk anything, youre all opinion as you say we are. I really dont care how many court rulings you say Obama has won. You see, i dont see the same truth in the things that you do. I dont think that just because some courts ruled in his favor that everything is all good and now i can rest assured. If the courts were right all the time we wouldnt have innocent people in jail being exonerated due to newly analyzed DNA evidence. A central theme amongst many conservatives lately has been distrust of our system of government which many view as being almost entirely corrupt.

            There is constant deception by our government and most major media. Whistelblowers like Ms Atkisson formerly of CBS proves that, and she wont be the last.

            You see my friend i live in Hawaii, proof in my avatar ;). Im blessed to be here. Now living here i think that between the two of us its safe to say im more of an expert on how things work in the islands. Its much different from the mainland, the politics are very corrupt. There is a very heavy japanese cultural influence here. THings arent always done by the law and some policies are put into effect hastily to affect change, regardless of the means. AN example of this is the supposed “proof” of Obamas birth here because his birth was announced in the newspaper the year he was born. I can tell you this with absolute certainly friend, that means NOTHING. You see, Hawaii being the youngest state and being so culturally diverse (heavy immigrant population), they didnt have the resources and government infrastructure. Many people came here with small children from places like Japan, and would simply call in to report that their child was born at home. The state issued them a birth certificate and they are now US citizens, even though legally they shouldnt be. This was aloud because much of the islands at the time, and even to this day on the big island where im from, its very country….mostly rural. Being born at home was common.

            So to play devils advocate, if i were someone trying to gain american citizenship or proof thereof, Hawaii at that time would be my FIRST and LAST choice to pull it off. Im not saying its proof he wasnt born here, but it is most certainly not proof that he was given that its public knowledge that many people gained citizenship illegally this way in the past. This is exactly why i said what i said before about you only citing things that support your side of the issue while disregarding everything else as birther or conspiracy nonsense. Several independent experts have looked at his release cert and ss registration card and deemed them to be tampered with. I myself have checked them out, and im a former IT pro with many years experience with photoshop as a hobby, and im telling you right now…..they have both been doctored extensively. I dont know why, but i see no reason why i should trust that they are real just because some courts said so. As an example, our president is supposedly a constitutional lawyer who campaigned up and down about how the mandate in the ACA was constitutional and that it wasnt a new tax, yet justice Roberts said the only way for it to be constitutional is it is a tax…..for that is all congress has the power to do is tax, not mandate that we buy stuff or else. SO who was right? They cant both be. When you were a kid and got into arguments did you just end debates with, “yea hah, ask my mom!”.

            You have a naive trust of a government which cares not for you outside of how much revenue it makes off your back.

          • COMALite J

            Actually, I’ve read @philipmarcum:disqus’s posts and yours and those of other Birthers here, and Philip has done an excellent job of debunking. You simply ignoring and denying that doesn’t change the facts.

            Since Philip has said that he’s done with you, allow me to address a few things you said:

            Many people came here [to Hawaii] with small children from places like Japan, and would simply call in to report that their child was born at home. The state issued them a birth certificate and they are now US citizens, even though legally they shouldnt be. This was aloud [sic] because much of the islands at the time, and even to this day on the big island where im [sic] from, its [sic] very country….mostly rural. Being born at home was common.

            Nice try, but not true on several counts. The law you refer to that allows birth certificates in lieu of an attending physician or midwife exists not only in Hawaii but many other States as well, and exists to handle cases such as, as you said, babies born at home, or perhaps in the car on the way to the hospital, etc. But in such cases, there would be no hospital stated, and no attending physician nor midwife stated as a witness, with signature thereof. Box 6c in such a case would list the street address of the home, or the nearest intersection if in a car, rather than the name of the hospital [actual caption text for that box: “6c. Name of Hospital or Institution (If not in hospital or institution, give street address)”], and Box 19a would simply be blank (actual caption text: “I hereby certify that this child was born alive on the date and hour stated above” followed by the actual Box 19a for the “Signature of Attendant,” followed by four checkboxes arranged vertically, labeled “M.D.” , “O.D.”, “Midwife”, and “Other”, respectively).

            Obama’s birth certificate names the specific hospital where he was born (Kapalioani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital), and was signed by the attending physician (David A. Sinclair, who was indeed an obstetrician there from 1960 through 1988, and personally delivered over 10,000 babies — note that August 4, 1961 would’ve been early in his career — he passed away in 2003 at the age of 88 — and yes, that really is his signature, done with a real ballpoint pen (not a signature stamp), and he checked the “M.D.” checkbox with a handwritten “X” (“✗”).

            This would not be the case if Obama’s birth were one such as you describe, either actually born at home or falsely claimed to have been born at home. Neither Dr. Sinclair nor any other obstetrician who wished to keep his career and freedom would dare to falsely claim to have delivered a child he did not deliver, and sign himself as a witness thereof if he didn’t actually witness it.

          • gomurr

            “…..and yes, that really is his signature, done with a real ballpoint pen (not a signature stamp).”

            You know this how?

          • COMALite J

            Because his signature closely (but not exactly, which would be an indication of copying) matches that of other documents he was known to have signed. His own daughter verified that the signature is his, and also showed other documents he signed to compare it to, including a notarized copy of his will that actually appears at the link.

            As for it being ballpoint, that’s rather obvious when viewed on the high-res ABC·com .PDF, which, I’ll remind you, was scanned from the physical paper certified copy handed to the Associated Press and uploaded to their website before the low-res highly optimized WhiteHouse·gov .PDF. Ballpoint pens were relatively new back then. You can easily see the difference between it and other signatures on the same form which were signed with fountain or cartridge nib pens (at that time still more common than ballpoints).

          • Shawn Hansen

            Show me which states, and show me the numbers per capita. Its your claim. Hawaii being much closer and more accessible to other countries at this time than the mainland USA, this was abused quite often. You cant say the same of other states…say Nebraska. Use your head here please.

            As for the birth cert, until the original is made available for viewing by experts…im calling BS. Like i said, i have the one put out by the WH, ive checked it out, you dont need to be an expert, it would not be accepted as evidence in anything but a kangaroo court as an actual document. Its the bad of a forgery, an obviously altered document. Also i noticed you didnt touch his SS card. Wonder why.

            In any case you went on and on about Dr sinclair and all this other nonsense, but dont even realize it doesnt matter. THey couldnt have pulled his sig off a different cert? The only thing we have been shown is a photoshopped chopped up multilayered masterpiece. You could put my sig on it in 3 minutes. None of your drivel matters unless you believe it to be a representation of a real document, which i believe it is not.

          • COMALite J

            “Numbers per capita” of what? Babies born at home or in cars? Nearly every state has such laws. In fact, I don’t know of any off the top of my head that don’t. It’s simple common-sense legislation.

            What does Hawaii being “much closer and more accessible to other countries at this time than the mainland USA” have to do with anything? Can you cite a single known, proven example of someone being born outside the USA yet given a Hawaiian birth certificate stating that s/he was born in Hawaii? That’s your claim, and you have to back it up. Them’s the rules.

            The original birth certificate will never be made available. It’s bound in a hardbound volume with dozens if not hundreds of other people’s birth certificates born in the same year in that part of Hawaii, and stored in a climate- and Ph-controlled Vital Records vault. It would be illegal to remove it from there for any reason short of to save the entire contents of the vault from imminent destruction from, say, a massive fire, threat of a nuclear explosion, or the entire island of Oahu suddenly deciding to show off its Atlantis impersonation. Why? Because removing it from the vault would mean removing all of those other people’s birth certificates in the same bound volume, and that would put theirs at risk as well as Obama’s. Not even the President of the United States has the authority to do that. Nobody does. Not even if all of those people were still alive and gave their permission — the birth certificates don’t belong just to them, but to the whole State as well.

            You have never even seen your own original birth certificate. Your parents and the doctor (or midwife) who delivered you did, briefly, just long enough to fill it out and sign it, and so did the clerks who processed it and brought it to your state’s Vital Records department, and the Registrar thereof. After that, its data was entered into a computer database (from which “short form” certified copies can be obtained on request), and the form itself likely got microfiched or microfilmed (from which “long form” certified copies can be obtained if needed, but Hawaii and most other states no longer do this except in extreme circumstances, which is why it took so long to get Obama’s) and bound into a volume, and there’s where it will stay for as long as human civilization exists.

            What you have in your possession now (assuming you do) is a certified copy, that was printed on security-patterned paper and signed (either with a pen or signature stamp) and dated and embossed-sealed by the Registrar or other certifying authority. Just like Obama’s.

            Certified copies are legally absolutely as good as the original in every respect.

            The one put out on the White House website is a very low resolution and highly optimized .PDF that was made as small as possible in terms of data, and still be easily readable. The algorithms that do that optimization are built into Adobe Acrobat Standard or Pro version 6 or later, and for decompression (viewing) into Reader as well. They’re also built into digital copiers such as the Xerox WorkCentre Model 7655, which we know for a fact the White House has.

            This is very easy to prove. All you need to do is scan any known genuine physical paper form-type document that’s as similar as possible to the Obama “long form” (a canceled check will do in a pinch) directly into Adobe Acrobat (not Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, nor the scanner’s own utilities such as Epson Scan, CanoScan, nor third-party scanner utilities such as SilverFast or VueScan, etc.) Standard or Pro (not Reader!) version 6 or later using its “File → Create .PDF → From Scanner…” menu command, un-check the “Recognize text (OCR)?” checkbox but leave all other settings at their defaults, then do nothing else to the resulting .PDF except to Save it, then open it in Adobe Illustrator version 10 or later. You’ll see the same sort of layers and other artifacts

            If you have a Windows XP or later or Mac OS X computer, a flatbed (preferred — sheet-fed will do in a pinch) scanner already connected and fully installed including drivers, and Adobe Acrobat Standard or Pro version 6 or later (preferably only through Version 9, as X and XI are quite different, but even they will work for this) and Illustrator 10 or later already installed, this would take you way less than five minutes to do.

            Way back staring on June 18, 2011, I had been posting comments on Birther videos on YouTube, and had posted on one entitled “Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator – Official Proof 1 ( Layers )” I repeatedly posted the simple experiment to allow anyone with the above to duplicate the same sort of layers and other artifacts shown in that video.

            Only one Birther actually took me up on it. He goes by the username “trident3b” and he uploaded his results into a video. Later it got accidentally deleted, so he uploaded it again. Here’s what happened when he scanned a DHL delivery receipt (nowhere near like Obama’s birth certificate, but the results still worked) directly into Adobe Acrobat. Note that he mentions me by user name.

            But don’t take trident3b’s word for it, nor mine. In fact, I insist that you do not take our word for it. Try it yourself!!

          • Shawn Hansen

            You misunderstood what i was saying about Hawaii, and thus you typed a whole lot of nothing about nothing for no reason. You wasted your time, and i wont do the same. Good luck to you.

          • COMALite J

            Sorry, I missed this the first time around.

            What, exactly, did I misunderstand about what you were saying about Hawaii? Were you not claiming that because it’s closer to other Pacific island and Pacific Rim nations such as Okinawa, Japan, etc., that a baby could be born in another nation and then brought to Hawaii and be issued a Hawaiian birth certificate? Was that not what you were intending to convey? Because that’s what I very thoroughly refuted.

            If that wasn’t what you intended to convey, then please, rephrase your intent so that it’s clearer and unambiguous.

          • Mike Groseth

            urm…. its “there” not their. Just saying…perhaps you should study some english instead or perhaps your English as a second language is showing. Go ahead and use your Russian on here…that way you don’t get confused with our “tricky” grammar.

          • Philip Marcum

            Yes, you nailed me there. I accidently switched one of my two their/there uses in my reply. Thats the best you have? I automatically have a a different primary language over one slip? Yet if your awesome grasp of grammar you use urm in a sentence, Not capitalized to boot, when one types, you use two spaces at the end of a sentence, and liberally throw around ellipses in place of proper grammar notations in lazy fashion. You got me though there Mikey, I said their once instead of there. That’s a little desperate for attempting a burn but I get it, I been throwing down pretty hard. Go ahead and comb through this one and other postings I made, maybe you will find some typos to! Awwww SNAP!

          • hiernonymous

            rum…it’s “it’s,” not its. Just saying…perhaps you should etc etc….

          • gomurr

            All people make mistakes. Pretty low and pretty petty of you.

      • gorrie

        The Us Constitution states “Natural Born” , In 1874,75 the Supreme Court decided in a non-related case, that “natural borne” is the issue of the legal union of one Male and one Female both being U.S. Citizens. obama’s father was/is a British Subject and he never applied for U.S. Citizenship. obama is not eligible to be President of the U.S.

        • Philip Marcum

          What you refer to seems to have been eliminated in 1978, it has no bearing since the laws were revised and even back then, that was not grounds for automatic non natural born citizenship.

          U.S. citizenship at birth but had only one U.S. citizen parent had to fulfill a “retention requirement” of residing, or being physically present, in the United States or its outlying possessions for a certain number of years before reaching a specified age. Otherwise the child would not retain the U.S. citizenship. (This also assumed the child was born outside the United States at the time and stayed out)

          Let’s say for a moment that he was born overseas. He has a U.S. citizen for a mother and a British citizen for a father, they are married and just for craps and giggles lets say he was born outside the U.S.

          The U.S. laws on Children born overseas to married parents

          The following conditions affect children born outside the U.S. and its outlying possessions to married parents (special conditions affect children born out of wedlock: see below):

          If both parents are U.S. citizens, the child is a citizen if either of the parents has ever had a residence in the U.S. prior to the child’s birth

          If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is a U.S. national, the child is a citizen if the U.S. citizen parent has lived in the U.S. for a continuous period of at least one year prior to the child’s birth

          If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not, the child is a citizen if the U.S. citizen parent has been “physically present” in the U.S. before the child’s birth for a total period of at least five years, and at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent’s fourteenth birthday.

          Even in this case, One U.S. citizen parent is enough to make Obama to be considered a Natural Born U.S. citizen under our laws.

          If the man was born in the U.S. as is said then the following applies;

          Under United States law, any person born within the United States (including the territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands) and subject to its jurisdiction is automatically granted U.S. Citizenship, as are many (though not all) children born to American citizens overseas.

          You can have one parent a citizen of a different country and one a U.S. citizen and still the child be declared as a natural born citizen of the United States weather he was born in the U.S. somewhere or outside of it. If he was born in Hawaii then there is no argument, he is considered a natural born citizen no matter how much anyone flails about crying.

          At best, you would have to hope for two things to make him not eligible. One, that he was born outside the United states, and two, his mother had not lived in the U.S. at least 5 years prior to him being born. Otherwise you have no case.

          • HopalongCassidy

            You are a lying Obama troll and nothing more.

          • Philip Marcum

            I quoted law, If I am a troll, so is the laws of the government…If you don’t agree with the laws as written then take issue with them, not me, I am just reposting it for your convenience to read. If you are saying you don’t want it to be this way and think he don’t have enough American born blood in him to count as “natural born” then just say that. The laws don’t lie though, if we are going to quibble law as the reason he is not eligible then don’t back out once I print the laws as written. You either accept them or you don’t.

            If it ever came out Obama lied, then Obama lied and deserves the full punishment of the law for such a scam. I don’t know Obama, he don’t owe me anything and vice versa. I did not vote for him but I lost the vote. He is the President so I must give him the respect of the presidency even if I disagree with him until such time that it id proven in a court of law that he is a fraudster or did something illegal that nets him a felony conviction.

          • gomurr

            “The laws don’t lie”

            Sure they do….every time it applies to the common man and not those in power, or until a judge decides it needs to fit their personal beliefs.

            “If it ever came out Obama lied,”

            Maybe not about his BC, but should I start counting for you?

          • COMALite J

            Keeping in mind what the term “lie” actually means (it does not mean “falsehood” nor “to tell a falsehood”), yes, I’ll take you up on that if @PhilipMarcum:disqus won’t. Please show us a few Obama lies.

          • fstookey

            Hey dummy, the revision of laws is not in play here. The “Constitution” has to be revised to fit your argument …. not “laws!” As usual, liberals like you just continue to make things up out of thin air to meet your requirements. Then, it is your belief that if you keep repeating the lie you have created long enough, it may eventually be accepted as the truth. That idea came from Saul Alynsky……your religious leader.

          • COMALite J

            Actually, gorrie was just plain factually wrong. Minor vs. Happersett, the 1874 case s/he referred to, says no such thing. Here is its full text at Justia.

        • COMALite J

          In 1874,75 the Supreme Court decided in a non-related case, that
          “natural borne” is the issue of the legal union of one Male and one
          Female both being U.S. Citizens.

          @gorrie, uhm, here’s the full text of that case, and guess what? It doesn’t say any such thing! Go see for yourself.

      • fstookey

        Philip, your first sentence is full of lies!! It is so repugnant to those who know the truth about liberals in our country, to listen to garbage like you are entertaining us with. I am more convinced every day that Liberalism is a serious sickness in our country today. For your information, the usurper in the White House has produced two fraudulent documents regarding his birth……and you want us to let it go? The fraudulent POTUS is proven to be a liar and a fraud on a daily basis.

        • Philip Marcum

          Ok, a couple questions here. What’s your special truth knowledge on Liberals? Before you answer that though…are you going to just spout a bunch of BS opinions or actually print some actual facts that exposes the Liberals as a whole as whatever you want to make them out to be in your “truth”. If it’s just you giving opinionated hate speech, that’s not going to sway me in the slightest. Just give me the facts and we can go from there.

          I think you mean “To read garbage like you are entertaining us with” not listen. Also who is us? You think you speak for all of America or all the right, or all the crazy people, or all the lovers of Xbox One? Who is “us”. Maybe you mean Birthers? It does seem me questioning the Birther movement has struck a chord with a few of you I admit. I am more then willing to admit, what is out there presented as facts is lies, IF you prove the current “facts” wrong. Put Obama in court if you guys got him dead to rights and can prove him not eligible and then you all can feel vindicated. I have no problems supporting you all if you prove it’s true, until then though, evidence is completely against you…Either that or the whole world is conspiring against just you few Birthers. Something tells me, you guys are more willing to believe everyone is conspiring against you rather than believe any amount of facts presented though.

          You are convinced Liberalism is a serious sickness eh? Thats rather unhealthy talk. While I have seen elements of extreme conservatism and extreme liberalism and both are scary at times, a little liberalism and a little conservatism is healthy. While I consider myself often conservative when it comes to the country’s fiscal responsibility, limiting terms of office, and upholding the Constitution for ALL (something Republicans often forget and just think it applies to their religion, and sexual preference). I am also clearly liberal when it comes to civil rights and protecting Americans citizens equal rights under the Constitution. This often angers the right because I refuse to use the Christian bible to oppress others under its laws which would only apply if the country was ruled as a Christian Theocracy instead of a Democracy.

          If it is for my information that the documents for the Presidents birth is false, bring them to task in court and I will support you if you are right. I work on facts, no amount of anyone calling me names or demanding I “see the light” will help without actual official proving of it’s false document. He is proven to be a liar and a fraud on a daily basis? Ok, well, show me some of his lost court battles where he was proven a liar and fraud, otherwise you are just being slanderous just because you clearly hate him.

          Hey, I don’t think he is perfect by any stretch, I certainly did not vote for him, I voted third party both times, and he probably has lied about plenty of things. Thats pretty much par for the course of all our presidents, tell me something I don’t know. The fact is, just like most other presidents, if they are lying nobody seems to be able to prove it and get them kicked out. I think he is lying a lot myself but he’s still in office ain’t he? Quite frankly, if a Republican in office, the country would be just as much a mess.

          The Republicans and Democrats as politicians just like to pass power back and forth and keep it’s citizens hating each other to keep the focus off the politicians. Alls you are going to do, like you do every election is vote blind across the board Republican. If thats all you do whether you are on the left, voting blindly all Democrats, or on the right voting all Republicans, the only true statement is that you’re nothing but a simple follower who only questions those you oppose. Lap dogs, left or right are still lap dogs. Good luck with that.

          • HopalongCassidy

            You are an idiot. Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama posted forgeries for his BC and SS registration. They used certified examiners who are court approved experts which, by the way, have testified numerous times for the same law firm that Obama uses. This forged BC which is online is an Adobe Photoshop created document in layers and anyone can take it apart and move the items around. The experts who have examined this claim is one of the worst forgeries they have ever seen. Yet, trolls like you still claim you have seen no proof. Open your eyes ! You won’t see anything with blinders on.

          • Philip Marcum

            I am willing to see if true but I gave to ask….why if it’s so open and shut, so water tight of a case….anybody know where Obama is today? I know it’s not jail. sooooooo…..

          • fstookey

            Where is Obumer now/today? He is touring Asia wasting taxpayer money to get some photo opportunities. With respect to his wrong-doings that are not being contitutionally addressed ….. both houses of our congress do not have the intestinal fortitude to go after Obama’s transgressions.

          • COMALite J

            Uhm, no. First off, the Arpaio “investigation” hasn’t involved a single actual digital document forensic analyst (not even Reed Hayes — he claims to be a handwriting analysis expert). Note: a digital document forensic analyst ≠ “computer graphics artist” or “graphic designer” or “Photoshop ‘expert.’” Those are not only not the same skill set, they’re not even the same talent set! Very rare indeed is the person who has the neural structure to be good at both, since graphics design and art are creative and thus right-brained talents, while forensic analysis is (as the name suggests) an analytical and thus left-brained talent.

          • gomurr

            You have no idea what his investigation contains since it hasn’t all been made public. Uhm…..until it is, you really can’t say.

          • COMALite J

            I stated as much. I even said that if Mr. Hayes sticks to his area of expertise (e.g. if he maintains that he has found something suspicious about, say, Dr. David A. Sinclair’s signature as the Attendant M.D. in Box 19a of the “long form”, or those of Stanley Ann Durham Obama as Parent or Other Informant in Box 18a or Verna K. L. Lee’s as Local Registrar in Box 21), then yes, I’d be very interested to see what he has to say, especially if he did so by analyzing either of the physical paper copies given to the AP and UPI on April 27, 2011, or the one retained by the White House, or, barring that, a high-res scan from one of those (such as the one at ABC·com that I linked for you days ago — did you even look at that? Be honest, now), and not the heavily optimized WhiteHouse·gov .PDF file. Again: if he tried to do his thing on that without even trying to find out if there was a better version available with more digital information to work with, then he has automatically disqualified himself forever as a forensic analyst of any kind. His credibility and thus his career which depends on it would be over.

            But why are Mike Zullo and Sheriff Joe Arpaio keeping this report under wraps, if it really is all that, the “smoking gun,” the “bombshell” that they’ve been waiting for all this time? These are not the tactics of those who are truly interested in the truth and in stopping a major violation of our Constitution ASAP. These are more like the shenanigans of those wanting to pump up anticipation for some reason, like, oh, say, to fleece more donations from the flock. “By their fruits ye shall know them.”

            I stand by what I said about the distinction between creative and analytical talents. That does not depend on what is or is not in Hayes’s report. If someone holds himself or herself out to be an expert and is offering to provide testimony as such, s/he had by golly well better actually be an expert in said relevant field.

            Remember the analogy I gave before about your kid and the naturopath vs. the chef (note: not medical doctor) and their respective knowledge and skills in the uses of herbs? Well, Zullo, Corsi, Arpaio, etc. themselves aren’t even chefs. They’re more like housewives who buy pre-made herbal seasoning blends at Kroger®’s (say, McCormick’s Montreal Grilled Steak Seasoning Blend or Tony Chachére’s Bold Creole Seasoning or Cavender’s Greek Seasoning or Chef Paul Prudhomme’s Blackened Redfish Cajun Magic Seasoning or some such) and are using those in their home cooking, and then claiming “expertise” in the use of herbs for treatment of illness when they don’t even have real expertise in the use of herbs for flavor in food!

            As for what I said about a person claiming to be a digital document forensic analyst, or forensic analyst of any kind, who accepts as evidence a low-quality source without even checking to see if a better version is available (and in this case, some were available since hours before the WhiteHouse·gov .PDF went online!), well, that would be like you taking your kid to a pediatric respiratory specialist because he has a constant cough that causes him/her to be short of breath and even turn blue at times, and it keeps both you and the kid up at night. What would you think of the pediatrician’s skills if he did nothing but prescribe you some earplugs so you could sleep through the kid’s cough? Or if he drew an inverted pentagram on the floor and put the kid in it and started chanting rituals to the Old Gods to heal the kid? Would you not consider those reasons to question his competence in his claimed field of expertise?

            Any claimed “forensic analyst” who spends even two minutes on the WhiteHouse·gov .PDF without at least trying to find a better version and then putting the White House one aside and working solely with the better version is tantamount to the wannabe pediatric respiratory specialist above. Since all of them to date (not counting Hayes, whose report I have not seen) have been harping on that file, they’re all disqualified for that reason alone!

          • gomurr

            I posted a number of links above showing that the long form birth certificate was computer generated. This are not done by people with an ax to grind.

            One of them was done by Reed Hayes who is a very reputable document examiner. He is the examiner used by the firm Perkins Coie, the firm hired to defend President Obama. Oh, and he’s a Democrat.

        • COMALite J

          No fraudulent documents have been produced. Both the Certification of Live Birth (“short form”) released in 2007, and the Certificate of Live Birth (“long form”) released on April 27, 2011, have been verified, and have withstood all attempts to show forgery.

          • gomurr

            A certificate of Live Birth, short form, can be obtained by anyone. They do not have to be born in Hawaii. The long form is called a Birth Certificate.

          • COMALite J

            Oh, wow! Three sentences. Twelve, nine, and eight words, respectively. Four claims presented as statements of supposed fact. And three of them are outright wrong, with the fourth technically correct but deceptively incomplete. That’s a lot of wrong in so few words! I’m impressed!

            Let’s break it down, shall we? Please follow along at the official website of the Government of the State of Hawaii, on their page for Applying for Hawaiian (Native) Homelands. Scroll down a short way and you’ll come to a § with the header “Primary Documents.” I could copy-paste quote it here, but I want you to read it there instead so there’s no question of me misquoting or deceptively excerpting them.

            From your post:

            • Statement of Fact #1: “A Certificate of Live Birth, short form…” — Wrong! A Certificate of Live Birth is a “long form”, or, as the website states, is the original birth certificate! The “short form” is officially called a Certification of Live Birth.

            • Statement of Fact #2: “… can be obtained by anyone.” — I’m going to assume here that you intended to say, “can be issued for anyone,” since “obtained by” means something different (Obama’s birth certificate was “obtained by” the AP and UPI and, via his and other website, by all of us). If so, wrong! Neither a Certificate of Live Birth nor Certification of Live Birth can be issued for anyone other than an infant born in Hawaii.

            • Statement of Fact #3: “They do not have to be born in Hawaii.” — Wrong! See above. Even if the child was not born in a hospital, the birth certificate still has to list the place of birth as a street address in Box 6c, and in any case the municipality and island must be stated in Boxes 6a and 6b, and optional judicial district [analogous to a county] in Box 6d if outside of a municipality. Note that no provision is given on the form for a child born outside of Hawaii. They don’t get Hawiian birth certificates. At all. Period.

            • Statement of Fact #4: “The long form is called a Birth Certificate.” — Technically true, but woefully and misleadingly incomplete. As stated on the Hawaii·gov website, the term “birth certificate” is an umbrella term that includes both Certificates of Live Birth (“long form”) and Certifications of Live Birth (“short form”)! Thus, the Certifications of Live Birth is not merely “almost as good as” nor even “every bit as good as” a birth certificate — it is a birth certificate!!

            This is in the same sense as how the term “vehicle” is an umbrella term including other terms such as car, truck, SUV, and motorcycle. An SUV isn’t merely “as good as” a vehicle, it is a vehicle.

      • gomurr

        The birth certificate has been shown to be a forgery, so you are wrong about that. As far as “ya just gotta be born here”, wrong again. You must be born to two parents who are citizens.

        No, it isn’t illegal to be a Muslim, but if you lie about to attain office, it is unethical.

        • COMALite J

          No, the birth certificate has not been shown to be a forgery. Every single aspect of alleged “evidence of forgery” presented to date by any Birther alleged “experts” has been extremely thoroughly debunked. Without. Exception.

          • labar

            COMALite, who has debunked it? When did they thoroughly debunk it and where is your evidence proving that it has been debunked?

            Your statement is almost as much bs as the Birth Certificate of Barack Obama is.

          • COMALite J

            See my Replies to @gomurr:disqus above. More forthcoming as well, so watch this space.

          • gomurr

            From a science and technology site:

            http://www.science.co.il/Obama-Birth-Certificate.htm

            Scrib, from many independent investigators:

            http://www.scribd.com/collections/3166684/Birth-Certificate-Other-Obama-ID-Docs-Forged-Expert-Reports

            This article refers to the examination done by Reed Hayes, a very reputable document examiner (an Democrat) used by the firm Perkins Coie (a firm used by President Obama to defend him against charges of having a forged birth certificate!)

            http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/07/08/forensic-findings-on-obamas-birth-certificate-a-100-percent-forgery-no-doubt-about-it/

            How about the fact (an it is a fact) that President Obama’s Social Security # belongs to a dead man in Conneticut, a state he never lived in?

          • COMALite J

            Last item first: about your use of the term “fact” re: the SS# — well, this guy says it best. Harry Bournel’s SS# differs from Obama’s by one digit, and that’s all it takes for them to be two different SS#s.

            As for Connecticut, it’s true that the Area Code (first three digits) portion of Obama’s was indeed assigned to Connecticut, but (A) that was not to indicate the State of residence, but rather the State to which the card would be mailed; and (B) that was only of even moderate importance (it was never a requirement that they match) prior to computerization of the SS system in 1973, to aid in filing and mailing. While Obama was born prior to then, it wasn’t until after that that he got his SS#, since the law requiring children and even babies to be assigned SS#s in order for their parents to claim them as dependents for tax exemptions and EIC wasn’t enacted until 1994 (signed by Clinton), so most people didn’t get theirs until they wanted to enter the military, college, or the workforce. I personally didn’t get mine until well into my teens in the late 1970s, and Obama is somewhat younger than me.

            All that matters for a SS# is that it be unique, and not within some restricted ranges such as “987-65-4321” which is reserved for use as examples in advertisements, tax and payroll software manuals, etc. and thus cannot be assigned to any real person. If the area code is “wrong” (as happens quite often due to human error, including for reasons I’m about to show) the SSA will not assign a new number just to fix that. They would if the number as a whole was not unique. A person can only get three replacements within a given year, and ten in a lifetime, which is one reason why identity theft is so serious (Protect your own SS#! Do not give it out to just anyone who asks for it over the phone or in any business situation, unless they can show you the specific law that requires them to access it!), so using up a replacement (not to mention the SSA’s resources) for something that doesn’t really matter such as the area code just ain’t gonna happen.

            In the specific case of Obama, his Zip code for his neighborhood of Honolulu, HI at the time he applied for his SS# was 96814. The Zip code for Danbury, CT is 06814. If you check, you’ll see that Zip codes beginning with “0” are for New England states, and “9” for Pacific coast and Hawaii.

            Now look at your keyboard (not the numeric keypad part). See where the [9(] key is? Now see where the [0)] key is? Right next to each other! The zero key is immediately to the right of and adjacent to the nine key! So, it’s an easily understandable typo to accidentally type “9” when aiming for “0.” The SS# area code would be assigned based on that.

            Or maybe it wasn’t a typo so much as an error in reading young Obama’s handwriting. He’s left-handed, you know. Try writing a “9” with your left hand. If drawn without a straight stem, it’s a clockwise spiral with the loop part generally drawn first, and if written quickly with the left hand, the loop part may wind up bigger than intended, making the “9” look like, well, a handwritten “0.”

            At any rate, there is nothing at all out of the ordinary here. A good many people have SS#s that don’t match where they lived at the time.

            As for your other links, I have to go to bed right now, but will get back to you. Suffice it to say for now that I can easily debunk them all. Right off the bat, the Israel “science” people are analyzing the White House .gov website .PDF file, and anyone claiming to be a digital document forensic analyst who spends even a minute analyzing that has automatically disqualified himself or herself from being a qualified forensic analyst of any kind.

            Why? Because the first rule in forensic analysis is to always start with the best, highest-qualify evidence source you can get access to. The White House website .PDF is extremely optimized (more on that later) and intended only for visual viewing by the general public. But hours before that went online, much higher quality scans were made by the AP and UPI from the physical paper copies that were given them, and those copies were put online at various news agency sites that very day (such as this one posted at ABC.com, for this article hard-dated the day of release — note the link to the above-linked .PDF right in that article!), even before the White House put their optimized .PDF up. Those scans do not show the layers and other artifacts.

            To be continued…

          • gomurr

            Only people who have something to hide spend millions of dollars to keep people from examining their past. It should not be an option for a presidential candidate, let alone a sitting president.

            Spin it anyway you want. Truth always prevails, despite all efforts.

          • COMALite J

            Aaaand, that’s another Birther falsehood (note: I’m not calling you a liar — I assume that you’re merely deceived, and that you honestly believe all this stuff). Obama did not spend millions to keep anything hidden. As reported to the FEC as required by law, the Obama campaign (note: not Obama himself) had spent a grand total of $2.6 million to law firm Perkins-Coie for post-campaign expenses.

            This is not out of the ordinary, and it was not done to hide anything. WorldNetDaily and others in the Birther blogosphere simply showed the amount spent, showed that it was after the campaign had ended, and simply assumed (or “was just asking questions” — a common trick of deceptive demagogues in general) that the entire amount (or even much of it) went to that purpose. Actually, none of it did.

            Any political campaign racks up legal expenses, including before, during, and after the campaign itself. A national Presidential campaign racks up a lot of expenses. His chief opponent in that very election spent $1.3 million in post-campaign expenses, and his campaign was considerably smaller than Obama’s record-breaking $750 million.

            Both men faced eligibility challenges, but Obama faced many more. McCain, of course, was born in the Panama Canal Zone, and there were legitimate concerns at the time as to whether he qualified as a Natural Born Citizen. Congress passed special legislation on this clarifying long-existing legislation (Immigration and Naturalization Act [INA] §301 aka United States Code [USC] Title 8 §1401) that, yes, anyone born to American citizen parents (always if both parents, usually in the case of one U.S. citizen parent and one foreign national parent) outside of U.S. territory, even if not on a military base or in a U.S. possession (which the Canal Zone was at the time) or some such, is indeed a Natural Born Citizen.

            Yes, some of those expenses did go to pay for defending against such challenges, but defending oneself against even the most frivolous lawsuits still costs money. None was spent to keep people from examining his past as you falsely alleged.

          • John.K.Watson

            I am now going to call you out as an extremist obamanite…WRONG AGAIN inaCOMA…Obama HAS spent millions on the BC issue!! as well as having all records sealed from public access…including government entitys as well! http://godfatherpolitics.com/6923/obama-classmate-reveals-why-college-records-sealed/ despite knowing that as an extreme libtard you will NOT read the article…but here it is!

          • COMALite J

            Wrong. I actually do read all the links people like you post. In fact, I actually post comments on Godfather Politics quite a lot. Under this same handle.

            Wayne Alan Root is a joke. He’s been so thoroughly discredited it’s not even funny. By his own admission, his “evidence” for this is his “gut.” He “feels it in his gut.” That may work for gambling in Vegas, but it doesn’t work in the real world. Note how he predicted that Obama would lose in a landslide in 2012, yet he won in a landslide.

            Obama really did go to Columbia, under the name “Barack Obama” (not “Barry Sœtoro”). He did not do so on a Fullbright scholarship for foreign students (as I posted at Nesara News, those are intended only for post-graduate.studies, not four-year college which Columbia is). He did not have a Foreign Student ID card (the one you’ve seen is a fake, made from the real card that German student Thomas Lugert posted on his own website back around 2006 — heck, Columbia didn’t even have bar-coded student IDs when Obama attended, nor would they for another ½ decade!). There are photos of him there, with other students and faculty, who also have stated that they remember him well. His registration records have been shown.

          • gomurr

            It’s hard to find anyone from Columbia who remembers him. Show the photos of him with friends and faculty, please.

          • COMALite J

            I can’t do so here because this particular Disqus™ forum (unlike many others) doesn’t allow pictures or videos in comments.

            But, if you’re willing to click a link, click here to see posts by me from mid-2013 on another forum with such a photo, as well as photos of his Columbia student enrollment records.

            You can see many other photos of Obama at Columbia.by simply typing “Barack Obama at Columbia University” into Google Image Search.

          • John.K.Watson

            If you could unseal Obama’s Columbia University records I believe you’d find that:

            A) He rarely ever attended class.

            B) His grades were not those typical of what we understand it takes to get into Harvard Law School.

            C) He attended Columbia as a foreign exchange student.

            D) He paid little for either undergraduate college or Harvard Law School because of foreign aid and scholarships given to a poor foreign students like this kid Barry Soetoro from Indonesia.

            - See more at: http://blackquillandink.com/?page_id=12948#sthash.CbrH2u1l.dpuf

          • COMALite J

            Wrong on all counts. The Columbia “Foreign Student” ID card you’ve likely seen is a fake made by a deliberately, willfully, and maliciously deceptive Birther.

            I could go into a lot of detail on this, but I already have, back on New Year’s Day on the Nesara News blog in a Birther article on that very subject. (Unfortunately it’s missing Part 4 of my series of comments [there was a length limit], but what remains should be enough.)

            For the record, he never went by “Barry Sœtoro.”

          • gomurr

            Talk about the completely brainwashed American, good job, Tavistock!

          • COMALite J

            A rule in debate is that once a participant resorts to insults instead of rebuttal with demonstrable facts and sources, that person automatically concedes complete and utter defeat. I have not insulted you (show me a post in which I have if you think otherwise — copy and paste therefrom).

            I’ll give you one more chance. Can you actually refute the points raised in my comments in the link to which I posted for @john_k_watson:disqus? Can you do so with actual evidence, not from blogosphere (note that I didn’t specify “right-wing” or “Birther”) opinion rants?

          • gomurr

            Didn’t you use the vile term “Teabagger” in regards to a group of Americans you know nothing about?

            Don’t come back and “educate ” me about the Tea Party. Using such a smear brings our agenda to the forefront.

          • COMALite J

            Why, yes, yes I did. And I said why I did. Because:

            • They’re not entitled to the name “Tea Party” (that name was already taken by Ron Paul’s fans who were doing Boston Tea Party reenactments in 2007 and even 1987), so I need something to call them and I refuse to participate in letting them steal some other group’s name who predated them by years or even decades and who was still using the name, so:

            • I use the name that their own founders chose themselves for their movement, despite having been warned by their own about what it meant (most especially including the vile sexual innuendo), and indeed they chose it for that very reason!

            I’ve written much on this subject over the years starting in 2010, complete with photographic proof and links direct to the actual thread (which is still there) where the Teabaggers formed and chose that name. The thread in question is dated exactly one week before the first Teabagger protest held on February 27, 2009 — namely, on February 20, 2009.

            Here’re my posts on another forum from last year, in a thread started by a Christian Teabagger woman who tried to equate the term “Teabagger” with the N-word to try to get it banned on that forum. This is just one of many such threads that I’ve posted this info in.

          • gomurr

            Sorry, he has spent millions to keep all his academic records under wraps.

            You believe whatever you want. No matter how much proof, or how many links one could provide, you will believe the first thing your favorite politician or celebrity tells you, rather than find out for yourself. You will swallow the official line, hook, line, and sinker.

            If you had an original though, or had the ability to think critically, you would never accept anything anyone tells you at face value.

            For instance, do you know where the term “conspiracy theory” came from, who coined it, more importantly when and WHY?

          • COMALite J

            No he has not. Everyone’s academic records are automatically under wraps, and can only be accessed on a need-to-know basis (e.g. for employment or further education purposes). He wouldn’t have to spend 1¢ to do that.

            And before you bring up Bush and the embarrassing transcripts that came out during his presidency, he didn’t release those. An investigative journalist (back before they became nigh-extinct) illegally obtained them under false pretenses, then released them publicly. That was a very wrong thing to do. But Bush did not release them of his own free will.

            Not that it matters, since the Constitution says nothing about education as a requirement for the Presidency. It only requires that the President be at least thirty-five years old as of Inauguration Day (which Obama most definitely was), and also (past a certain point in time during which the grandfather clause might apply) be a Natural Born Citizen (which he also is).

            I will analyze any link you provide, and if it’s to a reliable, unbiased source that presents actual evidence, I’ll give it due credence. I will not accept unqualified opinions and “gut feelings” (e.g.</I Wayne Alan Root, by his own admission — nay, by his own proud proclamation!), on either side.

            Do you even know what “to think critically” means? Please describe it in your own words. Do not quote from any other source, online or printed. I’ll know if you do. Please demonstrate that you actually understand what critical thinking actually is.

            No, I don’t know where the term “conspiracy theory” came from nor who coined it, and neither do you. Nobody does. I’ve seen claims that it originated with the Warren Commission and CIA to discredit JFK conspiracy claims in the 1960s, or with Jewish writer Karl Popper’s 1945 work The Open Society and Its Enemies. Even the Oxford English Dictionary is wrong when they state that its earliest use was in a 1909 article in the American Historical Review.

            It actually dates as far back as 1871, when it was used in The Journal of Mental Science reporting on a conference of the Fifth Quarterly Meeting of the Medico-Psychological Association (now the Royal College of Psychiatrists), held on January 27, 1870:

            The theory of Dr. Sankey as to the manner in which these injuries to the chest occurred in asylums deserved our careful attention. It was at least more plausible that the conspiracy theory of Mr. Charles Beade….

            But where did whoever wrote that report get the term, or did he actually coin it himself? We don’t know, and likely never will.

          • gomurr

            I’m sure the term has been used by someone previously, since conspiracy theories are real and have always been with us.

            In regards to how it has been used to silence dissenting opinions in
            this country, yes it absolutely was introduced by the CIA the day after
            the Kennedy assassination, to pre-discredit any theories which would
            dispute the “official scenario”. They have continued to use it any time
            someone might question the word of authority.
            It was planted in the minds of the American people at a time when they were in a state of shock, and given a negative connotation Just like 911, while the country watched, stunned, they solved the whole case in the first hour on the street. This is a deliberate ploy used to implant an idea or belief in someone’s mind.

            I’m always open to discussion, but there is nothing anyone can provide for you to make you believe anything but what you have set your mind on. You claim this person has been discredited, that person is not qualified, etc, but give no proof. Just because someone discredits someone, doesn’t mean they deserve it. You should know that.

            The truth is, I no longer care about his birth certificate, as his actions speak for themselves. He has repeatedly lied to, and betrayed, the citizens of this country. He has an agenda foreign to the principles this country was founded on. You only have to look at those he surrounds himself with. Check the beliefs and ideology of his czars and those he associated with, and continues to associate with, in Chicago.

            I really don’t like to name call or disparage others, and I’m sorry. On the BC, let’s just agree to disagree. Your research leads you one way, mine leads another.

            I have absolutely no illusions about my country or those who have been elected to run it. There has been an ongoing practice by key figures to “place” someone in office, by backing both sides. The details of how we arrive at our destination may differ with whether the Dems of Rhinos are in office, but they are both on board for the same outcome.

            I have seen the videos where our president says he is Muslim, states his father served in World War II (that certainly would not be Barack Obama senior), refers to his birthplace as Kenya (as did his publisher, Acton and Dystel, in his short author’s bio), and several separate instances, refers to the American as “…being too stupid to understand”.

            It doesn’t matter what his religion is, except it is a LIE told to get the people to believe another untruth. He is deceptive, as well as being in over his head. He has been absent at times when he needed to step up, like the Gulf Oil spill. He finally managed to stop by on his way to Martha’s Vineyard with Michelle. That tragedy continues to devastate the people, wildlife and ecosystem of the Gulf states, yet has been all but abandoned by our elected officials. This was a DELIBERATE event, just like everything else they do. Proof is always found by following the money.

            I am much more concerned at this point over real time events that are happening in this country and this world, that are being directed by a small group of people that do not have the welfare of humanity at heart, than I am over BO’s BC. Whatever he is will be shown to the people in the end. So far, his non-actions speak louder than anything he could say.

            If you’d like to discuss some of those other current issues, we can go at it, but I’m done with the BC. As I say, there are much more important things happening. If all you want to do is discredit every link or person cited without justification, or some ridiculous explanation (re: SS#), then I don’t feel like being hammered.

            I have spent virtually my whole life as a “truth seeker” and have come to realize that for many, it’s just not a driving force in their life (I am not referring to you…..this is a general comment). They have no desire to know, whether it’s fear, or they just lack the intellectual drive to do so. Some people, regardless of the truth, just need to always be right.

          • COMALite J

            No you have not seen any video in which Obama stated that he was born in Kenya. Nor has Michelle said such a thing. What they said was that Kenya is Obama’s “home country,” in the same sense that, say, JFK might refer to Ireland as his home country even though his parents were born here.

            America is a nation of immigrants. Even the “Native Americans” came here from Siberia well over ten thousand years ago (and there’s even some evidence that there may well have been other people here then, whom they wiped out). Everyone in America has ancestors that came from elsewhere.

            For many, that heritage remains a powerful force. Irish-Americans still celebrate St. Patrick’s Day with pride, even though it may have been generations since any of their ancestors was actually from there. Ditto Italian-Americans and Columbus Day.

            For Obama, his link to Kenya was much more recent: his father was born and lived most of his life there. So it’s perfectly natural for him to refer to Kenya as his “home country.”

            If you really are the truth-seeker you claim, then why did you refuse to even read my posts? Quoth you, just 17 hours ago as I type this: “You didn’t really expect me to read all that did you?”

            I post actual evidence. Are you willing to try a simple experiment? If you already have everything needed, it would take you less than five minutes. Here’s what you need:

            • A known-genuine form-type physical paper document, preferably that has been filled in by an old typewriter and hand-signed in ink, and also rubber-stamped and emboss-sealed (but not gilded-sealed), printed on actual colored-pattern security paper. In other words, as much like the Obama birth certificate in its basic nature as possible. A canceled check will do in a pinch.

            • A desktop or laptop computer (for all I know, you’re typing your posts on a smartphone or tablet) running either Windows XP or later, or Mac OS X.

            • A scanner (flatbed preferred, sheet-fed will do in a pinch) connected to said computer, with TWAIN, WIA, and other scanner drivers installed.

            • Adobe Acrobat (not Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) Standard or Pro (not Reader!) version 6 or later, and preferably no later than version 9 (X or XI will work but produce somewhat different results since the algorithms have changed).

            • Adobe Illustrator version 10 or later (to view the results and do the same experiments that the Birther “experts” you linked to did).

            If you lack the Adobe Acrobat and Illustrator, you can download a free trial version of (unfortunately) Adobe Acrobat XI or the Creative Suite 6 (which includes Acrobat Standard or Pro [depending on which version of the trial you download] XI and Illustrator CS6) from Adobe.com.

            The five minutes I promised would begin after you have obtained and fully installed all of that.

            You game?

          • gomurr

            I’ve been around to long to be deceived by people who just repeat the party line, or I should say, party lie. That applies to both parties.

            You, of course, could never be deceived, could you?

          • COMALite J

            I’ve been around quite a long time myself, and indeed have been deceived in the past, recognized it, and corrected it. For instance, I actually campaigned for Ron Paul in 1988. I voted for him then and in the primaries in 2008. But subsequently I learned more about him and analyzed his actual beliefs from his actual actions and legislation that he himself penned, and came to the conclusion that he’s not the libertarian he claims to be, but rather a neo-confederate who puts the concept of (non-existent) “States’ Rights” above the Inherent and Unalienable Rights of Natural Personhood (for an example, see his “We the People Act”). Anyone who puts anything above the concept of the Inherent and Unalienable Rights of Natural Personhood is not a libertarian, by definition.

            Just this very week, I changed a fundamental opinion of mine due to a discussion on a forum somewhat similar to this. On FARK.com, I had posted something I’ve posted many times before in a variety of forums, namely, my assertion that we should abolish political parties entirely. All of them. I stated that the Constitution neither mentions them nor provides for their existence.

            I got smacked down, hard, by three other posters ← (note: that’s three separate links, with the commas separating them!), all of whom pointed out among other things that the First Amendment provides for Freedom of Association as well as of Speech, the Press, Religion, etc., and disbanding and banning political parties would contradict that.

            So, I withdrew that assertion and admitted that I was wrong, without excuse. You will never see me make that assertion again on any forum after that date.

            Now, can you show me any time you have done likewise?

          • gomurr

            I am not afraid to admit I’m wrong, but you haven’t proven I am. I’m only concerned with the truth, so to contradict it would be counter productive.

            Can I find you proof? No.

          • John.K.Watson

            Oncve again coma you are drastically wrong and using made up arguments…the harry J B SSN is not one digit different from obamas…OBAMA has a connecticut SSN and has never resided in Connecticut much less been born there! OBAMA has also attempted to use 18 OTHER SSN numbers in the past…I think this denotes identity theft, which in and of it’s own disqualifies him from being the POTUS…Criminal record or past involving fraud or harm to another person is a high felony!!

          • COMALite J

            Wrong. Everything I’ve said I can back up. Can you back up your assertions, to reliable unbiased non-Birther blogosphere sources? Reliable journalist or legal sources only, please.

            I’m especially interested in the “18 other SSNs in the past” claim. I could find no reliable source backing that one up — in fact, I couldn’t even find any in the Birther blogosphere! The only Google matches for “Obama 18 Social Security numbers” in the first few pages come up using the number “18” either as the two middle digits of an SS#, or as a date, or as Obama’s age when he got his SS#, etc., not as any number of alleged prior SS#s.

            And for future reference, my handle isn’t “coma.” If you must abbreviate, please use “CJ.”

          • gomurr

            You wouldn’t accept any sources anyone gives you, unless they agree with you. What’s the point? You made up your mind, that’s it.

            I have some interesting declassified info that could show you the way it really works, but I’m sure you’d accuse me of writing it and declassifying it myself.

          • COMALite J

            Feel free to link to any actual evidence that you may have.

          • gomurr

            I am not referring to the BC, but the deception of the American people at the hands of government.

          • COMALite J

            I didn’t say you were. I asked you to link to any actual evidence (of anything) you may have.

          • COMALite J

            — (cont.) —

            As promised, more on your Birther links. For now, I’m going to be brief, because this is turning into something of a threadjack. This Ben Swann article is supposed to be about Sheriff Mack calling out Glenn Beck, and I came here to post some juicy stuff about Beck.

            If you want to discuss Birther stuff in more detail, please find a Birther thread of your choice that supports Disqus™ commenting (preferably one that allows embedding of images and YouTube videos into comments), that isn’t on WND (they banned me from there recently, and I don’t know who did it nor why [they didn’t even have the courtesy to Email me or post a comment telling me that I’d been blocked and why], as I did not violate any of their rules nor insulted anyone), post a link to it here, and I’ll meet you there. Deal?

            For now, suffice it to say that none of the people in those threads is an actual digital document forensic analyst — not even Reed Hayes. Mr. Hayes’s area of expertise is in handwriting analysis, which can mean two different things (I’d have to examine his cases and testimonies to know which he specializes in):

            • One is the valid science of handwriting identification, meaning determining who hand-wrote something by analyzing the characteristics of the handwriting: not just the shapes of the letters, but how they’re drawn (tilt, speed, and pressure of the pen as detected through analysis of the ink flow patterns on the paper, etc.). If that’s his specialty, then I have no complaints with him other than that until his actual report is released (your link is from an article about ¾ of a year old that has little actual details, and to the best of my knowledge the actual report is still sealed and will remain so until the case is heard), I don’t know for sure what he’s claiming. If he’s analyzing the signatures and claims something’s wrong with them, I’d be very interested to hear what he has to say.

            • The other is the pseudoscience of graphology, or attempting to psychoanalyze based on handwriting characteristics (“Notice how his loops are stretched, indicating a psychopathic urge to rape women”). That’s right up there with astrology, palmistry, phrenology (feeling skull bumps and attempting to determine personality characteristics and aptitudes from them), etc. If that’s the “handwriting analysis” he specializes in, then he’s got no more credibility than Miss Cleo. Graphology has been shown to be very unreliable, and any judge that still allows “expert” testimony from graphologists should be disbarred.

            If, on the other hand, his report extends beyond his area of expertise (as has every other Birther “expert”’s to date) into such things as layers, “kerning,” etc., then he is not qualified to do so any more than any of the others have been.

            Time for an analogy: imagine that your child has been diagnosed with a devastating condition that medical science can do absolutely nothing for. However, you find out that some herbal treatments do hold out hope, but they can make things worse or even be deadly if misused. Who will you trust to treat your child, from these choices?

            • A certified naturopath, a learned practitioner of naturopathic medicine who has spent years learning not only what herbs have what effects, but also their indications, contraindications, interactions with other herbs or pharmaceuticals or even food (for instance, if you eat grapefruit or drink grapefruit juice while taking Red Yeast Rice [a natural statin] it can kill you dead [as can also happen if you imbibe grapefruit while taking any other statin, including the pharmaceutical ones such as Zocor® or Lipitor®]!), side-effects, etc.

            or

            • A talented, expert, even award-winning chef who has years of experience in using herbs for flavoring in food.

            I would hope that you’d choose the former, for your child’s sake. The chef may be very good indeed, having created culinary masterpieces in which his use of herbs would qualify as a masterclass in proper seasoning. His knowledge of when to use parsely, sage, rosemary, and thyme (to borrow some lyrics from Simon & Garfunkle’s “Scarborough Faire”), in what amounts, and when in the cooking process to add each, may be top-notch, but that still wouldn’t give him even an iota of qualification on naturopathy, knowing whether to use comfrey root or hawthorne berry or valerian root or St. John’s wort or whatever, whether to mix them, in what proportions, whether to make a tea or use the powdered or fresh herbs, what dosage given your child’s body weight and other characteristics, etc.

            In this analogy, virtually all of the Birther “experts” prior to Mr. Hayes have been chefs. Graphic artists. Logo designers. Photoshop mavens. They may be very good indeed at those things, have created wonderful works of art, have brought out the best in many a photograph, etc. but those are not the areas of expertise needed to analyze a .PDF allegedly made from a scanned physical paper document.

            As I said before, they’re not just different skill sets, they’re different talent sets! The chef and the graphics artist / designer are both right-brained creative people, able to do feats of creativity that absolutely astound left-brained analytical geeks like me.

            I know every feature of Photoshop, Illustrator, etc., and how to use them. I can tell you how they work internally at the pixel and even binary 0s and 1s level. But if you launch either program and tell me to just create a new work of art out of my own imagination, I’d be completely stumped, since I have very little if any artistic imagination. I can process works that others have made, such as preparing a logo image for various uses such as four-color process printing, or fixing exposure or other issues with photographs, but don’t ask me to come up with a logo for you from scratch — not if you want your business to succeed.

            I greatly admire the creative people, but I also know that when it comes to analysis, people like me have it all over people like them, just as when it comes to creating works of art, the reverse is true. Just as I’d never seek to design a logo from scratch (I know that a bad or even merely not good enough logo can absolutely ruin a business no matter how good its products, services, management, etc. might be), so too should creative people not seek to weigh in on analysis matters.

            As I said before, right off the bat, all of the Birther “experts” (with the possible exception of Mr. Hayes) can be considered to have disqualified themselves just because they were wasting their time on the heavily optimized White House .gov .PDF file, when much better, higher-quality, considerably less optimized (but still optimized) scans in both .PDF and flat-raster-file (e.g. .JPG) formats have been available all along since day one even before the White House file!

            No real forensic analyst would do that with any form of evidence. They always request the best available form. Take audio forensic analysis: if an analyst is given an audio file of a recorded police interview, but it’s very soft, tinny, and you can hear noises such as children playing and dogs barking and wind blowing that cover up the voices and make it quite obvious that this was not a direct recording, a real audio forensic analyst would ask, “Is this the best recording available?” Then the suspect may have to admit that, to try to thwart the investigation, he complied with the subpœna by provided a recording he made by using a portable MP3 recorder to record the audio from his cell phone’s tiny speaker, with the .MP3 recorder mic held some distance away from the phone, outdoors in a dog park while kids and dogs were playing on a windy day. Knowing this, the real forensic analyst would know that the cell phone has a much more pristine recording, and could subpœna that. But better yet, he’d ask to get it from whatever source it was put onto the phone from, and if possible the direct recording from the actual police interview recording system.

            The best, of course, would be to analyze the original. That cannot be done, because the State of Hawaii rightly will not allow it, for any reason. The originals are bound into volumes (one per year, as I understand it) and stored in a climate-and-Ph-controlled Vital Records vault. They cannot leave that vault for any reason short of the vault itself catching fire, or the entire island of Oahu up and deciding to show off its impersonation of Atlantis or Nümenor. Doing so would require taking the whole volume out of the vault, which would endanger not only Obama’s own original, but also those of the hundreds of other people whose birth certificates are in the same volume. Not gonna happen, and not even the President of the United States can make Hawaii do that (Tenth Amendment — you know, States’ Rights? You right-wingers are supposed to be really big on that).

            Barring that, there’s the microfiche. Those, too, are in the vault, but they can be removed and accessed more easily without endangering the actual originals. This was actually done in late April, 2011, to make the three certified physical paper copies, two of which were handed out to the AP and UPI at the press conference on April 27 (three years ago this coming Sunday!), and one retained by the White House from which the .PDF on their website was scanned..

            Do you understand? Two physical paper certified copies were handed out to the two major press organizations. This was done in front of news media cameras on live nationally broadcast TV. From this alone we know for a fact that the .PDF was not created from scratch nor by copying and pasting elements from multiple documents in Photoshop nor any other program.

            Could it still have been forged? It’s possible, in the same sense that it’s possible that Benjamin Franklin never actually existed and all his works (including all issues of Poor Richard’s Almanac) were forged and all the historians and Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution and European monarchs and such were in on a massive hoax to create a fictitious legendary man (someone else discovered electricity and invented the Franklin stove and the bifocals and such, don’cha know). Thus, no real forensic analyst (inclduing me) will say that the birth certificate has been definitely proven to be genuine.

            What we can and will do and have already done is show that every last one of the claimed Birther “evidences of forgery” to date simply don’t hold up. Most of them are actually evidences that it’s genuine, or at least, if it was forged, it was forged on paper before being scanned (that would be impossible to detect solely by digital analysis methods).

            Example: Mr. Ivey’s big claim has to do with alleged “kerning,” yet despite claiming to be a fonts expert, he apparently doesn’t know what kerning actually is. He is correct that many of the letters don’t lie up precisely along a grid, but that’s actually evidence in favor of it having been an actual manually typewritten document that was scanned! Text typed on a computer using a monospaced typewriter-like font and overlaid on a scanned blank form would line up along a grid!

            But real mechanical typewriters are just that: mechanical. The ones used in 1961 used hammers which were physically moved by the force of the fingers hitting the keys, to rise up and strike the platen. The hammers are side-by-side, forming an arc in front of the platen. Since they’re mechanically linked to the keys, they have to be in the same order of the keys from left to right. When a key is pressed (with some force), the hammer is pushed up and flies in an arc to reach the platen. There is a guide shaped something like this: → _/ _ ← that guides the hammer to the correct spot in the platen. But, it’s not precise. The gap in the guide is slightly wider than the hammers are, and for good reason: were it a tight fit, it’d “grab” the hammer and it would stick and jam, making typing pretty much impossible. No, there’s a bit of “slop” in the mechanism, not only there but elsewhere as well.

            Centrifugal force tends to pull the hammers of keys typed from the left side of the keyboard to the right, causing them to bounce off the right angled side of the guide and shift a bit to the left, and vice-versa for keys to the right side. Mr. Ivey uses the “Pa” letter pair as an example of his alleged “kerning” in which the “P” is shifted a bit to the right and the “a” a bit to the left, causing it to “tuck under” the “P” somewhat. Kerning? No. Look at your keyboard. What side of the keyboard is the [P] key on? Now what side is the [A] key on? Typewriters were arranged that way (Sholes QWERTY layout) back then, too. Centrifugal force combined with deliberate mechanical “slop” factor, baby!

            No. Not kerning. Real kerning is a very different thing: it doesn’t just affect a given pair of letters, but the entire rest of the line of text as well! Failure to do that would simply cause a visual gap on the right side of the kerned letter!

            Imagine, for instance, the word “Tommorow.” In a proportionally spaced font such as the Arial Regular font that you’re almost certainly reading this in right now (it might be Droid Sans if you’re using an Android phone or tablet), the top of the “T” extends to the right of the center stroke, so that if short letters such as most vowels (not “i”) and many consonants wind up immediately to the right of it as computers usually do by going by the “bounding boxes” (the maximum extents in all four directions, and with a little extra space added), there would appear to be a gap between the “T” and “o” — exaggerated, it’d look like this: “T omorrow.” But if we shift the “o” to the left a bit, then that pair would look better, yet unless we also shift all the remaining letters over as well by at least the same amount, all that would happen is that the apparent gap would now be between the “o” and first “m,” about like this: “To morrow”!

            Kerning is performed in one of two ways: “Metrics” (using a table of kerning pairs actually placed in the font’s font metrics metadata tables by the font designer) and “Optical” (high-end software such as Adobe InDesign® capable of actually analyzing the actual outline shapes of the letters and doing its own kerning according to how the text would look to a human reader). The vast majority of software that can do kerning at all uses Metrics. Microsoft Word®, for instance, can do so, but normally only does it for fonts larger than 12 points (the larger the text, the more obvious the apparent gaps that mandate kerning). Lower-end software such as Microsoft WordPad cannot (not sure about Microsoft Live Writer, but I doubt it).

            For Metrics kerning to work, the font must have a table of kerning pairs in its font metrics metadata. Proportionally-spaced fonts such as this here Arial Regular, plus others such as Times New Roman, Georgia, Lucida Bright, Lucida Fax, Lucida Sans, the newer Segœ UI, Calibri, Cambria, Constantia, Corbel, and such common purchased fonts as Garamond, Caslon, etc., all would have such kerning pairs. But monospaced fonts (the kind that try to look typewritten), such as Courier New, Andale Mono, Lucida Typewriter, Lucida Console, and the newer Consolas, and purchased fonts such as Prestige Elite or Orator, have no kerning pairs, because that would defeat the whole point of monospaced fonts!

            If you’re running 32-bit Windows XP or later, you can download a free utility from Microsoft’s Typography website that will allow you to view the Features and other properties of any TrueType or OpenType font, by adding tabs to the “Properties” window that comes up when you right-click on a file and select “Properties…” — if the file in question is a TrueType (.ttf) or OpenType (.otf) font file, then the extra tabs will be available. One of them is “Features,” and at the top it’ll tell you how many glyphs (total individual character shapes) and how many standard kerning pairs it has. For an OpenType Pro font, it may have no standard kerning pairs but may still have OpenType Layout advanced kerning capabilities, in which case it’ll say so. Try it with both Arial and Courier New, and see for yourself: the former will have hundreds of standard kerning pairs (904 in the case of my old Windows XP’s version) and the latter will have “no standard kerning pairs.” Zero. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch.

            Okay, I think I pretty thoroughly refuted Mr. Ivey’s allegations of kerning. It took me eight ¶s, many rather long. I apologize for that — once I get started and on a roll, it’s hard to know when to stop. Thing is, I can do that at similar exhaustive detail for any and all of the other alleged Birther “experts” and their alleged “evidences of forgery,” with the sole exception of Reed Hayes whose report on this nobody outside of the Cold Case Posse has even seen yet. I anxiously await it.

            Meanwhile, pick any of the ones from your second scribd link other than Mr. Hayes whose report is unavailable, and Mr. Ivey who I already took care of. I picked him, now you pick one. I have no way of knowing in advance which one you’ll choose. I’ll refute it in about as much detail as I did Ivey’s “kerning.” I wouldn’t make such a challenge if I wasn’t absolutely confident that I could refute all of them. And I can. But don’t take my word for that. In fact, I insist that you do not take my word for that! Pick one!!

          • gomurr

            You didn’t really expect me to read all that did you?

            It seems you are the only one qualified to judge these documents. Of course, I’m sure you got those disclaimers from one of your idols .

            Any one who is running for president and does not release all his information publicly, and continues to try to keep it hidden, has something to hide. PERIOD.

            A constitutional “scholar” does not quote the Declaration of Independence, and refer to it as The Constitution. Not only that, he should know how many states are in the union if he wants to be president.

            I’ll pass on your challenge, not because I am not sure of my position, but because you’re starting to rant.

            Oh, I would pick the naturopath every time. I know western medicine is mostly designed to keep you sick, so you can take more medicine. Too bad Obamacare won’t cover it.

          • COMALite J

            Yes, I did expect you to read all of it. I’ve read every word of your comments. Fair’s fair.

            No, I’m not the only one qualified. Any certified digital document forensic analyst would be. Got any on your side? Zullo asked over 300 to weigh in before finally settling on handwriting analyst Reed Hayes, and all pretty much laughed in his face.

            My challenge was simply for you to pick one other of the evidences of forgery from your own link (the second scribd one) for me to refute. And no, I have not been ranting. I’ve been posting demonstrable facts and backing then up.

            You completely missed the point of the naturopath question. The choice wasn’t between a naturopath and an allopath (Western medical doctor). The choice was between a naturopath and a chef. Read the full post to see why I asked that.

            I’ve already fallen for one of your red herrings, which is why we’re on this Birther discussion to begin with. I won’t fall for another, so if you want to discuss ObamaCare with me, link to another Disqus thread on that subject in your Reply to me and I’ll meet you there.

          • gomurr

            I was kidding…..I did read it.

          • COMALite J

            I provide definitions of words unfamiliar to the general public not because I think you might not know them (I don’t know your level of education in such matters and make no assumptions), but also because other people will be reading these posts, perhaps for years to come. Please take no offense at that, as none is intended.

            I have respect for many forms of alternative medicine, including naturopathy (but not homeopathy, which is a straight-up scam). I use naturopathic products myself.

            The naturopathy vs. chef thing was an analogy of why the distinction between a left-brained analytical type (naturopath, digital document forensic analyst) and a right-brained creative type (chef, computer graphics artist or graphic designer) is so important, even if their respective talents involve the same basic thing (the use of herbs in the analogy, computer graphics software in the case of the Obama birth certificate issue).

            Competent judges are aware of this distinction, which is one reason why hundreds of Birther lawsuits to date have been tossed out: the alleged “experts” weren’t qualified.

          • COMALite J

            Oh, on the “57 States” thing (“Not only that, he should know how many states are in the union if he wants to be president”): that’s an easily understandable slip of the tongue. Thinking “47 of the 50 States” and getting the words crossed on the way to the tongue so that it comes out “57″ is the sort of thing that happens to all of us on occasion. It’s also reasonably possible that he was thinking “primaries in states” and it came out “states” (some States had multiple Primaries, enough to put the total he had campaigned in at around 57).

            Even without that, though, even if it were an actual stupid statement on Obama’s part (which it was not, but even if it were!), he’d still have some catchin’ up t’do.

            You see, George W. Bush made so many outright idiotic statements that they were collected onto a whole poster, but that wasn’t enough so a second poster with all-new material was released. Then another. And another.

            But soon it outgrew mere posters, so on New Years Day, 2001, a whole book was published with 96 pages, most of which were nothing but George W. Bushisms (the title of the book — “Bushisms” is a neologism coined specifically for his many malapropisms).

            The very next year so much new material had accumulated that a 96-page sequel was published on Guy Fawkes Day, 2002, entitled More George W. Bushisms! One day shy of one year later, on November 4, 2003, another sequel was published (Still More George W. Bushisms).

            Then another on November 7, 2005 (Even More George W. Bushisms ← with material still mostly from within Bush’s first term [it takes months to write and publish a book like this, and this one was also delayed]!). And even another (George W. Bushisms V ← this one actually came out a month before the previous volume, due to the aforementioned delay — stlll mostly first term material!).

            Five sizable volumes in all filled with nothing but Bushisms (mostly from just the campaign trail and his first term!), with no repeats — and those are just the ones from a single editor (Slate writer Jacob Weisberg)! But Bush wasn’t done talking yet, so on November 6, 2007, Weisberg published a sixth volume with second-term stuff (The Ultimate George W. Bushisms)! He figured that that would be it (thus the “Ultimate” in the title), but darn it, Bush just kept on talking, so a seventh volume came out also in 2007 (George W. Bushisms: The Farewell Tour)!

            An even larger 128-page Deluxe Edition came out on June 2, 2004, entitled The Deluxe Election Edition Bushisms: The First Term, In His Own Special Words, collecting the “best of” material from the first-term volumes (I–V, I believe).

            Weisberg also helped produce an hour+-long video of Bush actually saying these inanities (along with commentary and other material). This came out in 2004, so it’s all campaign trail and first-term stuff!

            And, there were also day-to-day calendars of Bushisms for the years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 that I know of — each with a different Bushism for every day of the year! All 365 of them (366 for 2004 and 2008, being Leap Years).

            And that’s just the Weisberg stuff! There are also books and calendars on Bushisms from other sources as well.

            So go on, keep on harping about the “57 States” and casually swapping the Constitution and Declaration in his mind (something a lot of people do, including some even in this very thread). That’s all you got, to compare against ↑all that⇑!?

            Like I said, Obama still has some catchin’ up t’do.

          • John.K.Watson

            THE Supreme court has recently judged that the Birth cert is fake…try keeping up with the real news…not the T.V. type but the research of court docs type!

          • COMALite J

            No it did not. The link you gave was for the Alabama State Supreme Court, and reported on a minority (i.e. losing!) opinion. The majority of the judges (7–2) ruled against the Birther claims.

          • John.K.Watson
          • COMALite J

            Uhm, read your link again: the majority of the judges threw out the case, as has every other Birther case to date (all several hundred of them in multiple States). This was talking about one judge who had a minority opinion in the Alabama (not United States) Supreme Court.

            The two losing judges quoted included none other than the infamous Judge Roy Moore, he who willfully violated the First Amendment by placing a Ten Commandments statue (which, ironically enough, violates one of the Ten Commandments themselves! — the Second Commandment flatly forbids any “graven” [carved, sculpted, or engraved] image or any likeness [“graven” or otherwise] of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth! Supposedly the “real” Ten Commandments stone tablets were placed in the Ark of the Covenant, which got lost when Jerusalem was captured by the Babylonians. Where is it now? Did God take it up into Heaven? Is it buried or hidden in a cave or building somewhere? Did Jewish priests try to salvage the Ark by smuggling it onto a ship, which then sank somewhere at sea? Dunno, but all three possibilities were explicitly and specifically accounted for and included in the prohibition! Wherever the Ark and thus the Ten Commandments tablets are, they would definitely qualify as being “… anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth”!) in his courthouse and refused to remove it despite a Federal court order.

            Sorry, no, his opinion means diddly squat.

          • John.K.Watson

            The two U.S. Attorneys representing Barack Obama tried everything they could to sway the judge that this case was frivolous, but Carter would have none of it and cut them off several times. Obama’s attorneys left the courtroom after about the 90 minute hearing looking defeated and nervous.

            Great day in America for the U.S. Constitution! The truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility will be known fairly soon – Judge Carter practically guaranteed it!
            Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/carter.asp#oKggHj0JEfQLtSzd.99

          • COMALite J

            Did you even read that Snopes link? It outright states that that claim is False! And it debunks it at considerable length!

            Every one of Orly Taitz’s court case challenges has been thrown out before they even got to trial stage, because Taitz is no more competent an attorney than she is a document forensics expert (which is not at all — we’re talking here about a woman who was publicly fooled by an obvious hoax Kenyan birth certificate that the hoaxter demonstrated exactly how he faked it using cheap materials!). She’s a dentist who managed to pass the bar exam without having taken actual law school courses. Taitz keeps making rookie mistakes of procedure, standing, etc. that law students learn to avoid in Pre-Law courses!

            Frankly, I’d love it if some Birther case made it to actual trial. I know exactly what would happen, and whoever the “experts” are on the Birther side could, within five minutes of someone like me testifying, kiss their credibilities and careers goodbye forever.

            Unfortunately for both of us, the Birther “attorneys” such as Taitz as well as Philip J. Berg, whom I personally, under this same handle (the only one I use online for such discussions) ripped to shreds (along with his second pet “computer graphics expert” one “Dr. Ron J. Polarik, Ph.D.” [who I’ll grant could be considered an expert on faking identity, since his own identity was fake, though I didn’t know this at the time — turns out he.s really Ronald Polland of Florida, and his Ph.D. is in a totally unrelated field] — I got there too late to assist in the humiliating takedown of his first such pet “expert,” one “TechDude”) on Berg’s own blog (since deleted, unfortunately) way back in 2009 on the subject of the “short form”, are utterly incompetent even at their own professions of law, let alone at document forensic analysis. Darn it!

        • Philip Marcum

          Gomurr, I have already posted word for word copies of U.S. laws elsewhere in these comments, so not going to bother to repeat myself. Instead if you feel like finding the laws I posted, feel free to look them over. If you can show me a modern ruling that supersedes the laws I posted that says a child can no longer be born in the U.S. as a natural born citizen to a single U.S. citizen parent and must have 2 U.S. citizen parents, then feel free to post it. The laws I read said different then your claim.

        • COMALite J

          You must be born to two parents who are citizens.

          Wrong. No U.S. law nor Supreme Court decision has ever said that.

          It is true that older laws (now superseded) did say “the child of parents who are citizens,” but that uses the unquantified plural. Whenever a noun has no quantity specified, the plural should be used unless the quantity is one and only one.

          In other cases of unspecified quantity, the plural would be used even if the unspecified quantity includes the possibility of being one, so long as the possibility also exists that the plural quantity would include some other quantity greater than one, or even in some circumstances the possibility of the quantity being zero. Exceptions include cases where the quantity is implicitly specified in the context (“the twins are doing fine”).

          Example: most courthouses have a sign in the entranceway that reads something like, “No Firearms Allowed.” If the use of the plural there excludes the possibility of referring to the quantity of one firearm. How about you try that? Bring one gun in, and when they go to arrest you, point out that the sign uses the plural and you only brought one gun in. See how far that gets you.

          Nope. For your case to hold up, you need to show a law or Supreme Court case that actually specifies, explicitly or implicitly, the quantity “two” or “both” relating to “parents.” “… the child of two / both parents who are citizens….” or “… the child of a father and a mother who are citizens….” would be acceptable.

          Good luck. No one has yet met this challenge. But, you’re welcome to try.

      • COMALite J

        If you want a real laugh, read about how Birtherism got started in the first place ← (this link goes to a summary written by yours truly [under this same handle] months ago on another forum, but I also highly recommend reading the original research by Loren Collins at his website “BirthOfANotion.com”)

  • Tom K.

    ALL Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement MUST become Oath Keepers, AGAIN, and take that Oath to God and Constitution seriously OR hit the road, Jack, and never come back ! Had those B.L.M. knuckleheads killed ANY civilian men, women and / or children, they would have caused a Revolution in this country and Obama’s ” Security Force ” would have been roundly defeated. The B.L.M. would claim that they were ” Just Following Orders ” – just like the German / Nazi butchers of World War II . The Feds proved that they have No Respect for person OR property OR the Constitution which they swore to God that they would support, protect and defend. America MUST remove the corrupt ones in OUR Government via recall OR the ballot box. Pray for America !

  • Rob Price

    The Sheriff is the head law enforcement official in that County-the BLM, State Police and other agencies are under his authority and jurisdiction upon entering into his County, whether they abide by that or not, is another matter! We, as patriotic American’s must stand up together in these small skirmish’s, or we will be overrun in the larger ones to follow. This is only the beginning of the American second revolution against Government tyranny!
    MOLON LABE

  • victorbarney

    If anybody should be ashamed of themselves, it is “we the people,” who became “immoral” even sooner than our brother Great Britain did in their history! Now, I better understand our need for Revelation’s 7 & 11′s judgment of us! It just can’t be fixed folks, not without killing it! WATCH…

    • COMALite J

      Are you implying that the USA is Babylon the Great? I’ve communicated online with a man who claims to be none other than one of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 who makes that same assertion.

  • Bob

    Under our system of laws, the government players actually HAVE VERY LITTLE authority and power if there were equitable people in every level with no anterior motives involved – but it’s STILL humanistic and subject to change – Yahweh’s standards are and literally were set in stone – His Morality is not SUBJECTIVE to whims of man, his standards are Equitable for everyone who loves life – why not support life and turn to Him ? Why > because of the lusts of the flesh and thinking ourselves wiser than Creator and yes master Designer of ALL we can preceive and ALL we don’t.

    • Mindy Robinson

      And the return of Christ is near.

      • COMALite J

        Actually, Christ put a deadline on His Second Coming, and it passed a long time ago. Three of His four Officially Accepted Biographers quote Him as describing His Second Coming, then immediately afterwards saying that there were some people standing there at that time and place, listening to Him say those words, who would not taste of death until they saw the Second Coming happen.

        He’s tardy!!

  • Snorri

    For those that don’t support the Federal Government especially the Obama administration, there are two choices: 1. vote the Democrats and RINOs out of office starting at the dog catcher level and refuse cooperation where possible e.g.: not serving on Federal juries, avoiding federal taxes.

    2. finding another country. If the American people want to vote themselves into socialism, and political as well as physical slavery, it’s their choice. Yes stupid and ignorant is no way to go through life, but that’s what liberals need to effect legal change. We deserve the government we get.

    • COMALite J

      I recommend Choice #2, since the Constitution is against you (see @TedRWeiland:disqus’s comments). And, there aren’t enough of you to vote out all the Democrats and “RINOs” (um, just so you know, the Republican Party has been around since 1854, and the Teabaggers¹ since February 20, 2009, so guess what? You are the real RINOs!), and you’re getting fewer and fewer all the time.

      Unfortunately, all the rest of the land on Earth is already taken, so I’m wondering just where you’re going to go to found a new country.

      There is that Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone of its sun-star that was discovered recently, I suppose. It’s only about a hundred light-years away.

  • RizoliTV

    The Jew based Southern Poverty Law Center takes the side of the Government, big surprise, they along with Jewish monies want America destroyed through multiculturalism.

    • Philip Marcum

      This, is exactly why the right has such a hard time winning over the center and left. A former Sheriff who wants to use women as a tactic to civil war, a Racist Troll looking to blame a whole race of people. This is why it makes it difficult for the left to support the right in times like this because they are scared to death you guys plan on making America into a Christian Theocracy to oppress minorities or worse. I have no doubt this guy would do far worse if he could then simply make Jews second class citizens…

      If you all would tell people like this to get stuffed, you might actually get more support. By the way Rizoli, Jesus and I love you and America has ALWAYS been Multicultured. It was built on the backs of just about every culture in the world and sometimes forced into it. What is this 1943?

      • RizoliTV

        Philip, the only thing that will save America is the man on the White Horse of Revelation 19 fame. Our country went down hill in about the late 1700′s when Christian oaths were abolished and any Tom, Dick Harry, and Mary without an ounce of Godliness took over America. Unfortunate history proves the Jews took a great lead in that process. State Constitutions slowly acquiesced to their demands to remove Christian Oaths and thus Our beloved Constitution did the same. It was downhill from there, and now we are here with sodomites, atheist, communist and every degenerate in public office from top to bottom, from school boards to city councils. The only hope for this wheat and weeds mess is “wait till the harvest”.
        That will be the only salvation we will have.

        • Philip Marcum

          Well…can’t get much more scary then you, friend. You think a Christian Theocracy is the way to go? Why? Because it worked so well when Hitler did it, or the time they wiped out all the Aztecs, or maybe if was the genocide of the Incas? Perhaps it was the near destruction of the Native Americans or the Salem Witch Trials where they accused their own faithful of witchcraft. No I got it, it was when they ran Spain and started the Spanish Inquisition. No, that don’t sound right, perhaps it was the Crusades or the Hundred Years war. Maybe the near complete annihilation of the Pagans of Europe and their attempt to remove any trace at all from the history books (but failed just short of that). Perhaps we could just go as far back as the old testament when the whole idea was complete genocide of all males to anyone not Christian and rape and enslavement for women and children.

          Yes…Life under Christian rule of genocide, torture, oppression (even of it’s own faithful for believing maybe they might not be “Christian” enough, I am sure seems a great idea to you to get the country where you think it should have started from the very beginning yet didn’t. Looking back on history, I cannot imagine why people would attempt to stay away from yet another oppressive religion run country. Muslim theocracies work much the same way history tells us and we have modern day theocracies proving religion still sucks at running countries.

          Religion is best kept out of the government where it cannot get it’s hands on near unlimited resources, power, and authority to control, force conversion, and kill its enemies because thats what any religion does when it claims superiority over all others.

          Even if you got your way and Christians changed the Constitution so they could now rule the country under biblical law, I hope you are Catholic? Because you have to consider which denomination gets to rule the Christians. The single biggest denomination in the U.S. of Christians is Catholics at around 26%. If you are not Catholic, after they wil the right to control the government, the U.S. comes under the authority of the Vatican. If you were not Catholic before, you will be under Christian rule since they dominate the other denominations of Christianity.

          Put to a vote among Christians for which denomination shall rule, thats how that would end up, if you fought it out, instead to stop Catholics from ruling, well I suppose I would not be surprised Christians yet again turned on each other demanding their variation of Christianity is the “correct” one. This would still be tough considering 1 in 4 Christians are Catholics. 1 in 4 Americans are of another religion or none at all besides Christianity as well. 3 in 4 Americans may be labeled “Christians” but there are so many denominations of Christianity and so little agreeance on which is correct, (Christians cannot even agree on which version of the bible they want because they keep changing it to suit their needs) that they become a bunch of minorities within a majority.

          Changing the Constitution to suit your desires to make your religion dominate to impose an age of suffering upon those not of your faith, yeah, I sure am glad your type of extremism is dying out and taken less and less serious. Anyone that supports this guy cannot call themselves a partiot because he wants to change the Constitution so that Christians rule the country in an official capacity under biblical law. You cannot swear to protect the Constitution and demand it’s very 1st amendment on the Bill of Rights to be changed so that Christians rule this country since that would remove freedom of religion and have the Congress be able to make the law respecting the establishment of a particular denomination of Christianity, which it specifically says it will not do; “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion,”

          Despite them putting it on paper they still did not stick to that and as a result we ended up in a civil war some 84 years later as Christians demanded the “God given” rights to continue slavery in their individual states. For anyone that don’t know, Yes, Southern Christians used to demand it was their god given rights and the Government needed to stay out of their business. We still have transcripts of politicians and preachers quoting the bible in debates of the time both to the people and on the floor of Congress to back up what the bible clearly states that slavery is fine. It was even argued black people did not have souls because it was believed they were animals and in Christian belief, animals have no souls.

          What you are talking about sir by wanting to change the Constitution for Christian rule is a type of hell on earth for the United States, which, for many people in history when Christians did rule in some countries, it was a hell for them.

          This is exactly what I am talking about Republicans. This is the type of person that wants to sneak into the movement, his agenda is not addressing government overreach and states rights, it’s to insert his belief system on all of America, and there are more like him. If this is the rights idea of a true patriot, then yes, I guess I am against you all. In just a single paragraph he already wants to alter or possibly dispose of part of the 1st Amendment in the bill of rights and who knows what else. I am sure if he gets to talking, it would be far many more changes.

          • COMALite J

            Have you read @TedRWeiland:disqus’s posts here and on other Disqus forums? Or checked out his various websites?

          • Philip Marcum

            I have not, no. I will check him out though. So many comments and things to research lately, I can’t keep up with all the air tight arguments that have been coming at me like; “You’re mentally ill!” and “Dildo breath!” and well I am sure you can see where I am going with this and how hard it is to debate such gotcha! skills…

          • COMALite J

            Ted doen’t resort to such things easily, though once I started refuting him from his own Bible, he fell back on, “You can’t refute a Bible that wasn’t written for you,” referring to me being an atheist. I pointed out that I was a BIble-believing Christian for the vast majority of my life, and was speaking of the understandings I had then.

            For the record, the “You’re mentallly ill” stuff almost certainly comes from right-wing AM shock-talk radio host Michael Savage who is fond of saying, “Liberalism is a mental disorder” and who wrote a book with that title first published in January, 2005.

            A year later, a more serious pop psychology book was written by a forensic psychiatrist named Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D., entitled The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. The book itself appears to.be, ironically enough, a classic example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect on the part of Dr. Rossiter. He basically assumes that his right-wing worldview is correct, then comes up with psychological deficiency causes for why anyone would reject his oh-so-obviously-correct worldview.

          • Philip Marcum

            I see, yeah, I had not drawn the connection to Michael Savage. I heard a few of his shows but not heard about him in a while. He is pretty extreme though from what I remember. Thats one messed up angry dude.

        • COMALite J

          @RizoliTV:disqus, are you a Mormon? Certain Mormon extremists are the main ones to refer to the White Horse Prophecy as referring to some great yet human leader in the future. Most Christians interpret that as referring to Jesus Christ Himself. Mormon extremists are also fond of the “wheat and tares [weeds]” metaphor.

          Christian oaths were never removed from “our beloved Constitution.” The U.S. Constitution never had Christian oaths, and indeed, in its original pre-Amendments and thus pre-First Amendment form, outright forbade any religious test from ever being required for any office of public trust under the United States (Article VI ¶3). This is right after the Supremacy Clause (Article VI ¶2), written by the same hand a mere ~2″ up on the same piece of parchment, so yes, this applies to the States, counties (and parishes or whatever), and municipalities as well.

          • RizoliTV

            Mormon? LOL….I quoted a Scripture from the book of Revelation about the man on the white horse, NOT about the Mormons foolish “White Horse Prophecy” that might exist or maybe exist or they think exist in their church.
            Yes, I now all about their viewpoints on that topic, but no I am not a Mormon. I am a Christian that hasn’t folllowed 99% of the brain dead Christians in the world.

          • COMALite J

            Ah. Thanks for the clarification. For the record, mainstream Mormons don’t harp on that stuff, but some of the fundie LDS sects do.

            But most evangelical Christians consider the White Horseman to be Jesus. Do you believe that? And what do you think the White Horseman has to do with the USA? Can you show me the USA clearly and unambiguously shown in End Times Prophecy?

      • LTE2

        “This, is exactly why the right has such a hard time winning over the center and left.”
        .
        If the right tip toed around and said nothing they’d still get attacked. The Democrat Party and it’s allies have been in a systematic campaign to destroy all they do not agree with, including any of their own who do not toe the line.
        .
        Polite arguments with them will not work. The only bridges they want are to be built on their terms.

        • Philip Marcum

          Both parties are hell bent on destroying each other, that’s hardly unique to the Democrats. Strong debate or even polite debate with the extreme left or the extreme right is almost certain to fail, this is true. Luckily the extreme left and extreme right are actually a small but just very loud percentage. Most Americans lay somewhere between moderately left of center to moderately right of center.

          In the end, if a natural disaster or attack on the country happens, neither side is going to ask the American next ti him what is your political stance and religion before I help you or defend the country against a foreign invader with you. They are both going to do what needs to be done. It’s only the very extreme left or very extreme right that hopes for his fellow Americans to snuff it in a natural disaster or invasion and hopes politically opposite of themselves get taken out in such a situation. America really is in a sad state when thats what Republicans and Democrats are thinking in such a moment instead of; “How can I help? We can argue policy later.”

          • LTE2

            “Luckily the extreme left and extreme right are actually a small but just very loud percentage.”
            .
            This is where I disagree with you. The Democrats and the Republicans are not the same as the Democrats are moving to a far more intrusive social model and it is the “small percentage” of the left that drives the Democrat Party with the rest of the Democrats following along.

          • Jackie Brush

            Very well said.

      • Craig Robinson

        How much welfare was given to minorities in 1943? The immigrants who came here went to work not to the welfare office.

        • Philip Marcum

          Yes, they did, and we had workhouses for children and robber barons in the 1800′s and early 1900′s, good for you, you pointed out we were far meaner to our poor back then and paid them indentured servant wages. Oh whats that? We shipped immigrants over by the boat load even after slavery was abolished and made them work in camps and shop at the company store until they paid back the high cost they charged to bring them here in the first place and kept them stuck even longer by charging them high prices for room and board in shacks, long hours or hard labor, with no safety standards at all, and high prices at the company stores all to make sure they would be working for Robber Barons for most their lives? We did that!?! Oh yeah….

          You got me. Before that, who needed indentured servants when we had forced immigration slaves? Am I right people? High five! We liked to enslave people and then hate them at the same time for being here. Then you know what’s even more hilarious. After we made it a crime for slavery and forcing people into indentured servitude and made businesses no longer work poor children in factory work house, we then got angry because these freed people wanted jobs and now that they are here needed jobs but we could not use them anymore for slavery so then, and this is the funny bust a gut part, we wanted them all to leave.

          Ahhhhhh good times. Then these asshole immigrants started asking to go to school…HAHA Oh man…what a riot. So we said no and then we fought tooth and nail to try and keep them from getting an education and set up our society to keep most minority immigrants poor which we still practice today, and then that allows us to get all mad when the poor can’t live in society because we make it increasingly harder and harder while by the cost of living and inflation continues to rise but wage increase continue to stagnate and so now more people then ever in American history need help just to barely make ends meet and are literally a missed paycheck away from becoming homeless and HAHA man…Poor people suck don’t they? ahhhh…..

          Yes, America’s woes are all poor peoples fault Craig and for the record, no, most were not going to work accept at America’s worst and most dangerous jobs, many died from being overworked, underpaid, starved, work accidents, or just your general Hi I am your friendly neighborhood white man hater that will service you with a hanging or bullet/beat to death/torture today and the law will look the other way cause the law hates you to. So which plan would you like to pick today Mr. immigrant? We have this one here, now this package promises we burn down your home steal what little saving you have, beat you to within an inch of your life, and rape your daughter. If thats enough for you, we can do that but if you care to resist then here is another package we offer where we rape your daughter in front of you, after we beat you within an inch of your life, shoot your son, take your wife away to who knows where, burn a cross in front of your shack and burn your shack down but leave you alive…

          Thats when immigrants were immigrants right Craig? No welfare office for them because…it did not exist I suppose so they had nowhere to turn when they were starving and cold so…there is that…instead they just suffered and or died with almost none ever making it to the middle class and oh heres a shocker! Organized crime was born by unwanted immigrants not being allowed to have a decent job. What!?! Why would immigrants of all the different cultures start becoming criminals and start organized crime!?! It makes no sense!?! You mean these guys was both awful and yet was also giving back to their communities at the same time. They ceased to care about committing crimes on those outside their race and did so freely and also put some of their ill gotten gains back into their communities? Why were they not happy with the way things were? Could everything I be writing in this post be as sarcastic as possible? I think I could be far more sarcastic but this is good enough for now.

          • Craig Robinson

            That’s a touching story. Is the word “illegal” anywhere in the liberal dictionary? We have ILLEGAL aliens, we have ILLEGAL spying on American people, we have the IRS using their organization to ILLEGALLY target gop organizations, we have a president that ILLEGALLY changes and creates his own laws and the list goes on.

          • Philip Marcum

            Yes, fascinating Craig. I have no idea what that has to do with RizoliTV’s racist remarks. I am aware we have illegal aliens, I am aware the NSA is spying on Americans and I think that is flat out unconstitutional. I am aware of the accusations that the IRS might have targeted more specifically the Tea party, and is so, thats blatantly wrong and I hope those responsible end up in jail for it.

            I would like some examples of Obama changing laws illegally though because near as I can tell, presidents have a tendency to loop hole the crap out of things along with Congress but they do it in such a way they cannot be thrown out of office typically and make sure they have the law backing them first so can you give examples of his illegal works that is court pending and if he is guilty I would gladly support his removal. I will give you though that presidents and congress loophole things to death creating backdoors to steal freedoms bit by bit and yeah, President Obama seems no different on that score. I am sure to you, he is the worst one thus far in getting away with such skirting the Constitution tactics. I’d say he is in a close race with Bush though on thats since Bush started many of the loophole policies Obama has made worse today. Neither one can I say is a good president that I can believe in.

            Anyways, whats concerning me Craig is you don’t acknowledge at all Rizoli’s clearly racist comments and went straight at me. It suggests my political leanings are more worthy of attack and that you might actually support Mr. Anti Semite here. You are clearly Republican, that much I can guess about both of you, one blatantly shows his racism, you don’t say it but you clearly don’t admonish it either since you ignored him and went straight for me and my comments to him for being racist. Am I to assume you agree with his comments since thats what this particular debate under his comments is about? Which is fine, I am just trying to get my hate groups in order here.

            Speaking of Racism and why the right keeps getting less and less support, it because well…you have winners like Rozoli here, birthers who think Obama is a communist Muslim (sometimes even the anti christ) sent to destroy America, and then your whole movement against the BLM is lead by Sheriff Mack and his desire to “strategize” how to start a civil war getting Americans to support it and then the recent discovery of Mr. Bundy’s character with his interview recently where he throws down some good old fashioned racism then when asked in other interviews just reaffirms what he said.

            Here is the on camera interview if you want to see why America is more and more saying you are losing the high ground. The right really seems to love to hold onto the idea of racism doesn’t it? With people like that, you think you all will “take back America” and do what with it exactly? Set it back into the early 1800′s and oppress the hell out of anyone not a White American Christian Male? It’s weird how the only support you all are getting is from mostly over 90% from White Christian males…

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FbnRnhrNFEY

          • RizoliTV

            Racist comments, LOL, if you knew what I have been doing for work for the last 35 years you would be apologizing Philip.

          • COMALite J

            Looking at what you actually wrote, @philipmarcum:disqus was probably wrong to use the term “racist.” “Anti-Semitic” would be more accurate. Copy-paste quoth you:

            The Jew based [sic] Southern Poverty Law Center takes the side of the Government, [sic] big surprise, [sic] they along with Jewish monies want America destroyed through multiculturalism

          • RizoliTV

            Anti semitic? Actually that would include Christianity. The word antisemitism is a word that is thrown around a lot but actually antisemitism is actually a normal humans response to the sins and bad behavior of the Jews. If that is what you want to hit me with, then guilty.
            The Jews HAVE been responsible for most of the evils that have taken over the earth. Slavery, murder, usury, abortion, communism. They back homosexuality, and most vices such as pornography, loan sharking, you name it. The Mafia actually were under the Jewsish warlords, Lansky and others, the Purple gang, Jewish. David Duke has explained all this very eloquently. The Bolshivic revolution, JEWISH.
            I also believe 911had Israel involved in it and maybe the Boston Marathon.
            Also See Betsy Mcgee expose Carlos Arredondo on her youtube video.
            Lastly the holocaust lies are starting to be brought out daily.
            Look up jjrizo on youtube for that. I’ve done a few myself exposing that fraud.. be interesting to see Philip get into that topic. Lets discuss Auschwitz, the impossibility of the stories about that supposed “death camp”.. total nonsense.

          • Philip Marcum

            How did I miss this comment? Wow…

            You talked about way too many subjects for me to hit upon and would take me weeks to go into all of this in any even small detail. One thing came across clearly however so I know your position anyways, you communicated you blame the Jews for all of the things you touched upon. I think that is a safe thing to assume you was getting across. I have no problems criticising religions, I do it all the time when I think they do something wrong but this is blaming them for everything as if they have some evil diabolical plan and are evil just because they are Jews, that being Jewish by itself is automatically evil, scheming on a global scale, with plans that would take decades or even centuries to fulfill. Some of the stuff you assume to be true requires a belief that they are all evil and that they pass the same belief and plans down from generation to generation.

            In order for that to happen, we would have to take as fact a few things. One, they would have to be “spiritually and innately evil under the same banner. Two, they have to have a collective mindset as they have yet to betray each other and “rat” each other out. Three, we have to assume somehow, you, as a brave Christian warrior and others like you in the battle vs. good and evil, uncovered their evil plots that they have been working on for several thousand years.

            Naturally, I am skeptical of the idea that I have to accept their supernatural status of evil as basically a billion demons roaming the earth openly to take over the world. To me, this is as likely as the Jews saying Christians intend the same, or Muslims saying the Jews, Christians, or both are the evil super naturals, or Christians and Jews saying the same about Muslims. In other words, I am as likely to believe that, as to believe the bible is a factual and literal text. Since I do not look at the bible as a factual and literal text and you present no facts, I have no reason to believe your accusations. I should stress here that conspiracy theory opinion videos have no solid ground for me. Religious faith based theories and your desire to believe them is not enough just as a word of warning on if you will be wasting your time or not.

          • RizoliTV

            Phil, your post said nothing, I bring up specifics you poo poo it all.
            Go to realjewnews.com that should keep busy educating you about the real deal about Jewish behavior, you really are ignorant in this area of life, maybe deliberately, maybe not.

          • RizoliTV

            Oh by the way Phil I actually agree with you on a lot of what you have said, so to start labeling me does a diserrvice to your observations of persons.
            I almost NEVER use the term racist on anyone. When you used It I thought you were Jewish of from the likes of the ADL or SPLC. THEY always go down that road when people like me have an opinion that brings their antichrist, anti-God, Anti-American nonsense out in public.
            They have got so bad at the nonsense that they have labled me and my brother people they have on their web sites for so called “hate” when in our instance all we want is to see the immigration laws enforced. Go check out their half truths on both their web sites just put in my last name minus the tv for a search.
            As to the future of the world I personally think we have reached the breaking point to where we are now living in the wheat and the weeds of Jesus prophicies. The only thing happening now is that people are rearranging the furniture on the Titanic to the Republican/Democrat and whatever political partys they think are going to fix the USA and the world.
            Hopefully in my time I will see the fullfillment to the prophecy in Daniel 2:44
            That is where I am in my life now. Go fight over the furniture arrangement on the Titanic….

          • COMALite J

            Interesing! Some years ago I was in communications with someone who claimed to be no less than one of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11. He had fascinating interpretations (he claimed them to be divinely inspired discernments) of End-Times Prophecies. He even pronounced a curse on the rainfall of a town in Texas that they would receive only a third of their normal rainfall that year, and it was exactly a third to the ¹⁄100th″ accuracy (the maximum accuracy possible, since that’s all the level of accuracy that meteorologists and climatologists measure)!

            He shows exactly where the USA fits in. And it’s not what most Christians think.

            Are you interested in hearing more?

          • Philip Marcum

            Perhaps, racist is off as brought up by COMALite J and yourself, considering that the Jewish people are often referred to as the Jewish race because they have racial features that can tell them apart from the European strain, or any other race, being Anti-Semitic may still be the more proper term because you do not have to be from Jewish genes to join the Jewish religion. It is still not even close to a good thing being Anti-Semitic but I will withdraw the racism remark.

            Regardless, without some extra information explaining what you mean, your remark by itself looks like just one passerby Anti-Semitic remark as if to condemn them that they all mean to destroy America with their I am assuming their “jewish backed” money. I do not throw racist around lightly but when someone seems to be blaming a race for the problems in the world, it don’t take much to spot the unreasonable anger in their hearts. However, criticising a religion is not racism. It’s just a mixed situation unlike say Christianity that has no racial gene connections since being Jewish is a race and a religion all at the same time but not all Jews follow Judaism and some that are not of Jewish descent do follow Judaism.

            I would not say Judaism is Anti-Christ oriented, but like Christianity has groups like the KKK or Neo- Nazis, this does not represent all of Christendom there certainly is some groups within the Jewish community that probably are Anti-Christ oriented. As for Judaism being Anti-God well that can’t be right because Christians, Jews, and Islam all share the exact same God and their roots all come from the Old testament but then split off from there. I am all for immigration law enforcement, we can’t be the giant refugee camp of the planet but at the same time, I also cannot blame folks for trying. Their alternatives sometimes are pretty desperate and bleak. If I lived in a oppressive society under a dictator, I’d probably make a break for it to and hope my new home might give me sanctuary. I’d have to try in a situation like that.

            I am not Jewish, I come from Irish and Scandinavian family background of mostly Catholics and in more recent generations many of them are Baptists. I myself am Agnostic and politically I am an Independent that looks for a 3rd party to inspire that puts all people of America and the Constitution first, along with complete fiscal responsibility and such parties exist but the tricky part is finding one that embraces civil liberties at the same time. The closest one I have found is Libertarian but even they have a few civil liberty issues but I keep my eye out for them to have rising influence in the two party system and see them as possibly becoming a competitive 3rd party of the future.

            The Tea Party is technically stronger than the Libertarians but alls they really are is upset former Republicans that want things even further right than even Republicans (and thats not easy to do so sometimes) on all things including the desire to restrict civil liberties. I can almost agree with the Tea parties stance of fiscal conservatism, small government, term limits for congress, tax reform, and similar issues but then they lose me when they start talking civil liberties and social issues, they do not believe in equal rights for all and wish Christianity to rule the nation. I think this is a mistake, proved throughout history of Christian run Theocracies. It’s oppression waiting to happen. Religions make for bad governments, not just Christianity.

          • Primo Knoxville

            The same thing was done to poor white Americans you liberals just dont get it its like your missing part of your brain . Also I can tell you really like to hear your self talk remember you can always fit the truth into a couple of sentences .

          • Philip Marcum

            Listening to myself talk is the only way I can be sure of intelligent conversation. I to could “speak truth” tactic as the far right seems to cling to in just under a few sentences if all I had to do was call you a douche, tell your your brain is abby normal and then say again you people are nuts! It’s not productive at all however. To you all, I know, arguments with facts and words that are not just attempts to insult is completely foreign to you. The lack of ability to present your own facts is why you are often reduced to attempts at insults (as if that has any effect at all), and desperately turning to the bible as if you speak to God on the phone and he tells you what to say about sending people to hell and such.

            You have no skills, you just have blind faith, your alls debate skills come from a drunken household of insults and shouting matches as to who can intimidate or bully the hardest means that person wins, you have no facts (because you don’t believe in facts) you just claim things to be fact because you want it to be as such. This is what the extreme right does. They are an angry lot, they hate to be challenged, they hate being confronted. If you all had any ability past the adult equivalent of what would be kids yelling at each other that they are poopy heads and that we will pay by some higher authority (in a kids case, parents wrath and in an adults equivalent, God’s wrath (cause ya know….he only works for you)) as your defense. If you all showed you were not just a hate group with a mix of the Dark Ages attempt to kill learning of the masses and the inquisition attempting to oppress any religion other than their own ( and even their own sometimes when the extreme right don’t feel you are not angry and religious enough), then maybe, some form of dialogue might be possible.

            We all know the extreme ones like yourself are only going to continue to attempt to throw desperate haymaker insults with zero effect and since you all seem to be working the pearly gates and the gates of hell, you apparently get to decide who is going where which I must give you kudos on the job promotion from mortal to divine know-it-all. I think the comments here under this article have run their course. You all have had little to say on the actual article with the exception of a few saying what a great man Sheriff Mack is for his failed attempt to put women in the front to be shot first. Aside from that telling me a bit about your alls character and a few of you declaring your racial or religious hatred further making the impression you folks need to get help for your radical nature you have developed. You have no sense of being reasonable or moderate anymore.

      • Primo Knoxville

        Do I have to go into what makes it hard for the right to support the left . Wake up neither party is for the people .

        • Philip Marcum

          I would actually agree with you there, neither party is for the people, we have something in common at least. I believe that of the politicians though more than the American people. We the people may fall to the left or the right but we are not making the crazy decisions and both parties love reminding us how powerless we are in stopping them from helping their special interests. Instead they tell us, if you don’t like it, give us back the power again, It’s always the left or the right saying, if you would just vote us into full power, we could “fix” everything once and for all. Break everything they mean and “fix” it just for their party specifically.

          There are plenty of things I am sure all the time most Americans can agree that Congress if voting things into law most Americans do not want. We have no control once they are in. The body of Congress “represents” the people but we all know they now only represent the lobbyists, corporate special interests, and even individual rich people like billionaires can manage an audience with congress. The average American lost control of elections, candidates, and having their needs represented a very long time ago, it’s just been far worse than ever the last 2 decades.

          The one difference I can say is, unlike the right which often despite their demands for limited and small government to stay out of Americans lives, the right sure does want the government to control minorities and set up interferences with gay folks lives. The left, supports equal rights regardless. While the left sometimes sucks at things like fiscal responsibility, and seems to more and more be somewhat a socialist government, they excel in civil rights.

          What the right often means to say but deny they “mean it that way” is we want the government to stay out of our lives if we are White Republican Christian males. We (the right) have issues with certain religions (in particular Judaism and Islam, sexual preferences, and sometimes even race (even these days such as the Muslims and Mexicans most notably) having “our” rights because we keep letting our religion get in the way of the Constitution saying they have the same rights and that we cannot use our religion to be favored by the government as the Constitution won’t allow it.

          The very right of center is currently annoyed to no end by Americans thwarting the most heavily religious White Christian right which dominates the Republican party and the Tea Party by 90% + but in the last 2 decades the Republicans have started to realize they can no longer just majority vote and win. While White Christian males are still the majority in America by a long shot, they are more and more not as hard core bible thumpers and siding with civil rights issues which places them closer to the center or even left of center. The Republican party has found out in the last 8 years that they cannot win anymore by just saying screw you minorities, we don’t need you!

          They have to start welcoming some minorities to swing back into their favor. They have started most notably with their old rivals they used to be dead set against, African Americans. They are now trying to make the Republican party more friendly with this once hated minority. Because Republican African Americans have a few things in common now. One, very religious Black Republicans also do not want gay people to have rights because they think it’s wrong and use the bible instead of the Constitution as their guideline, two, they also are having racial and religious issues with Latinos, Jews, and Muslims/Islam. So, the Republican party while still dominated by White Christians, is starting to be bolstered slightly by a 6 – 8ish percent Christian African American demo.

          This by the way is the reason why extremely religious right leaning Christians want to change the Constitution to “correct” what they see as an error made by the founding fathers. If they could just change it to this;

          “We, the people of the United States, humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among the nations, His revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government, and in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the inalienable rights and the blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to ourselves and our posterity, and all the people, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. “Congress shall make law respecting the Christian bible and no other religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of Christianity.”

          Then they could do whatever they wanted and thwart anybody who tried to gain equal rights for their minorities. This one change would make America the Christian Theocracy the extreme right has been complaining about for many years now. Wanting their religion in every government building, every classroom, they want official changes to everything. It’s likely you do not even know, the pledge of allegiance used to not have under god in it until the 1950′s. “In God we trust” was also added later to money. Little changes like this were snuck in by very religious Congressmen who managed to get enough support to change these things. Now you all think it’s always been a part of America since the founding fathers.

          It’s matters like this, that I clearly part from the right on because they wish to do something against others that is unconstitutional and elevate their religion as an official religion of America in preference to others and use the bible to make law in America. If you are for the Constitution and for protecting it then you MUST leave your bible at home when it comes to American politics. It does not mean you cannot worship, or pray over your dinner, or go to church, or even still say, I think being a homosexual is wrong. It just means you cannot use your religion to interfere with another Americans rights. This is why I cannot join the right fully.

          I cannot join the left for completely different reasons but takes far less words to explain. Most notably, their complete lack of fiscal control and responsibility. Their desire to change bits of the constitution to reflect a more socialist government and attempt to remove Americans right to keep arms. One thing I can see as a right of the American people and I will catch more hell over this I am sure and be declared a Communist again. We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Well, the right to life should give all Americans the right to be taken care of in the hospital regardless of their illness or financial station. I think Obamacare mostly sucks and is just another Bureaucracy asking for corrupt loopholes which it is already riddled with but I believe Americans should just pay towards a fund like social security and if they get sick, they should be treated and there should be no limitations or boards to approve the treatment.

          Yes….I know this would be a socialist program but so is social security. So is giving a disabled vet free medical for life. America DOES have a few socialist programs, most notably when it comes to keeping your elder mother or grandmother from having to eat dog food when she is 75 or 80 by giving her some extra cash in her older years from social security, giving them medical help, they could never afford on their own unless they were independently wealthy, which 90% of us will not be. Giving Vets if they get disabled money and full medical for life is a socialist program and a worthy one at that. The point is, it’s not without some basis of having some decent applications. The right to you having the best quality of life the medical industry can provide should be the right of all Americans, not just the ones that can afford it.

          A healthy America, is a productive America. You want poverty stricken families to start contributing? Stop telling them they cannot be treated because they are too poor, so they get sicker and sicker, never able to keep a job well. You try working well when your teeth are rotting out, making you sicker and sicker, in pain all the time, or a minor medical condition easily treated but costs too much, ends up becoming a major one because you could not get proper treatment. See how productive you are in 20 years of work on 15k – 25k a year without more money than that, no dental, no eye, and no health insurance. Thats what a poverty stricken family has to deal with.

          They would love to be healthy, they would love to be educated so they can get a better job and real marketable skills so they can contribute to and get wealthier with America. Does anyone honestly think for one second their lifes dream is to be under crushing debts, bad health, unable to save, never takes vacations, sometimes has to work multiple low paying go no where but there jobs to get a full 40 hour work week in or more, JUST so they can get that sweet sweet $100 or so extra a month in food stamps? Thats the poors diabolical plan to take our taxpayer dollars by living in absolute desperate and destitute conditions so as to “stick it to the man” and live High off the hog???

          Needless to say, while I have problems with the left, I clearly have more issues with the right on how they wish to treat other people and they are supposed to be the “real” Christians. Apparently Jesus’s message about loving your neighbor and him loving the poor the most got lost in the good book to some good old fashioned old testament fire and brimstone wrath, jealousy, and hate. That guide seems to win out more often than not instead of Jesus’s teachings which is a shame cause the parts Jesus talks about seems to make him a pretty damn good guy, it’s his followers that seem to be hyper focused on anything negative the book taught so they can justify being awful to others that they fear or don’t understand.

          Appropriate that you are one of those that passed judgement as is very typical of the very religious as you did above to COMA about deciding you know exactly where he is going. Thats interesting how self righteous and arrogant you are as to decide all by yourself for God where his children are going just because you got a “hate on”. It’s almost like you have no idea how Jesus was said to be towards his fellow man. I am fairly certain, if you want to be a good Christian, a great many of you are going to need to spend a lot more time studying Jesus’s words because it is clear you all just sorta skipped over them and went towards most of the old testament stuff that allows you to justify wrath and hate towards those you disagree with.

  • Chief47

    I took Beck at his word and canceled my subscription to all of his service because I DO agree with everyone who responded to the brutality of the feds at the Bundy Ranch.

  • Jack

    Just another example of a company socializing the liabilities and privatizing the gains.

  • CaptainUSA

    Glenn is done the day after he played the Race card with the State run media. The New’s breaks about him getting White House talking points 3 days before media matters. 1 week ago 57 of my friends liked the The Blaze on face book now 35. And this connection is 1 hour old.

    • COMALite J

      Actually, according to both mainstream Christianity and Beck’s own Mormonism, he was done long before that, when, in 2010, live on his own TV show, he blasphemed the Holy Ghost and became a Son of Perdition, whom Jesus Himself stated would never be forgiven in this world nor in the world to come, all to dishonestly shill for a corporate sponsor!

      Watch this YouTube™ video. Dylan Ratigan goes into much detail exposing the fraudulent nature of Beck’s endorsements of Goldline on his TV show, without clearly indicating them as advertisements as required by law (not to mention Goldline’s own fraud).

      But even Ratigan misses an even bigger issue: listen carefully to what Beck says in the first ten seconds of the video. That’s all you really need to hear.

      Remember, this was years before the Vice Presidential Debates in October, 2011 when Chris Matthews interviewed an elderly (almost certainly Mormon) woman nicknamed “Cold War Connie” who called Obama a “communist” on national TV outside the VP debate venue, and when he pressed her on it, she repeatedly replied: “Study it out!” That’s an odd phrase, and prior to her saying that, it was not an Internet meme. It didn’t become an Internet meme until she said it, and because she said it,

      But look who else said it years previously. long before it became an Internet meme!

      Where does that phrase actually come from? What does it mean in Mormon dog-whistle-ese? Do you know?

      And what does it mean for a Mormon to use that language (especially when followed by, “Pray on it”!) to unethically shill for a corporate sponsor, for money, for filthy lucre, for mammon!?

      It comes from the Doctrine & Covenants (abbreviated D&C), an LDS volume of scripture that they consider equal to and in many ways even more important than the Holy Bible and The Book of Mormon! The other two are ancient scriptures, while the D&C is modern scripture for our age. The vast majority of it is alleged revelations given mostly by Jesus Christ Himself to their founding Prophet Joseph Smith. Each revelation is in a “Section” (the D&C doesn’t have books nor chapters, but the §s are basically analogous to chapters in the Bible and BoM).

      D&C §9 was brought on by Joseph Smith’s scribe Oliver Cowdery attempting to translate some of the plates himself. This alleged revelation was to show that Cowdery went about it the wrong way, and to show the proper way that one should call on God to reveal truth to him/her via the Holy Spirit. Verse 8 says that you must first “study it out in your own mind,” and then ask God if the thing be true, and He would respond accordingly.

      So, in those ten seconds, you see for yourself as Glenn Beck, live on his own TV show, invoked the Holy Ghost (using Mormon-specific “dog whistle” verbiage) to dishonestly shill for an unethical corporate sponsor! How would that not qualify as Blaspheming the Holy Ghost!?

  • CorrectionPlease

    It’s clear that the obsessive compulsion to engage in this
    bizarre crypto judaic discussion of the shibboleths in the scripture of the
    Church of the Latter Day Saints reveals COMALite to be a failed Judaic convert
    to LDS, who hoped that the Philo Semitic tenants of that religion would prevail,
    since COMA was undoubtedly ejected from membership in that fold with his own aluminum foil hat
    intact.

    • COMALite J

      Wrong. I’m an atheist (“weak” agnostic “weak” atheist, to be more specific). I’ve studied several religions, and LDS is just one of many that I’m familiar with. I have never been Jewish, but have studied some of Judaism (including Orthodox and Reform) as well.

      • Primo Knoxville

        The gate to hell is a wide gate, bye .

  • Primo Knoxville

    And he has millions of people standing behind him not just Americans .

  • J. Nev

    THIS NEEDS TO BE SAID LOUDER!!! I think what Bundy rancher was trying to say is, I wonder if all the free stuff (FROM ANY POLITICIAN) is making you free or dependant?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio