See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #101
   On February 12th, 2010 at 11:00 am, plymouthacclaim said:

   Medina talked to JD Wells from KLIF AM in Dallas/Ft Worth after the feces hit the fan.

   part 1 of 2

   part 2 of 2

   Here she says that she misunderstood Beck’s question and that she could not hear him when he was talking over her saying

   Yeah, I understand. Debra, you’ve answered the question.

   Maybe she had a bad phone connection or maybe his voice was on the air but not on the phone. Medina mentioned that she wondered at the time why he was letting her talk so long without him saying anything.

   Listen at 1:10 on part 1. Wells asks her point blank. Medina replies that she believes that 9/11 was done by terrorists, not the government.

2. #102
   On February 12th, 2010 at 11:00 am, philmon said:

   Sure. Go ahead. Ask questions.

   But be prepared for the answers, and don’t junk them on the litmus test of whether or not they support your conspiracy theory.

   I haven’t seen any answers from the Truther crowd that doesn’t amount to uniformed speculation and can’t be easily debunked.

   On the birther issue, I agree with Bob. I acknowledge that I find it curious that we haven’t seen some journalist go scraping for just why it is we only have what we have and efforts to dig deeper are stamped out quickly. I have to wonder what it is that would be so bad if we knew about it for the records to be closed. If this were a conservative president the media would be making things up and perhaps forging “truthy” documents.

   But the Hillary thing… yeah, that’s a clincher for me. They would have used it.

   It doesn’t matter, though. He is the President, he got through the process, and he’s not going to be removed even if the Truthers can prove it. We may tighten up future requirements for what documentation you must present to be considered eligible in the future. But this one’s a done deal.

   Let’s focus on the philosophy of the role of government, and not details about where people might have been born. At this point, that is all that is relevant.

3. #103
   On February 12th, 2010 at 11:05 am, BOB said:

   On February 12th, 2010 at 10:41 am, swede said:

   As previously said, I do not put birthers in league with truthers, but many do. I agree, something does not smell right, but so far all evidence I’ve seen is either manufactured, (by nutroots to perpetuate this) circumstantial or heresay travelling through blogland.

   Again, if I am wrong, help me out. I would be very pleased to eat my words. But again, at the end of the day the issue must be decided by the present Senate who are not at all likely to even hear it, and if they did would almost certainly decide Barry eligible. Then what? SCOTUS?

   Go back to my previous post and read the information in the links. I would like to know how you conclude the information is “manufactured”. What “proof” do you want…and does it bother you that Obama is hiding the “proof”.

   Is the burden of proof not on Obama? He has provided no proof at this point. Do you favor an independent investigation…or at least a rational media discussion of the issue, with “experts” on both sides opening this up for the general public to understand why it is important?

   The issue would be decided by the American people if an honest, open discussion were allowed. Why is Sarah Palin’s palm pilot more important than Obama’s eligibility?

4. #104
   On February 12th, 2010 at 11:07 am, Dexter Alarius said:

   We may tighten up future requirements for what documentation you must present to be considered eligible in the future.

   I agree we should do that. But, I’d still like the SCOTUS to define the term “Natural Born Citizen” in the context of the Constitutional eligibility to the office of President.

   There was a Supreme Court case in the 1880s or 1890s involving a Chinese immigrant where the court recognized a difference between a “citizen at birth” and a “natural born citizen”, but since it wasn’t germaine to the case at hand, they declined to define the difference.

   We have a right to know.

5. #105
   On February 12th, 2010 at 12:17 pm, Surveyor said:

   I find it curious that we haven’t seen some journalist go scraping for just why it is we only have what we have and efforts to dig deeper are stamped out quickly.

   We do have a journalist doing this. Joseph Farah of WND. But, according to MM, Hannity, O’Reilly, Coulter and others, Mr. Farah, despite his years of journalism, is a nutcase for asking such a cockamamie question. Wow, the right does have an Alinsky tactic after all. Pot, I would like to introduce you to kettle.

6. #106
   On February 12th, 2010 at 12:30 pm, BOB said:

   On February 12th, 2010 at 12:17 pm, Surveyor said:
   I find it curious that we haven’t seen some journalist go scraping for just why it is we only have what we have and efforts to dig deeper are stamped out quickly.
   We do have a journalist doing this. Joseph Farah of WND. But, according to MM, Hannity, O’Reilly, Coulter and others, Mr. Farah, despite his years of journalism, is a nutcase for asking such a cockamamie question. Wow, the right does have an Alinsky tactic after all. Pot, I would like to introduce you to kettle.

   I think that is called “Trickle Down Alinsky.”

7. #107
   On February 12th, 2010 at 12:59 pm, plymouthacclaim said:

   To get back to the original point of this thread:

   Medina denies being a ‘truther’ on KLIF AM.

   Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSyL6APEPtk
   Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ74CH1lKAE

   Listen to the whole thing if you can. Here are the parts to focus on:
   I basically paraphrased these except for Part 1 9:28 which I put in blockquote.

   On part 1 of the interview, listen to 1:10 – 1:40 Medina stated it was Muslim terrorists w/ no help from the government

   Listen again at 3:00 – 4:14 Medina reiterates that point.

   4:28 – 6:12
   This came out of left field and caught me by surprise. I’m not a polished politician. If I had time to prepare, I would have had time to research.

   6:25-6:39
   I thought the question was ‘Do people have an opportunity to question the government?’

   9:08 – 9:16
   Wells: It’s refreshing that you admit to having misunderstood and answered the wrong question.

   9:28
   

   “I never heard him trying to stop me. I never heard him on my end of the phone. I don’t know what all y’all can do in studio, but I did think that it was kind of odd on that show that I was being given two or three minutes to talk without any kind of interruption finding out from my husband and my daughter after the interview that in fact he was saying ‘Ok, we got your answer. Ok, we got your answer.’ That’s the thing I think, um, whether that was intentional or it was technical difficulty I do not know, but it, it doesn’t feel very good on this end.”

   Part 2:
   1:58
   I am not a truther, but I support their right to question. We need to question our government.

   3:50
   Glenn champions questioning the government, so that question was out of left field. I’m glad to have the opportunity to straighten that out.

8. #108
   On February 12th, 2010 at 1:21 pm, battleaxe said:

   The fact that there is enough distrust in government, despite all of the evidence, that the truther and birther movements exist at all is something to think about. Either we need to lock an awful lot of people up or we really need to reform government in such a way that people can trust it again.

9. #109
   On February 12th, 2010 at 1:27 pm, purplepeep said:

   Surveyor said:
   according to MM, Hannity, O’Reilly, Coulter and others, Mr. Farah, despite his years of journalism, is a nutcase

   Well, Surveyor, for that to mean anything you would have to explain your logic in assuming anyone who’s had “years of journalism” could not be a nutcase – or something(s) even worse. For example, Dan Rather has been in journalism many more years than Farah. By your reasoning, Rather is more trustworthy than Farah.

   The fact is that the National Enquirer actually has more credibility than WND-Farah. e.g. the NE flushed out John Edwards while Farah is set on auto Extreme-Gullible for every “Kenyan Birth Certificate” some kid photoshops up. No credibility at all.

10. #110
    On February 12th, 2010 at 1:37 pm, AmericanPatriot said:

    On February 11th, 2010 at 7:22 pm,
    

    tarpon said:

    Beck did a number on Debra Medina.

    I’m a Beck fan and not a Truther. I do agree with tarpon.
    He went into this interview with the express purpose of nailing her. Not sure why.

    I listened to the replay amd read the transcript The advocacy of Trutherism just isn’t there

    On
    

    February 12th, 2010 at 9:53 am, GladzKravtz said:
    I heard this woman on Beck yesterday. She had every chance to say what she issued in her later statement. She did not. Beck even asked her if she would keep a person whom she knew was a truther, on her staff. She said that she did not want to practice mind control on her staff.

    Early in the interview with her, she sounded quite competent. As the interview progressed, I realized that she talked incessantly and Beck couldn’t get a word in edgewise. I started to turn off even before the truther question came up.

    Good for Beck to expose these people

    I don’t have a dog in this hunt.
    But I was a little shocked at the attack

11. #111
    On February 12th, 2010 at 1:56 pm, purplepeep said:

    AmericanPatriot said:
    The advocacy of Trutherism just isn’t there

    It’s all over the place, actually. This gal is a major nutjub and she’s doubling down on her conspiracy theories:
    KAVU Interview With Debra Medina.

    She’s giving a presser on this in a few minutes, so I’m expecting more of Teh Crazy to pour out. Mebbe she has the inside scoop on who really shot JR, too.

    But I was a little shocked at the attack

    Asking someone about their beliefs on 911 is an “attack” now?

12. #112
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:08 pm, Surveyor said:

    Well, Surveyor, for that to mean anything you would have to explain your logic in assuming anyone who’s had “years of journalism” could not be a nutcase – or something(s) even worse. For example, Dan Rather has been in journalism many more years than Farah. By your reasoning, Rather is more trustworthy than Farah.

    not exactly. but I offer this:

    Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor’s Business Daily and now with WorldNetDaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration.

    I didn’t say “any” journalist. I said Joseph Farah. To compare the National Enquirer….the “Southern Woman has Alien Baby” rag to WND is silly. Michelle seemed to deem their news reporting worthy enough for quote at one point, as evidenced by the link you provided earlier with Michelle “just wondering”. So….by your reasoning….your saying Michelle at one point was tinfoil-hat worthy? Or has the hypocrisy been given a pass on this one?

13. #113
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:20 pm, plymouthacclaim said:

    February 12th, 2010 at 9:53 am, GladzKravtz said:

    As the interview progressed, I realized that she talked incessantly and Beck couldn’t get a word in edgewise.

    Gladz, please read the Medina interview quote that I transcribed above. Debra Medina did not hear Glenn Beck talking. Either there was a bad phone connection or a bad mix or something. She thought he was giving her an unusually long period to talk.

14. #114
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:24 pm, plymouthacclaim said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 1:56 pm, purplepeep said:

    I watched the vid you posted. It was not an advocacy of trutherism.

15. #115
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:39 pm, purplepeep said:

    Surveyor said:
    I offer this:

    “Investigative reporter Paul Sperry, formerly of Investor’s Business Daily and now with WorldNetDaily.com, scooped the mainstream press by exposing a high-level, internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration.”

    Actually you didn’t offer that. Even a quick googling of the open words shows you just borrowed it, without attribution, from some Ron Paul nutball forum. Second hand insanity is even less impressive than the original, sorry.

    I didn’t say “any” journalist. I said Joseph Farah.

    OK, so your revised reasoning is then Joseph Farah (only) can’t be nuts (dishonest, sloppy, or worse) because he’s been involved in journalism for years? Alrighty.

    To compare the National Enquirer….the “Southern Woman has Alien Baby” rag to WND is silly.

    Well, if you substitute “Filmmaker Has Former VP Candidate’s Baby” you’d not only have an actual NE story, but also one that required some real journalistic work. Claiming that you got emailed photos of the latest “Real Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate” is not quite journalism, it’s called “getting punked & owned” by some kid.

    Michelle seemed to deem their news reporting worthy enough for quote at one point, as evidenced by the link you provided earlier with Michelle “just wondering”. So….by your reasoning….your saying Michelle at one point was tinfoil-hat worthy? Or has the hypocrisy been given a pass on this one?

    Nope, because as you pointed out (“at one point”) Michelle knows enough to distrust nutso, flaky outlets like WND. I also pointed that out – while we all make such errors in judgment (e.g. believing Farah, WND) at one time or another, it’s only a bad thing if a person continues repeating that error. Michelle was/is way too bright to get stuck on stupid. But I do understand others may have trouble with unsticking themselves from stupid.

16. #116
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:41 pm, roadrage said:

    The issue with Obama isn’t that he COULDN’T be a natural born citizen, thru his mother, but that he won’t show a simple piece of paper and put the question to rest.

    I heard that the reason he doesn’t want anyone to see his birth certificate is because it has him described as “caucasion.”

    Remember, his African father was thousands of miles away when little Barry was born. Only his white mother was there.

    Just sayin’

17. #117
    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:57 pm, purplepeep said:

    plymouthacclaim said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 1:56 pm, purplepeep said:

    I watched the vid you posted. It was not an advocacy of trutherism.

    Seems she’s pretty well hunkered down in her conspiracy theories for my money. The best you can say for her is she attempting to keep her truther creds while trying not to sound too crazy. Trying both to have & eat her cake.

    Maybe she feels she has nothing to lose now after her massive gaffe on Beck. And, frankly, she does seem to me to have an air of schizophrenia about her.

18. #118
    On February 12th, 2010 at 3:05 pm, Surveyor said:

    Actually you didn’t offer that. Even a quick googling of the open words shows you just borrowed it, without attribution, from some Ron Paul nutball forum. Second hand insanity is even less impressive than the original, sorry.

    This quote came from Michelle’s article. You know….the one you referenced earlier? Yeah….I guess you didn’t read it even though you are the one who posted it.

    it’s only a bad thing if a person continues repeating that error. Michelle was/is way too bright to get stuck on stupid.

    So I guess the questions she posed back in that article are not worthy questions still today? Did she write any other article laying out the answers to the questions she posed in the “just wondering” article? What I think is….once the HEAT (as in ridicule and credibility) was on those who questioned the official story…Michelle dropped all her previous inquires into the matter. Now that’s journalism. I wonder if Joseph Farah’s other WND articles are bunk too. You know, like the “Exposing CAIR” articles or the articles exposing Planned Parenthood and their schemes. All bunk right? Don’t think so. WND got pwned on the “Kenyan Birth Certificate”, but that’s just the way things go in the media. Getting pwned on one story doesn’t throw out the rest of their work. If it did, then Michelle’s article “just wondering” should have spelled the end of Michelle’s credibility….but it didn’t did it?

19. #119
    On February 12th, 2010 at 3:33 pm, purplepeep said:

    Surveyor said:
    This quote came from Michelle’s article.

    Yes, Surveyor – what I was faulting you for not checking via Google to see who was/is still incorrectly excited about Michelle’s 2002 error. e.g. conspiracy kooks, the Ron Paulnuts, goofball sites and MM-haters. (i.e. only the cranks & crazy people care)

    What I think is….once the HEAT (as in ridicule and credibility) was on those who questioned the official story…Michelle dropped all her previous inquires into the matter.

    Yeah, but then again you think a guy who wets his pants in excitement every time he gets a bad photoshop emailed anonymously to him of “Really This Time It’s The Real Certificate, Really” has just gotta be a good source. So, you’ll understand if your thinkin’ doesn’t impress me a whole lot.

20. #120
    On February 12th, 2010 at 3:56 pm, Surveyor said:

    So, you’ll understand if your thinkin’ doesn’t impress me a whole lot.

    That’s OK purplepeep. I am not out to impress you. You posted Michelle’s article first…not me.

    Even a quick googling of the open words shows you just borrowed it, without attribution, from some Ron Paul nutball forum.

    Fail again. I don’t think Townhall.com, where Michelle’s article was posted, is a Ron Paul Nutjob site. All I’m saying is: Where are the answers to the questions she posed in that article? A good journalist would have at least tried to answer some of their own questions right? Not in this case. But Medina is skewered and she didn’t even write an entire article…as did our hostess in 2002. Then…Michelle comes out saying “say hello and goodbye to..”. So because Michelle (and others) didn’t necessarily like Medina’s answer to Beck….she is the all knowing and all seeing for the rest of us?

    Don’t be a sheep….even if your sheepherder is Michelle Malkin.

21. #121
    On February 12th, 2010 at 4:32 pm, purplepeep said:

    Surveyor said:
    Fail again.

    If you mean you failed to address this, then you are correct, Surveyor:

    “I was faulting you for not checking via Google to see who was/is still incorrectly excited about Michelle’s 2002 error. e.g. conspiracy kooks, the Ron Paulnuts, goofball sites and MM-haters. (i.e. only the cranks & crazy people care)”

    Only nutcases are desperate enough to hold up an almost 12 year old mistaken article as “proof” for whatever their pet conspiracy theory. I imagine 12 years from now some insane person will be basing a conspiracy on something they read on Daily Kos about “Palin’s Black Bracelet”.

    Rationale, intelligent people, on the other hand just observe that we all make mistakes. The key is not to keep on repeating the same mistakes ad infinitum as Farah and Medina are wont to do.

    Real journalists (and other people) know when they’ve been had and burned by people like Farah and wisely apply the “fool me once” motto.

    But it’s okay in a way since I actually really do get some good chuckles when the Farah & Medina types fume and express frustration that people don’t take them seriously. They just don’t have a clue why people dismiss them.

22. #122
    On February 12th, 2010 at 4:34 pm, purplepeep said:

    That should be “an almost 10 year article”. I got 2012 on my mind.

23. #123
    On February 12th, 2010 at 5:32 pm, Surveyor said:

    I could soooo pick-a-part what you just posted. Instead, I will just agree to disagree.

    But your right….I didn’t address this:

    “I was faulting you for not checking via Google to see who was/is still incorrectly excited about Michelle’s 2002 error.

    Yes I know the nutjob sites have referenced this article to further their truther crap. Like I said, I’m not a truther. The main question I have, as a concerned citizen, is: How in the hell can the trillion-dollar security aparatus of the U.S. fail so miserably? I read the 9/11 commission report. Every page. But I never really found the answer to that question. Instead what we got was alot of technically-worded BS.

24. #124
    On February 12th, 2010 at 5:50 pm, purplepeep said:

    Surveyor said:
    I will just agree to disagree.

    Aw nahh, com’n, let’s agree to be disagreeable !

    How in the hell can the trillion-dollar security aparatus of the U.S. fail so miserably?

    How could the 9 billion $ Large Hadron Collider, 17 miles around, be put outta business by a bread crumb dropped by a passing bird?
    I dunno – sometimes breadcrumbs just happen.

25. #125
    On February 12th, 2010 at 6:35 pm, Surveyor said:

    Aw nahh, com’n, let’s agree to be disagreeable !

    agreed.

    But that LHC analogy is lame.
    So there!
    (I’m sticking my toungue out at you) !

    

26. #126
    On February 12th, 2010 at 7:23 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 9:28 am, MarcoPolo said:
    Babies born to foreign nationals on military bases aren’t granted citizenship, and the children of diplomats are excluded even if they’re born here.

    Really? And yet, children of illegal aliens are automatically citizens just by being born here! What the….!!

    As for birthers…I am one who is taking a wait-and-see attitude. There are too many questions. And too many gaps in Obama’s past! Something stinks. Was he born in Hawaii?? I don’t know. But all the cover-ups smell like rotten mahi-mahi. Or dead Kenyan kelp, or something.

27. #127
    On February 13th, 2010 at 9:49 am, plymouthacclaim said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:57 pm, purplepeep said:

    I thought the point was “Is she a 9/11 truther?”

    On the KLIF interview
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSyL6APEPtk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ74CH1lKAE
    Medina states that she believes that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslim terrorists with no help from the government. I think that’s a pretty explicit refutal of the accusations.

    See my post above for more details: http://michellemalkin.com/2010/02/11/a-gop-pollution-test/comment-page-2/#comment-890005

28. #128
    On February 13th, 2010 at 1:31 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 9:15 am, MarcoPolo said:

    @ItooktheRedPill: Article I of the U.S. Constitution gives the power to judge “Elections, Returns and Qualifications” of its own members. So while voiding a Senate election is in their power, I’m not sure that judging a Presidential election is. They could, however, pass legislation and grant the authority to do so to the SCOTUS. They’re allowed to do that, too.

    But here’s what the Birthers and the Truthers have in common: no evidence will ever convince them. They’ll simply insist that it’s all fabricated. It’s just what conspiracy nuts do.

    They don’t hurt anybody, and at least they might help foster an intense distrust of big government. IMHO we can’t get enough of that in this country.

    It is incorrect to say

    But here’s what the Birthers and the Truthers have in common:
    no evidence will ever convince them.

    I have said on multiple occasions, both here an on my own blog, that
    two things are required to put this to rest:

    1) A Supreme Court ruling on the definition of “Natural Born Citizen”. Can someone who was born with citizenship of another country (as Obama admits that he was) be considered a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States?

    2) If the Supreme Court finds that persons born with foreign citizenship can still be considered a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States, then Congress needs to inspect an officially certified birth certificate for Barack Obama, delivered directly to them under seal from the State of Hawaii, just as they did with their inspection of the Certificate from the Hawaiian Secretary of State for the certification of the Electoral College vote.

    This issue will not go away.

    The State of Hawaii has never verified the authenticity of the COLB that was produced at and by the Obama campaign headquarters in Chicago and only shown to a very small, controlled audience.

    The State of Hawaii has never released any documentation of Obama’s birth.

    The State of Hawaii has never claimed that Obama was “born in Honolulu”, even though the Associated Press and Fact Check.org lied and claimed that Dr. Fukino had said that.

    The State of Hawaii did claim that Obama was “born in Hawaii”, but ONLY AFTER the U.S. House of Representatives voted in favor of a resolution that included that claim. Doesn’t it seem odd that for months on end Dr. Fukino was not willing to publicly claim “Obama was born in Hawaii”, yet she rushed to do so mere hours after House Resolution 593 passed?
    See: Which Government Organization Was The First To Say, “Obama was born in Hawaii”?

    A newspaper announcement is circumstantial evidence that is not admissible as “proof” of his birth in Hawaii. Can you imagine a new employee trying to use a newspaper clipping as proof of their U.S. citizenship? It’s laughable. If that won’t work to get you a job at McDonalds, it’s certainly not acceptable for the highest office in this country.

    Every Member of Congress swore an Oath of office to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States”. The Constitution explicitly requires that a President be a Natural Born Citizen. It is the responsibility of Congress to honor their oath and verify the eligibility of the man who would be President.

    Every member of Congress failed to uphold their oath of office. They “outsourced” their Constitutional responsibility to an unaccountable, unelected, untrustworthy third party who demonstrably lied.

    Again, two things are required to put this to rest:

    1) A Supreme Court ruling on the definition of “Natural Born Citizen”. Can someone who was born with citizenship of another country (as Obama admits that he was) be considered a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States?

    2) If the Supreme Court finds that persons born with foreign citizenship can still be considered a “Natural Born Citizen” of the United States, then Congress needs to inspect an officially certified birth certificate for Barack Obama, delivered directly to them under seal from the State of Hawaii, just as they did with their inspection of the Certificate from the Hawaiian Secretary of State for the certification of the Electoral College vote.

29. #129
    On February 13th, 2010 at 1:34 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 9:16 am, BOB said:

    OK…(smiley if I knew how to put one here).

    See: Smilies

    Red Pill, your reply to Michelle’s article was great, thanks for the link.

    Thank you.

30. #130
    On February 14th, 2010 at 7:34 am, purplepeep said:

    plymouthacclaim said:

    On February 12th, 2010 at 2:57 pm, purplepeep said:

    I thought the point was “Is she a 9/11 truther?”

    Since you didn’t quote what you’re supposed to be responding to, plymouthacclaim, the response is a meaniningless one.

    At any rate, this gal is a “well-rounded fruitcake” – a dabbler in misc Alex-Jonesy assorted kookery that she refuses to let go of. Her latest insanity is her demand that Texas stop execution of it’s most violent and depraved death-row denizens, likening her position to her crusade for “truther rights”;
    Medina: Hold off on executions

    But ever since Medina insisted on a very public romantic interlude with the pooch and – in so doing – doomed herself, it’s all moot. Just another footnote in the pages of political nuttery. Machts nicht.

31. #131
    On September 23rd, 2010 at 5:54 pm, RedRepub said:

    No Truthers in the GOP????

    Where will Ron Paul and the Paulians go????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????