stupidity

Paul Mulshine: Moron

Calvin Freiburger healthcare, resercons, Sarah Palin, socialism, stupidity

Prior to seeing his latest column linked at Hot Air’s headlines, I’ve never heard of Paul Mulshine.  Upon reading it, I’ve determined that’s a good thing.

Mulshine has “got a creepy feeling Sarah Palin’s a socialist.”  Okay, he gets points for coming up with an attack we haven’t heard before, but socialist?  How does he figure?  By quoting Palin’s now-infamous “death panel” statement, in which she says:

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Somehow, Mulshine concludes Palin’s “central thesis” to be “that Medicare should indeed provide essentially unlimited coverage for Palin’s child as well as her parents.”  Next comes a lengthy lecture on Ronald Reagan & the free market, which is all well & good—except for the fact that it’s a complete non-sequitur.  Palin’s “central thesis” exists only in Mulshine’s imagination.  As would be obvious to anyone with an IQ above that of a toaster, she was discussing what she thought would happen under a government-run, single payer healthcare system—y’know, when nobody but the government is there to cover anyone?

Not once does Palin indicate she believes paid healthcare for all is a right.  In fact, let’s turn Mulshine’s challenge to Palin supporters to “find the slightest indication on her Facebook pages that Palin realizes she is responsible for paying for her children’s health care” around on him—prove your assertion that she doesn’t, Paul.  Oh, and this time, remember to show your work.

More examples of Mulshine’s crappy reading skills can be found in his observation that Palin “seems to be assuming that [baby Trig’s] care comes under the Medicare law,” despite the fact that Palin never mentions Medicare or Trig’s current healthcare; and this gem: “Unless I miss the plain meaning of her words, Palin is arguing that it is evil for the taxpayers to deny anyone any coverage ‘to reduce the growth in health care spending,’ as she put it in a later post.”  But if you read the post he’s referencing, you’ll see that phrase isn’t Palin’s at all—she’s quoting the “stated purpose” of HR 3200, Section 1233, in the process of analyzing what the legislation says.  Brother, you’ve missed the plain meaning of all her words.

This article did make me ask questions, though.  Questions like, how could a self-described conservative author such a train wreck? And then I saw the bottom of the page, where Mulshine approvingly links to a Ron Paul video.  Ah.  Now I see…

It’s a good thing Paul Mulshine’s “Pre-emptive Moron Perspective Alert” to his commenters doesn’t come until the end of his article.  Any higher and it would have disqualified his own commentary.

PS: Andy McCarthy, Thomas Sowell and Mark Steyn think Sarah Palin was right to warn America about the prospect of “death panels,” and even a couple liberal, pro-Obama advocates of nationalized healthcare have conceded there’s cause for concern with the current legislation.

Birthers Go Home

Calvin Freiburger Barack Obama, birth certificate controversy, conspiracy theories, dishonesty, moonbats, scandal, stupidity

This week, it came out that John McCain’s campaign conducted an internal investigation into the rumors that Barack Obama was not really born in Hawaii, and is therefore ineligible for the presidency:

While they ruled out any chance of the ‘birther’ lawsuits holding up in court, lawyers for the McCain campaign did check into the rumors about Obama’s birth and the assertions made by Berg and others. “To the extent that we could, we looked into the substantive side of these allegations,” said Potter. “We never saw any evidence that then-Senator Obama had been born outside of the United States. We saw rumors, but nothing that could be sourced to evidence. There were no statements and no documents that suggested he was born somewhere else. On the other side, there was proof that he was born in Hawaii. There was a certificate issued by the state’s Department of Health, and the responsible official in the state saying that he had personally seen the original certificate. There was a birth announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser, which would be very difficult to invent or plant 47 years in advance.”

Granted, McCain hardly had the best judgment when it came to attacking Obama, but they were right to skip this foolishness.  As John Hawkins has pointed out, it’s got no legs:

– The people at FactCheck.org have seen the certificate of live birth provided from the state of Hawaii to the Obama campaign and it is genuine.

– Although Hawaii “state law prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record,” the director of Hawaii’s Department of Health [a Republican appointee] has certified that Obama does have a legitimate birth certificate on file in Hawaii.

– In a print copy of the 1961 Honolulu Advertiser, there’s a notice that Barack Obama was born. In and of itself, this is a game, set, match conversation-ender on this subject unless people want to argue that this isn’t genuine or that there was a conspiracy going all the way back to the day of Obama’s birth to make him President.

Unfortunately, this isn’t enough for the Birther crowd, spearheaded by WorldNetDaily.  When you point this stuff out to them, they posit all sorts of hypothetical scenarios about how a birth certificate or newspaper clipping could have been issued to a non-resident, and so forth.  But that doesn’t cut it.  We could talk all day about how the moon landing might have been faked, or how World Trade Center Seven could have been destroyed by controlled demolition, but since the magnitude of the allegation is so severe—that the President of the United States is constitutionally illegitimate—it is morally irresponsible to give them serious consideration in the absence of affirmative reasons to believe Obama was born somewhere other than Hawaii.

Birthers claim to have such evidence, in the form of testimony from Obama’s grandmother that he was born in Kenya.  But that claim doesn’t withstand scrutiny either:

During the interview, which was conducted through a translator by a street preacher named Ron McRae, Sarah Obama does in fact say she was present. But it’s clear that there was a mistranslation, because as soon as McRae very excitedly starts to try to get additional details, the people on the other end of the line realize what’s happened and say, over and over again, that Obama was born in the U.S.

For some reason, the transcripts of the interview that have been posted on various right-wing Web sites all seem to cut off right after Sarah Obama says she was there when her grandson was born. So does this YouTube video with the audio of the interview. But as The Economist points out, McRae also released the full audio, in which the key parts of the conversation can be heard. Here’s part of it. (The other person speaking is translator Vitalis Akech Ogombe.)

MCRAE: When I come in December. I would like to come by the place, the hospital, where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born? Was he born in Mombasa?

OGOMBE: No, Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in America.

MCRAE: Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.

OGOMBE: No, he was born in America, not in Mombasa.

MCRAE: Do you know where he was born? I thought he was born in Kenya. I was going to go by and see where he was born.

OGOMBE: Hawaii. Hawaii. Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii. In the state of Hawaii, where his father was also learning, there. The state of Hawaii.

When the house of cards all but collapses, the Birthers play their trump: “All Obama would have to do to satisfy us is release his original birth certificate.  Why doesn’t he?  That proves he’s hiding something!”  Hawkins gives the answer, which should be obvious:

Well, why would he at this point? He has a significant number of conservatives wasting enormous amounts of time on a side issue that can never bear any fruit and, as an added bonus, it makes them look somewhat unhinged to many Americans. When your political enemies are making fools of themselves, why stop them?

Heck, that’s what I’d do in this situation if I were Obama!  The Birthers undermine the Right’s credentials on honesty, intellectual rigor, and moral seriousness, which we need to maintain if we are to stand up to the Left’s real lies.

Rave Reviews!

Calvin Freiburger anger, blogosphere, dishonesty, hypocrisy, liberalism, me, misc, moonbats, Rave Reviews, stupidity

See what the critics are saying about Calvin Freiburger:

“Typical know nothing conservative…” – Sheldon

“…Mr. Didn’t-Really-Do-Any-Research…” – Jay Morris

“As a resident of Wisconsin, I am embarrassed by Mr. Freiburger…” – Jude Noble

“Calvin Freiburger is not very bright…damn you’re stupid.” – bhd8ball

“…half-baked turd of imflammatory mush…Mr. Freiburger may be a legal adult, but he writes like a ten year old.” – cobweb1780, AKA Pan Zareta

“I expect in the future you will write articles about taking away rights from non-christians. Good Day Sir!” – ciretower

“Calvin you’re a nitwit.” – Matt

“Ah, yes, dear Mr. Freiburger and his little neocon fantasies.” – Prof. Omer Durfee

“Mr. Freiburger seems to devalue debate and disagreement within the American political sphere.” – Brent Schmitz

“What makes me afraid is his self-righteousness and implied superiority in his writing.” – Daniel Sitter

“You, my friend, are a metaphysical laughing stock. You are a literal will-to-nothingness. You slave. You nihilist.” – Anonymous Fark.com user

“You must be a fag. Do you have a wide stance?” – Mike

“…rude, insulting and just not someone we want to associate with.” – Alex Habrock

“Ideology-driven nutjob…crazy anti-sex, anti-woman…I am certainly willing to admit that you are capable of making sound arguments, when you’re not being hyperbolic and offensive.” – Brittany

“Scumbag…nosy and controlling neo-christian…cultist…bully…” – Aryeh

“… why haven’t you joined the armed forces yet? Put that money where that mouth is, chicken-boy.” – Anonymous

“20 years old + writing letter to editor = massive life fail.” – Etchy333

“Angry teenager alert…Why the hell would you want that sack of crap to endanger the lives of others when he’s crying in the middle of a firefight?” – NewportBarGuy

“Well with any luck he’ll continue on his way and turn out a repressed gay Republican.” – Generation_D

“His world is like a mirror opposite of reality. A Conservative Fundamentalist, you could say.” – Javacrucian

“Reminds me of that jackass David Horowitz…” – Necrosis

“I know many see this as funny, but people laughed about the funny little guy with the funny little moustache making hate-filled speeches too. It’s just a slow creeping change from sane to insane until the totally insane becomes reality.” – Befuddled

“Is it me, or does this kid look like a Hitler Youth member? Seriously.” – alternative girlfriend

“I do find it funny that a socially inept kid that believes in a Sky Ghost thinks he can chide our education system…” – Shaggy_C

“…and he’s a racist to boot!” – AndyMan1 (based solely on a disparaging remark about gangsta rap)

“This child comes off like a product of Hate Radio madrasas.” – SherKhan

“That kid is teh uglay!” – hachijuhachi

“note that this douchebag is going to Hillsdale College, a bastion of right-wing nuttiness.” – gregario

“He sounds like a douche and was probably ridiculed at school for being an asshat!” – Torque420

“That’s what happens when you can’t argue successfully. You resort to cheap name calling. And like I said, I love it.” – Jayce Commo

“People like calvin have been around a long time…. For example, those who though blacks didn’t deserve the same rights as whites…Some people (ex. Calvin) really enjoy feeling like they deserve more liberties than others.” – Adam Kempf

“…kiss my liberal American butt…I don’t think you have the balls to say any of this stuff to my face…morally inferior.” – Scott Feldstein

“… a mouth-breathing sycophant with all the intelligence of a particularly dim species of refrigerator mildew.” – Chet

“…dubious, bordering on dishonest…” – AnotherTosaVoter

“…stop being an extremist…you’ve been touching nerves for a couple comments now, with your disregard for the truth…Sounds to me like you get your history from the pulpit.” – Eneasz

“Calvin is clearly such a bigot, especially since he has amply displayed his own bigotry in this forum.” – martino

“Go to hell article writer.” – jake3988

The verdict is in, and the Left agrees: Calvin Freiburger is precisely the kind of ignorant, intolerant, rightwing extremist scum your Homeland Security Secretary warned you about!  Calvin Freiburger Online: shouldn’t you be reading?

Biden?

Calvin Freiburger 2008, Bayh, Biden, Democrats, good news, GOP, Hillary, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, Jindal, McCain, Obama, Palin, Pawlenty, Richardson, romney, scandal, Sebelius, stupidity, VP
Seriously? He chose Biden?!
–
Joe Biden is recognized as having a fair amount of foreign policy experience, which was very probably the main reason Barack Obama picked him, but Bill Richardson has a more-than comparable resume (UN Ambassador, Energy Secretary, Governor), plus is Hispanic and, most importantly, doesn’t have a reputation for being a walking embarrassment dispenser.
–
I mean, good grief! Mere days after the announcement, and even the most casual scan of the blogosphere (most of these stories were found on Hot Air alone) have provided a treasure trove of ready-made opposition research. Apparent conflicts of interest, lobbyist issues, a casual acquaintance with the truth, arrogance issues all his own (those should nicely complement Obama’s preexisting problems on that front, eh?), contempt for the concerns of gun owners, some, uh, interesting praise for his own running mate…oh, and did I mention his foreign policy credentials are vastly overrated? How ‘bout issues with speech worthy of the Left’s number-one boogeyman, George W. Bush? Or maybe apparent confusion about who he actually thinks would be the better president? And then, of course, we can’t forget the plagiarism thing…
–
Just imagine what goodies we’ll discover once they start trying. Not to mention the brand-new blunders in store on the campaign trail.
–
Sure, Richardson is a fairly-unremarkable lefty, and I’m sure he’s got a skeleton or two in his closet, but I can’t imagine this much crap would have come out this soon. As a minority candidate, Obama probably doesn’t have to worry too much about the Hispanic vote, but Richardson’s race would have to have been worth at least a few points, and again, he’s arguably got a more impressive resume than Biden.
–
Tim Kaine and Evan Bayh probably wouldn’t have brought much to the ticket, but (assuming Team Obama doesn’t have the exclusive scoop on some juicy info) nor would they be constant sources of stress for the campaign. Kathleen Sebelius, as a female Democrat who isn’t Hillary Clinton, would have been asking for trouble. And Hillary? It’s a pretty safe bet she and Barack hate each other’s guts.
–
Obama’s been fumbling big-time lately, with a crappy performance at Saddleback, his disgraceful support of infanticide returning to haunt him, and now this, coupled with John McCain’s surprisingly-excellent (even conservative!) Saddleback showing and a willingness to hit The One where it hurts, and I’m optimistic about this election for the first time since Mitt Romney dropped out.
–
Now it’s especially important that McCain not squander his momentum with a bad VP pick of his own (that means you, Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman—now is not the year of the pro-choicer). I find Tim Pawlenty unremarkable, but he’d be a fairly safe choice. Bobby Jindal can fire up the stump, but I still think he needs time to build experience (and atone for this profile in courage).
–
My choice would either be Mitt Romney (surprise!) or Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Romney has framed himself firmly to McCain’s right, has abundant economic expertise, and has proven himself an aggressive campaigner and an excellent debater. It can be said that Palin should have more experience, sure, but she’s been a successful and conservative governor, and, of course, is a woman, which could make for a mighty interesting election, what with all these disgruntled Hillary supporters running around (granted, this may smack of identity politics, but there’s no reason not to see race or sex as a selling point, provided—and this is the key—that you’re not doing so at the expense of qualification or principles).
–
Come on, John. As much as I hate to say it, I’ve seen and accepted the need to support you. Don’t let us down.

McCain’s Ace in the Hole

Calvin Freiburger 2008, Bolton, Europe, foreign affairs, Georgia, GOP, McCain, national security, Obama, Russia, stupidity
With Russia’s attack on Georgia and Barack Obama’s bumbling reaction, now is the time John McCain ought to be hammering the most powerful case for supporting him: in an increasingly dangerous world, America needs serious leadership instead of incompetence. McCain’s own reaction to the conflict is more coherent and substantive than Obama’s, and displays McCain’s knowledge of the issue, but unfortunately doesn’t offer a lot more than “we need to instantly mobilize people to talk about what we’re gonna do.”
–
If disgruntled conservatives are gonna be convinced to support McCain, it will have to be on foreign policy and national defense grounds. The good news is, he has one ace in the hole (if he realizes it): the support of John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton has a clear view of both the threats facing America and the international community’s inability/unwillingness to deal with them, as well as a proven ability to speak plainly about them, without regard for Beltway hand-wringing. He’s earned the respect of the Right, the venom of the Left, and, if utilized by the campaign, could go a long way toward bringing the case for a strong, clear-eyed foreign policy to the American people in an accessible way.
–
But beyond that, I’d like to see McCain signal just how serious he is about a meaningful foreign policy change by pledging to put Bolton in a prominent post in his administration. More “realistic” (read: timid) conservatives and Republicans would probably advise against such a move, based on how much liberals would howl about it. I say let ‘em. Heck, they’re calling McCain a racist without anything to go on; what makes you think you can appease these people? Just do the right thing, and defend it with that “straight talk” we hear so much about from ol’ John.

The Atheist Ethicist: Just Another Propagandist

Calvin Freiburger Alonzo Fyfe, atheism, blogosphere, Christianity, dishonesty, homosexuality, propaganda, religion, shellfish, stupidity
We interrupt Atheists Crying Wolf (no, I haven’t forgotten it; I promise Part II is coming!) for a special bulletin: the “Atheist Ethicist’s” credibility has hit rock-bottom.
–
In this post, Alonzo Fyfe peddles a number of anti-Bible talking points, including the “abomination” of eating shellfish:
–
The eating of shellfish is an abomination because – well, have you ever looked at a shellfish? They’re disgusting. My wife has a hard time with peel-and-eat shrimp. So, of course, eating those things must be considered an abomination…
–
Current bigotry against homosexuals is not something that people get out of the Bible – something that people disapprove of because the Bible calls it an abomination. If people got their morality out of the Bible then they would be just as intent on protesting the eating of shrimp as they would homosexual sex.
–
It doesn’t take much to find out Fyfe hasn’t a clue what he’s talking about here. Neil at Eternity Matters explains the issue very well in a detailed-yet-accessible post. You should read it all, but here’s his quick summary:
–
The short version: There were different Hebrew words translated as abomination. They were used differently in the individual verses and were used very differently in broader contexts. The associated sins had radically different consequences and had 100% different treatments in the New Testament.
–
Curious about how he’d spin his way out of this, I posed the question to him in the comments section (yeah, that’s me under “Anonymous”). In response, not only did he refuse to defend his own claims, he actually argued that the original context was meaningless. After all, it only gives Christians “room for rationalization and self-deception.” Pot, meet kettle.
–
The exchange is stunning in how completely Fyfe dismisses the basic legwork that any reputable commentator, philosopher, historian, or theologian would do before making serious claims about serious subjects. He speaks without any regard for the truth. His writings will continue to satisfy his hardcore secular groupies, but I don’t think many other people are going to recognize him for the ethicist he isn’t.

Hating Religious Expression

Calvin Freiburger atheism, bigotry, Christianity, God, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, letters, religion, reporter, stupidity
In today’s Reporter, Rachel Diech whines:
–
Is it just me or is it every time I read The Reporter’s editorial section, there’s always someone spewing rants about God?
–
It’s just you. God and religious values are a recurring topic every now and then, but you’ll need more than that if you want to characterize them as “spewing rants.”
–
I’m so sick of Christians forcing their beliefs down my throat. Can we just give a little bit of a rest when it comes to religion, please!
–
What the heck were you expecting from a page labeled “Opinion”? Its entire point is for people to express their OPINIONS. Religion is something people have OPINIONS about, for and against. Disagree with specific beliefs? Write about it. But unless you’re willing and able to offer more than vague crap, your complaints are nothing more than bigotry.
–
If I wanted to be preached at about God, I would go to church. I don’t want to read it in my newspaper.
–
Get off your high horse and grow up. Maybe church would do you some good…

The Content of Obama’s Character; UPDATE: Now with Kos Feedback!

Calvin Freiburger 2008, abortion, cowardice, Democrats, evil, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, Iran, Islamofascism, Jeremiah Wright, letters, Obama, reporter, stupidity
My latest letter to the editor:
–
A recent letter asked, “Why does everybody have such a problem with a member of a minority achieving a position of either prominence or power in our society?” as if racism is why voters really oppose Barack Obama. That’s completely false, and this voter opposes Obama because of his utter lack of competence, courage, and character.
–
Competence: Iran and North Korea’s nuclear pursuits, and the desire of Islamic jihadists for nuclear weapons, make today’s world very dangerous, yet Obama pledges to cut investments in missile defense. He also voted against the recent bill preserving our intelligence-gathering capabilities, which received broad bipartisan support, passing 68-29.
–
Courage: On June 4, Obama said Jerusalem should remain Israel’s undivided capital. But after a single day of Palestinian complaints, he backpedaled, now saying the Jews and Palestinians will have to negotiate it for themselves. Such cowardice leaves little doubt that Obama would fold like a house of cards in his no-precondition, direct talks with Iran’s Ahmadinejad.
–
Character: No responsible father who values honesty could possibly expose his children to the foul lies of Jeremiah Wright. And nobody with a shred of decency or compassion could reach Obama’s extremes on abortion. In Illinois he fought against legal protection for fully-born babies who survived their abortions. Even after being separated from their mothers and gaining full physical independence, Obama thinks these children should be starved to death. Delivery-ward nurse Jill Stanek testified twice before Obama for born-alive infant protection, offering her firsthand experiences and pictures of premature births. She says her efforts “didn’t faze him at all.”
–
Conservatives are judging Obama not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. Unfortunately for him, that’s a contest in which he doesn’t stand a chance.
–
UPDATE: It seems I’ve made a new friend on the Daily Kos! Unfortunately, Pan Zareta’s refutation is so devoid of substance it’s laughable. If you’re out there, Pan, I’d be happy to clear up any confusion you might have; comment away!