Prosecute the torture.

August 24, 2009

Birther Crazie Continues At FreeRepublic

Via Jesus' General. The next step in the "birther skepticism" is found at FreeRepublic.com. You have to read this to believe it:
Read a copy of Larry Sinclair's book this afternoon. Quick read. The list of character who attacked his character being names we see regularly and a few attached to Axelrod.

The only other thing that hit me was that Sinclair said BO was not circumcised. When my son was born in a hospital that was done as a matter of routine without even consulting us. Would the same be for Hawaii? OTOH People born at home or in some other cultures are not circumcised. [emphasis added]
See what the writer did? A verrry subtle insinuation that because Sinclair sez President Obama isn't circumcised, be might then be from "another culture" (i.e. KENYA).

Sheesh what is it with these wingnut republicans and their obsessions with Democratic Presidential penises?

And anyone notice the name of the author of the book? SINCLAIR.

That's LARRY SINCLAIR. He's the guy who made up some fraudulent accusations against Obama during the 2008 election and then failed a polygraph test regarding those accusations.

But let's be honest. For these folks, the only way for the President to prove to them that Larry Sinclair is lying is for the President of the United States to show them his penis.

Nothing else will satisfy the birthers.

4 comments:

the Other Ken said...

"For these folks, the only way for the President to prove to them that Larry Sinclair is lying is for the President of the United States to show them his penis."

Thereby making Chris Matthews very jealous.

Sherry said...

i'm shaking my head and giggling at the same time.

but, the diversions the far right use are working. that and yet more stuff about michael jackson.

Joy said...

Muslims circumcise. About as categorically as Jews. Remember all the "muslim female circumcision" stuff about Africa? Mind you, it is sometimes done at a more advanced age.

Here are the actual US historical circumcision rates, broken down by ethnicity.

http://www.circinfo.net/rates_of_circumcision.html

" it was 80%, 50% and 34% in Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, respectively, in the 1940s (overall 71%), for those born in the 1970s it had risen to 94%, 91% and 57% in Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, respectively (overall 91%)."

the Other Ken said...

"but, the diversions the far right use are working."

Sherry, who is it that's going out of their way to find these rantings and promote them as if it's mainstream conservative thinking? They're diversions alright, but these diversions are not benefiting the "far right."