TM Connect

Donate Now
Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Another Republican Goes Birther

This time it’s “a top member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee,” Rep. Cliff Stearns, who said Tuesday he’s not convinced the President’s birth certificate “is legitimate.”

Someone should tell Republicans this isn’t going to help Mitt Romney in November. There is nothing less on the minds of voters than questioning Pres. Obama’s Americanism.

From The Hill:

“I am, shall we say, looking at all the evidence,” Stearns told reporters in the Capitol Tuesday, comments that come after he expressed similar doubts at a meeting with constituents in February.

[...] Asked Tuesday if he thinks the birth certificate is legitimate, Stearns cited an inquiry by an Arizona sheriff – an apparent reference to Arpaio – and noted he believed there is “another investigation” as well.

“I think we are just going to hold in abeyance a final decision until we hear, you know, some of these people seem to have legitimate concerns, so I don’t think it is unreasonable just to see what they have to say,” Stearns said.

There’s just nothing that will convince some people on the right that Pres. Obama deserves and has earned a modicum of respect, at least as much as comes with the office of the presidency. Obama doesn’t even get that from the right.

You’d think ordering the killing of Osama bin Laden would be enough, but not even taking out the mastermind of Al Qaeda is enough for the bigots.

Rep. Stearns joins the delusional Sheriff Arpaio, who’s trying to divert attention from his own Federal troubles by seducing yet another Republican into looking like a sucker.

About Taylor Marsh

Veteran political analyst and author. Former Miss Missouri, Broadway performer, & relationship consultant at the LA Weekly, which began a decade-long romp in the trenches of dating, women and men, mating and sex.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

9 Responses to Another Republican Goes Birther

  1. fangio March 21, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    It’s not about their being delusional or having a modicum of respect, it’s about their being racists. So let’s see: they hate blacks, hate women, hate old people, poor people, gay people, Hispanic people and all kinds of sex. The new republican party, ” The party of Hate. ” Can the Jews be far behind; fire up the ovens.

    • Taylor Marsh March 21, 2012 at 9:46 am #

      It’s never ending.

      When you think of it with the back drop of Trayvon Martin it gives their bigotry new meaning for me.

  2. angels81 March 21, 2012 at 11:22 am #

    Like I said in a earlier post, the republican party has replaced the KKK. To me all the hatred of the president has been based in the fact that there is a black man in the white house. No president in my life time has had so much personal hatred thrown at him that has nothing to do with the policies he advocates. The only conclusions I can draw, is it has to do with the fact that he is other then white.

    • jinbaltimore March 21, 2012 at 1:29 pm #

      Then you weren’t alive during the Clinton presidency, which had “Democrat” attack dogs as well like Chris Matthews trying the kitchen sink strategy against Clinton for years…nor after from fauxgressives during the 08 primaries who had the gall to call Clinton racist…insane.

      • angels81 March 21, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

        It happens I was alive during the Clinton presidency, and I haven’t forgotten, The difference being most of the attacks on Clinton had to do with his womanizing not the color of his skin. Nobody ever questioned Clinton about being a American or a christian or a terrorist. The level of disrespect that we see for this president and his family on a personal level is something I have never seen before, and that includes the Clinton years.

        • jinbaltimore March 21, 2012 at 3:42 pm #

          “No president in my life time has had so much personal hatred thrown at him that has nothing to do with the policies he advocates.”

          “The difference being most of the attacks on Clinton had to do with his womanizing not the color of his skin.”

          I guess your counting “womanizing,” as well as Whitewater, Haircuts, and Cookies as “policies advocated” then.

          But yeah, no, your memory is severly sugarcoating what happened back then. This is just par for the course with the repubs.

          • secularhumanizinevoluter March 21, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

            “I guess your counting “womanizing,” as well as Whitewater, Haircuts, and Cookies as “policies advocated” then.

            But yeah, no, your memory is severly sugarcoating what happened back then. This is just par for the course with the repubs.”

            What the HELL are you smoking or drinking?!!!
            The repugnantklan spent over ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS of tax payer money using the entire investigatory apparatus of the Federal Government for YEARS digging and all they could come up with was a BLOW JOB!!!!!

          • jinbaltimore March 22, 2012 at 3:52 am #

            Secular, you really do have reading comprehension problems (noted elsewhere by others on this blog as well).

            You are AGREEING with me, and you don’t know it. I was quoting angels81 in the passages you cite, so, I guess thanks for the accidental support in arguing against him/her.

  3. Jane Austen March 21, 2012 at 12:27 pm #

    What you said angels81. I’m sad to say I have thought this from day 1 when President Obama was elected and I started to hear very covert conversation; now it’s become downright overt even to hearing derogatory comments about not only the President being a natural born citizen or a Muslim but the color of his skin. So much for post-racial America. Racial hatred still is alive and well in this country. I have many problems with our President’s policies and actions but they do not hinge on his citizenship, religion or the color of his skin. The GOP needs to get over this. I don’t know how they can ever make the claim of being the “Party of Lincoln” again because they have forgotten what Lincoln stood for.