(Enlarge.)
ADDED: Scrolling around and looking in different frames, I don't see it. I think this picture creates an illusion of a clear plastic earpiece, but I can't see it in other frames.
AND: I made the picture smaller, so you won't think I'm trying to make trouble even though I no longer believe there is a visible earpiece. Anyway, remember the suspicions about Bush in '04, the famous jacket bulge? Remember this old story about Romney? There has also been discussion over whether Palin wore an earpiece. And there's been speculation about Obama, based on performances like this:
ADDED: Live-blogging the debate, Jac (a big Obama supporter) said:
10:27 - Obama needs to be coached to stop beginning so many of his answers with dead air while he thinks of what to say: "Uhhh ... ehhh ..."That would be a good time to listen to an inside-the-ear advisor. Glenn Reynolds links to this post and agrees with my just a reflection analysis. But then he links to this comment over on Volokh:
Actually, both candidates' hesitancy and quick changes of topic, often within the same sentence, are consistent with their being whispered to. I challenge you to sound coherent when someone's talking to you and you have to not repeat what they say but reformulate it into something that sounds good, while they're still talking.On that theory, look at this: (Thanks to commenter jdeeripper for pointing me to that.) You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see. I would not be surprised to learn some day that all or most politicians have for years had their advisors helping them from deep inside their ear canals. Maybe the best politicians are just those who are most adept at translating the voice in their ear into fluid speech. AND: In the comments and around the web, this post is attracting anti-Althousiana. What I would really love would is a Chip Ahoy animation of Obama's ear as a vortex, like this one. For more information my vortex, read this and click the "vortex" tag.
Posts
164 comments:
hmmmm. I don't see it but the picture isn't too clear here.
If he were a girl with long hair, I'ld say he just didn't rinse his ears out after using too much conditioner.
But there were times it felt like to me that he was being corrected by someone.
Now that is...
...interesting.
I don't see a this at all.
The mrs. says it looks like the light shining off his sweat.
He cheated! My God! Obama cheated! Well, let's move on, ha ha ha, and discuss issues. That is the Democrat way.
Click the enlargement. It's clearly there, a crescent of clear plastic.
I don't see it.
I don't think so, Ann. I think it's just reflection.
RG
I inspected it close up on screen, and I have it saved. I could do a better close up.
For real?
But his upper lip is just as shiny in the shot...?
Is that an actual picture of Obama or is it the Madame Tassaud wax replica?
Looks like a reflection to me.
Sorry Althouse -- Obama won, McCain lost, and you are so out of touch, you are hallucinating things.
Please present some other pictures. I don't see it at all in this picture.
How exciting if you're right.
He looks 16 years old.
Nonsense. It's light - identical to the light on his ear above the "earpiece".
It's okay, he was just transmitting brain waves to the campaign.
He's not restricted to verbal communication, like the rest of us.
desperate attempt for an instalanche?
I cannot say for certain without more detail, but it looks like an oily ear to me. lol
Nice try Ann. Are all the other shiny spots in the pic secret radio receivers too?
Ann, looks like a reflection to me.
But I can't vote for a man who doesn't wash his oily ears.
I've scrolled around, and I don't see it in other frames, so I'm going to say it's not there.
I dunno, look at your own ear in the mirror (I just did), that part seems a bit lighter colored. I think it's just a trick of the light.
That's certainly not the most handsome angle. He looks much better from the front than side...
dman, why would I be desperate for an Instalanche when I've had at least 3 already today?
Maybe (God forbid)you should just take this post down?
Remember when there sinister accusations in the first 2000 Bush/Gore debate that Bush had a "bump" in his back jacket? "Bush cheated! He had a receiver!"
I will begin the "I hate Obama club" on inauguration day - only fair, as the I hate Bush people will be done - but this ear piece is meaningless.
What a great time to introduce Oliver Stone as a guest blogger!
Eh, looks like a specular highlight on a particularly oily/shiny earlobe.
Well, that got the blood pumping!
LOL.
I don't think it looks oily, though. More like squeaky clean.
Ah, well...darn it. McCain probably still lost, then. I mean, not that he *really* lost on the substance. But he probably effectively lost it. I don't even know if that makes sense. I'm tired. And crabby cuz "earpiecegate" fizzled out so quickly...
Meh. I don't believe it. I need proof. Like DNA testing or something.
As I said in my live blogging:
Where are the good questions? We already heard all these exact questions LAST TIME so WTF?! Brokaw had thousands to choose from and he chose THE SAME ONES from the first debate? What about torture, abortion, gays, EDUCATION? Give me some red meat and fuck these Johnny Come Latelys who are just listening to these guys for the first time.
You know, things might have been different if that FAILURE Brokaw would have actually tested these guys with DIFFERENT, surprising questions to throw them off. You might call this GOTCHA DEBATIN'.
There is one more debate left, and they better spice it up...because how will "undecided voters" be able to decide!?
You know, if it were Palin, we could carry the "earpiece" meme forward for the rest of her political career.
I mean, if you're not worried about facts, you never run out of ammo.
Can't we hold on to Eargate just a little longer? It's the first time I've felt a rush of interest about anything in this campaign(other than Palin)since Giuliani dropped out. Dang--there's goes Eargate down the drain like yesterday's whiskers.
Frankly, I thought he was being prompted. Some of his answers were so belabored it felt like he was waiting for a word or like someone waiting for a translation.
I don't see it, Ann. I see light in his ear canal, as well as on other parts of the ear; they're disconnected, so they can't be part of a single earpiece. It's just his skin, perhaps a little oil.
I got a little excited myself.
I apologize for the false alarm. It was plain as day in that one still, then gone in others.
Let's not do this. It is too easy to allege, and too difficult to prove.
Besides, he didn't even know it was in there.
Trig planted it!
Beautiful unlined skin! I had skin like that once!
Obama's ears are so large he could fit the bus he runs over his questionable friends.
Boy Ann, your son Jac is definitely in the tank for Obama judging by his live-blogging performance tonight. Why did he even bother?
Madison--
I'd suggest your daughter as a write-in candidate, but I wouldn't wish the Presidency on anyone....
Usually it's the left that comes up with these "hidden help" scenarios. Palin's cheat sheet! Bush had a box underneath his coat!
I don't think Obama needs any help regurgitating his talking points or being smooth. And to my knowledge, there wasn't a ballgame on tonight.
I would knock off the cognac and check out your own greasy ears. What a ridiculous thing to suggest.
Don't you mean greasy eyes?
Well, most poor people don't have fancy elite HDTV like Althouse so they won't be able to see the earpiece.
Also, that's not an earpiece, he's just wet behind the ears.
Host with the Most said...
"Ann, your son Jac is definitely in the tank for Obama judging by his live-blogging performance tonight. Why did he even bother?"
Surely thou dost jest! For has not the Younger Althouse said that Obama lost him? How can one have been lost if one is still giving all that is of value?
earpiece?
you are fucking morons!
are you all Palin?
Obama is wet inside the ears too.
You know, you see all sorts of things when you're drunk off your ass.
As I'm sure you know...
OT:
One serious piece of good news today.
ACORN offices raided in Nevada
Nevada authorities seized records Tuesday from a group they accused of submitting fraudulent voter-registration forms — including for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys.
"Tony Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada, and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won't be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4," said Secretary of State Ross Miller, referring to star players on the pro football team.
Tony Romo. Thank God, I needed a laugh.
Cheers,
Victoria
The fact we don't trust this guy to play fair that we're looking for an ear piece sums it up for me.
My four year old said she liked “the white one.” Cringing inside I asked her why. She said, “He looks like a white cow, and I like cows. Look how white his hair is.” Then she looked at Barack and said, “He looks like a brown cow, I like him too.”
Then about five minutes later she decided she liked Brokaw best. She went up and pointed to him and said, I like him.
Those were our debate highlights
Acornd gave the paperwork to Nevada a WEEK ago
nevada did a stunt!
learn to read PALIN!
I doubt he'd be rigged with an ear piece. Operatives on either side would be scanning, they'd pick up the transmissions on anything before the debate was over. They have to fly blind. Some blogger said the same thing about Sarah Palin in the VP debate. I think it's just silly, myself. Obama can lecture us on socialism and the need for higher taxes all day without assistance.
Ann, you might find this fact Twilight Zone freaky.
I couldn't believe you posted this, because I presaged your comment on the Live-Blogging thread:
Whenever I hear the word 'earmarks' I think of that crud that gets stuck in the ears when you don't clean it probably.
8:29 PM
Cheers,
Victoria
Note, I also got comment #666.
WHOA.
BTW, McCain lost this debate. He will lose the next one. If this was any other Democrat, I'd say McCain is a goner, for sure.
However, I'm not sure America--and old, white, often quasi-racists Democrats--are ready for an African American president named Barack Hussein Obama. I'm just not convinced, no matter they tell the pollsters, that that is how they are going to pull the lever.
There was obviously no earpiece: Obama struggled so mightily with his "answers" and there were for too many "ums" and "ahs" for him to be actually getting information through an earpiece.
When a Democrat winds up getting spanked on, of all things, healthcare you know he was really flailing tonight. So, yeah, the idea that he was getting some kind of super, secret communication during the debate is pretty laughable.
"Did we ever find out how much those fines were?"
OUCH
Ann Althouse-
The rest of his face is powdered-they don't do the inside of the ear.
Studio lighting for television is very extreme-that's why they do the powdering and I think what you are seeing is the reflection of light.
Oh for pete's sake.
He doesn't have an ear piece. He's got a shiny ear.
Come on, Ann. Are you just chumming the water here or what?
hey folks
let's just float bald naked lies
onto the blogosphere
so that people can debate BS instead of
real issues
we'll just throw in a token dash of doubt
for deniability!
and meanwhile, the country crashes and burns
but the althouse star soars ... move over coulter!
It was obvious that he had an earpiece in his ear. You could even seem him move his head around and concentrate at times to hear what was being directed to him. The man is a total fraud.
Drunkblogging?
God, have we conservatives gone this low?
That's light reflecting from oil in the ear. The oil build up occurs to many men by nighttime, and particularly to darker skinned individuals.
Althouse, this post alone has made me reconsider my association with the Republican party and pundits like you.
lets agree - it was an earpiece
Obama won
so? msm wont cover it.
and we need a bar knuckle player agasint iran and taliban
whil emccain doesnt take gloves off
No, she has apologized and admitted her mistake.
It's late and blogging is all too human.
Man the internet is vicious-one thing that Althouse does is gives you a place to say it.
Whatever it is, she's pretty free with that.
So how much has she tolerated from all of you?
Honestly-try to return the favor.
It's not that hard.
A good high definition television should provide viewers with definitions of arcane words and phrases like "misogynistic exceptionalism" in a scroll across the bottom of the screen. Spellcheck doesn't even care for that one.
* makes Spellcheck learn "exceptionalism" *
And another thing-the lady has guts she actually wades through all of this stuff.
So you know...I admire that because I know I couldn't do it.
What's really sad is that this post is featured on memeorandum.
But I am curious. Did you actually freeze the frames, walk up to your TV, and take a picture?
Classic.
I apologize for the false alarm. It was plain as day in that one still, then gone in others.
It was a reckless post, and one which most people here (if not all), wish to distance themselves from. I do anyway.
But unlike many people who make mistakes, you did have the presence of mind to apologise.
...which is more than we can say for Andrew Sullivan, a man who is a much more noted blogger than you. He's a writer for the freaking Atlantic, for goodness sakes.
If people want to bear witness against writers for bizarre conspiracy theories which are plainly bogus to any thinking person, start with him.
Cheers,
Victoria
Two things:
Where's the closeup of McCain's ear?
If you're performing live on-stage, there's nothing unusual about wearing an earpiece monitor in order to hear what the audience hears without echo, feedback, or delay. I'd expect both candidates to wear earpieces during a debate.
Yeah...Obama can only lose because America might still be racist. Unless he wins, in which case America has finally transcended race. Thanks to the bi-racial man and his followers and their incessant race-card playing.
I didn't see an earpiece, but Brokaw counts as a mouthpiece, right?
i dont give favors to anyon supporting a creationist MORON
mccain I like.
For all of you racists who claim that Obama's ears are just oily, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Didn't you hear Biden declare him to be clean and articulate? Shame, shame, shame.
I'd expect both candidates to wear earpieces during a debate.
Not without the moderator revealing that to be the case. I mean, if it's that expected and all.
However, if this is true and they were both wearing earpieces, then everyone owes Ann an apology.
Cheers,
Victoria
Am I the only one who remembers the insane conspiracy theories that the Dems floated about the bulge in Bush's coat when he debated Kerry?
Nick, why is it that people who complain about other's being morons always have moron-like qualities themselves, like not knowing how to spell 'anyone' or how to use proper capitalisation?
Inquiring minds, and all that.
Victoria--
You have to admire their commitment to irony.
like i waste tiem typing right
or
As if I would waste my time ensuring I typed every word Correctly.
you lost
"i dont give favors to anyon supporting a creationist MORON
mccain I like."
Hmm, not quite there yet. Keep tweaking the bot a bit, it's almost producing coherent sentences. Pretty soon MICHAELBOT II will be perfected and unleashed!
hookt ahn fonix werkt fer mee.
"like i waste tiem typing right
or
As if I would waste my time ensuring I typed every word Correctly.
you lost"
Hmmm, nope still not quite there yet. I mean, almost but not quite. It's producing phrases but they're still too incoherent and garbled to be believable.
[I doubt that] Ann Althouse is so desperate to help her candidate McCain that she'll throw out whatever crazy anti-0bama innuendo she can think of, which just makes her look pathetic.
my job is done
Palin the CM is toast,
even David Brooks says Obama won.
see you on some other PJ
What a dumb post from Althouse.
"my job is done
Palin the CM is toast,
even David Brooks says Obama won.
see you on some other PJ"
OK, now it's actually starting to seem human! Just tweak the logic circuits a little more and I think we might have a marginally passable bot on our hands!
dman, why would I be desperate for an Instalanche when I've had at least 3 already today?
Yes, we know you get daily Instalanches, especially since you went in the tank for Sarah Palin.
Yeah, but wasn't William fun?
The, "Oh, noooes... have we conservatives sunk so low? I think I'll be a Democrat now."
I mean... every single person (barring a couple who I'm not sure were serious) said they didn't see it or disagreed... but somehow William took this lovely opportunity to decry the state of conservative-dom.
Undoubtedly a LIFE-LONG Republican.
"I mean... every single person (barring a couple who I'm not sure were serious) said they didn't see it or disagreed... but somehow William took this lovely opportunity to decry the state of conservative-dom.
Undoubtedly a LIFE-LONG Republican."
Not even David Axelrod will pay for such a lame attempt at astro-turfing.
Victoria:
Not sure you caught my drift.
I'm talking about earpiece audio monitors, not earpieces allowing one to receive prompts.
Not long ago, audio monitors were these big wedge speakers facing the speaker or performer on the stage.
And Obama doesn't need anything as primitive as an earpiece... The Dark Lord Axelrod can just metaphysically project his thoughts into Obama's receptive brain.
I heard two plausible speculative explanations for "Bush's bulge." First, it might have been a bulletproof vest. Second, and perhaps more likely, Bush might have been wearing an apparatus that shocks his heart if it srtops or beats too slowly.
Remember when it was reported that Bush fainted alone (supposedly choking on a pretzel while watching TV). At the time he had an extremely low pulse rate (in part from lots of exercise). I read somewhere that a common treatment for this is a device that one wears under the clothes.
Ear-piece. That level of shine is not common to a black ear. He's wearing one of these pieces that have natural coloring but the light caught him out cuz it kicked off of the piece's material.
WTG, Obambi. You still lost!
Mr. Barely's head looks really huge in that picture.
I hate to have to do this but, Helen, that's BS.
A "black ear" doesn't get shiny? OMG, wow. Are you William back again, this time to prove that someone really does think that Obama had an earpiece?
Ann Althouse said..."Click the enlargement. It's clearly there, a crescent of clear plastic."
Really.
I'll wager $100 it isn't.
It's the lights.
So, some of the idiots here think Obama was wearing an earpiece (Ann included?)...while strolling around in front of people who can see him from damn near ever angle...thinking no one would notice??
The entire on-stage audience was blind or "in on the deal?"
Brokaw didn't notice?
The stagehands didn't notice?
The networks didn't notice?
JOHN McCAIN didn't notice??
But Ann and the gang did???
You people are sick.
Since "presidential debates" seem to have taken mythic significance in the american political system, all candidates should, in the future, be made to undergo strip and body cavity searches.
Give me a fucking break. Why even post shit like this in the first place. Really.
I'll wager $100 it isn't.
Your money's no good here.
Wager a box of wine. Blithering Idiot will take that action in a nanosecond!
What I find amazing is how shocked, SHOCKED people are that people would say such a thing about Obama, when we've had to listen to far worse about Palin for weeks now.
If Obama wanted to wear an earpiece, I'm sure he could manage to find one that cameras would not notice. I am equally sure it would make him sound even more stilted than he usually does, even if his answers were factually more accurate. But these debates are more theater than anything else; facts don't count for much.
Is this like Eargate or something?
My doctor once told me I needed to eargate to remove wax.
Mystery solved. It's the tail of one of those creatures from Star Trek II that Khan inserted into Chekov's ear to render him susceptible to suggestion.
photo 1 photo 2
Obama has been compromised by a villain from the future.
photo 3
Ann, this is the video you need.
Who is he talking to?
A few days ago, there was a blurb on Fox that lawyers from both sides were calling for ear canal inspections.
The way Obama stumbled and fumbled, except for delivering a handful of talking points is evidence enough that there was no earpiece.
Besides - that would assume two people are that f*ucking stupid.
Long time - no see, Ann.
You've got a mighty fine stable of trolls here.
How come you get to have all the fun?
Obama is a Senator, so it has to be one of those earmarks.
In 20 years, more likely 30 or 40, everyone will have minuscule ear things or even more likely cranial gizmos or even brain implants to do just what is being suspected here.
DARPA is funding research into "thought helmets" for the Pentagon...that was in Time a few weeks ago.
A company called Emotiv is releasing a video game helmet thing any day now for the Xmas season.
Also, lots of ongoing research to help quadriplegics move objects....
Ann clearly has to lay off the keyboard while drinking her wine. Obama was not wearing an earpiece of any kind. After all, why is it that only Ann Althouse in her Brooklyn living room picking-up on it. I have PBS-HD. I didn't see anything.
Why can't you admit Ann that (1) you are a lush, and (2) you can't stand the fact that McCain lost the debate he was favored to win?
Okay 'Peter Bella', and I'm sure not for the last time. It is 'Democratic' as a descriptor. A 'Democrat' is a noun. If you want to insult someone, it helps to have the grammar correct so you don't come off looking like a moron.
And no, Obama's not wearing an earpiece. Nice try, though. A+ for effort, F for truthiness.
HA! Funny... I see nothing.
Bottomline... each person will see whatever it is they want to see. It's a Rorschach inkblot test!
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Sounds suspiciously like "You know, just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean that someone's not out to get me."
I wasn't drinking wine. I told you it was cognac (in the last 15 minutes) and (before that) tea. Please stick to the text.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
You've lost your mind. Seriously, if you can type this and leave it up for any length of time, you need help.
Maybe you should find an expert to look at the video...
Ann proves once again that Merlot and Vicodin do not mix.
Sober up, Annie. You're embarrassing yourself.
You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Ear shapes are unique to each person, so, for those interested enough to make the effort, compare Obama's earshape from other profile pics of him to the ear shape in this one.
If it's a reflection, they'll match. If not, it's something else.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn’t there doesn’t mean there wasn’t something there that I didn’t see."
Ann, get help.
http://www.aa.org
You know, just because the thing I saw wasn’t there doesn’t mean there wasn’t something there that I didn’t see.
ROFL. What a ridiculous person you are.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Dumbest person on the intertubes.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Bill Buckley is crying in the afterlife for the English language. And use of reason in general.
Three cheers for bibulous cougars everywhere!
The statement that some of you are having trouble with -- "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see" -- is completely logical and grammatical. Instead of just pointing and saying it's ridiculous, try explaining why it's wrong. You can't! Just because a sentence is long, without commas, and contains word repetitions doesn't mean it's not sound. It's a bit of a puzzle, and it's meant to intrigue, so take the time to think, and then abase yourself to me and apologize... abjectly!
What this post needs is for Chip Ahoy to make an animation of Obama's ear as a vortex.
Ann - I will take a crack at showing why your statement is so fucking stupid: because the thing wasn't there means you DID NOT SEE IT. And the corollary you associate with this stupid fucking statement, namely that something may in fact exist without you observing it proves nothing. Sweet Jesus, you have a job? As a law professor? I pity your students.
Enough with the fly by night insults to a woman who admitted her mistake.
It's more than any Andrew Sullivan and Daily Kos have done for the asinine "Trig is Palin's grandchild!!" conspiracy theories.
You want to fight, go there.
Vbspurs - Enough with the fly by night nagging. Can't you do enough of that at your own shitty blog?
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Possibly the dumbest thing you have ever said and that's saying a lot. Good thing you have tenure now that you have destroyed any possibility of someone's ever taking you seriously.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Where have I heard this kind of statement before? Ah, yes, NOW I remember:
"There are things we know that we don't know ..."
McCain needed to crush Obama & failed abysmally. He was literally begging for votes by the end. Looked utterly pathetic making faces behind his back while he was speaking, & the "that one" screwup is going to haunt him.
WTG, Obambi. You still lost!
McCain wishes he could "lose" like this. He's got less than 4 weeks to figure out how, & it looks like he's not going to make it.
Obama would have to open the last debate with "hail, lord Satan, blessed be thy name" to even make it close. The GOP is dead meat. Too bad it's happening 8 years too late.
You are so fucking stupid.
The statement that some of you are having trouble with -- "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see" -- is completely logical and grammatical. Instead of just pointing and saying it's ridiculous, try explaining why it's wrong. You can't! Just because a sentence is long, without commas, and contains word repetitions doesn't mean it's not sound. It's a bit of a puzzle, and it's meant to intrigue, so take the time to think, and then abase yourself to me and apologize... abjectly!
We are amused at that statement not because of grammar or punctuation, but rather the implication that Obama very well may have been wearing an earpiece, even though there absolutely no reason to believe that.
Let me explain with an analogy. Recently I thought I saw a Cthulhu hiding behind the Moon, but then later realized it was just a spot on my glasses. But just because just because the Cthulhu I saw wasn’t there doesn’t mean there wasn’t a Cthulhu there that I didn’t see. As a result, I remain agnostic as to the presence of a giant fictional beast hiding behind the Moon.
And, you're dumb.
Ann Althouse, an almost elderly, fully grown woman, takes delight in being thought of as a ridiculous idiot.
You see, it means attention for her, and she never grew out of that 5 year old "look at me" phase.
Honestly, Ann, I pity you.
Sean: "Ann - I will take a crack at showing why your statement is so fucking stupid: because the thing wasn't there means you DID NOT SEE IT."
Sean, the text to be analyzed is "You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see." I need you to figure out what that means, including all the words, and you simply have missed... well almost everything. Really, try to parse through it and get the meaning. The meaning is there, you are just so convinced it's stupid that you're not able to see it.
Well, let me help.
1."the thing I saw wasn't there" = I admit that I believed I was seeing something in one frame that, having looked at other frames, I now am fairly sure was not there. It was a weird combination of reflection and unusual ear structure.
2. "doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see" = there could still be a listening device inside the ear canal (as some have said is possible) and no one would see that.
3. The fact that what I thought I saw was nothing does not exclude the possibility that there was something else that was not visible.
Is it really so hard?
I'm not making any assertion about how likely it is that there was a listening device in the ear canal, just stating the plainly obvious fact that photograph has nothing to say one way or the other about that.
Why blow a gasket?
Because you, a law professor...
Wow perfesser dumbshit, I did exactly as you had asked, and pointed out the stupidity of your fucking comment. The two things, namely you imagining something that did not exist, and your attempted corollary, namely that failing to notice something does not negate its existence are in no way related to each other. Putting them in the same sentence is a weak way of being cute. Putting the two of them together, if anything, makes both statements mean less, not more. And trying to make this into a syllogistic argument? Fuck off. I know what the words were that you wished for me to parse. I parsed them. You are still a blithering idiot.
Ann Althouse said.."You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see.
Of course Ann. It's called an IFB. Obama uses a wireless IFB.
The Obamadroids better hope it's a wireless IFB or else the man is a functioning psychotic who talks to voices in his head he can't control.
It's obvious from the video link I posted.
Or maybe since he is The One, the Holy Redeemer of America's Racial Sins, he's talking to his Father. Not Barack Sr but you know who.. the Big Fella with the lightning bolts....
Why isn't this a bigger issue? Can you imagine if this was Sarah Palin. It would be all over the news and Jon Stewart/Letterman/SNL would be having a field day.
Obama has Axelrod's forearm up his butt and his voice in his ear.
Teh, salvage, sean, et al.: Just because you're too dense to realize it, doesn't mean you are not being made sport of.
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
That's exactly the sort of critical thinking I'd expect from a law professor.
Um. The speech in front of the flags? Teleprompter issues, looks to me. It's a speech, after all. Not a town hall or press conference, where he would be off book.
The town hall style meeting has another possible reason, too... And Occam's Razor makes it more likely than some kind of two-way radio thing. It seems to me that Obama simply "went up," as they say in the theater. He's saying the same or similar things, two or three times a day for months and months. It happens to even the oldest hands on Broadway. Too bad he couldn't just call for "line" from the wings, huh?
Hearing aids have become so tiny that they can be hidden completely inside the ear canal. A candidate who is hauling in the bucks like Obama could easily pay to have a completely concealed earpiece made that is like the tiny hearing aids, and not risk having some shiny plastic thing in his ear that could be seen on TV.
I say this as a McCain supporter.
The speech in front of the flags? I thought it was a teleprompter issue, but the "That's what I said" now sounds a bit more like he was inadvertently conversing with someone whispering in his ear. But why in that venue? He was reading a speech, not trying to look quick on his feet in a townhall setting. So I doubt that he would have been wired there. He is frightfully flatfooted when the prompter is off, though.
This place is strange. The same deluded wingnuts that couldn't see the transmitter on bush's back now sees things that aren't there. Is Cindy McCain giving you guys the drugs she stole?
Wow, there sure are a lot of smelly turds in here. What lefty sewer did we get flooded by this time?
But I do suggest taking a good long sniff of these turds: these people are the "change we can believe in"! I mean, can't you just smell the "hope" and "progress" steaming off of them?
tom.durkin -
Think about this for a minute. Why would President Bush wear a transmitter right in the middle of his back, where it would be easily visible any time he reached forward? Why not put it lower on his back where the jacket is loose, inside the lower front inside jacket pocket, tucked inside the waist on the left or right side, or taped to his calf? Why not position it in the place a shoulder holster holds a firearm? Why put it where everyone can see it?
Have you considered that the President of the United States would wear a bullet-proof vest in a public venue? Don't you think it was likely that Kerry, as a candidate for the nation's highest office, was wearing one too?
Man, I can smell the flopsweat on you guys from here, who think that Obama needed help to beat this deluded old geezer. Get real.
Yeah, so, I just wanted to let you know, Ann, that I've been getting special transmissions from the Planet Clarion and, um, the world's going to end, so I figured you'd be the first to sign up for my new death cult, amirite?
"You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see."
Are you kidding me?
It's not the shiny rim around the ear, it's the MIDDLE where it supposed to be black - an entry into the ear canal - but it ISN'T - it's of the same color as his skin.
And human ears are just not so.
It is clear that the entrance into his ear canal is obstructed by something with his skin's color.
IT IS an earpiece. Definitely.
IOW it's not a clear earpiece, it's light brown opaque earpiece.
It IS an earpiece!
A "clear plastic earpiece" would not be a functioning earpiece. An earpiece requires a power source (battery), transducer, and antennae, in addition to audio amplification circuitry. None of these can be made transparent -- think of the secret service earpieces that are state-of-the-art and yet have obvious wires. Furthermore, any transmission to a wireless earpiece could easily be intercepted by a simply frequency scanner held by a news reporter, barring some sort of digital encryption. If you're willing to believe in a transparent plastic earpiece (or a deeply implanted one) that can decode a digitally streamed encrypted signal that has not been detected, I have some UFO-abduction insurance I'd like to sell you.
OMG--I just found a picture of Ann Althouse eating a live puppy!! Oh, wait...the picture doesn't show that. Still, you know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see.
You know, on further reflection, I think this blog post and the comment thread should be required reading for anyone considering taking one of Althouse's classes.
Cousin Bob - Ann is not smart enough for that.
Oh, and fuck off.
You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see. I would not be surprised to learn some day that all or most politicians have for years had their advisors helping them from deep inside their ear canals.
I would not be surprised to learn that you're a logic-impaired nutcake.
The two things, namely you imagining something that did not exist, and your attempted corollary, namely that failing to notice something does not negate its existence are in no way related to each other.
Indeed. She could as well have said "just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean I'm not a soul eating ghoul from Aldebaran". It's a non sequitur straw man.
As for her not being surprised if it turns out that all or most politicians have for years had their advisors helping them from deep inside their ear canals, that's like not being surprised if it turns out that the moon has an inner core of green cheese -- it doesn't speak well to her understanding the available evidence about the world around her and her ability to make predictions about it.
Look, it's entirely possible that he has a very small device that completely fits within his ear canal. I say there is no visible external device, but some of the video shows that it seems that he is being prompted. Why not concede that it is possible?
It's not like the possibility that the moon is made of green cheese. It's a technological aid that we know is feasible and its usefulness is apparent. Why wouldn't people do things that are feasible and useful?
"The fact we don't trust this guy to play fair that we're looking for an ear piece sums it up for me."
Me too. Assuming, of course, that we both refer to your circularly reasoned, tinfoil hat-bedecked wingnutismo.
Paranoid much?
Why not concede that it is possible?
Conceded.
If there's a better example of a tautology than the assertion that possible things are possible, I'd sure like to hear it.
>You know, just because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see.
Three words:
Dis
Bar
Ment
Post a Comment