Oops, yep you’re right. I mis-remembered the SourceFeed video and thought they were searching only on the last name.
Well, just to play devil’s advocate, okay… let’s try it.
Hmm… looks OK so far…
Let’s zoom in a little for a closer look and… OH MY LAWD! He’s right!!
23 Likes
The thing is, it is not even true. For me Google is completely happy to suggest “crimes” for both Madoff and Clinton, both on Google.fr and Google.com. Perhaps something limited only to the US residents? Or maybe the safe search setting.
The joke’s on you. Wait until he shows back up in 2043 and you’re working at a massage parlor descaling another giant gecko overlord. Soooo much “I told you so.”
11 Likes
Autocomplete may be constrained by a desire to avoid violating various local privacy and libel laws. It could also be algorithmic prudery.
5 Likes
In case anyone is wondering what this guy is babbling about - and since he’s probably reading the responses despite the ban:
The modern birther isn’t concerned about where Obama is from,
They were “concerned” about it long after all such claims were debunked by mid-2008.
or whether he has some “secret birth certificate”.
Obama’s birth certificate was released - and verified - by Vital Statistics in Hawaii in mid-2008. By a Republican state government under a Republican Presidency when even the most prominent Democrat would have liked to see him disqualified. By then his original birth announcement was already found in two local papers - placed there not by his family, but by Vital Statistics with information from the hospital.
And make no mistake, that was the proper birth certificate, the one you’d get if you were born in Hawaii years earlier and ordered a copy in 2008.
The truth is, they are concerned that Obama released an obviously forged birth certificate (as proven by the complex text layering that could not have been created by a document scanner).
That’s on the original certificate, released years later. The layering is normal. To make a smaller file the scanning software used optical character recognition where possible, and stored the bitmaps where not. Even a given word might have two layers - OCR’d text and bitmap.
The experts back this up. (The conservative magazine National Review duplicated it too, but the link I have to the story is dead.)
As long predicted, there was no way that the birthers wouldn’t declare the original certificate a fake if it were released.
Ironically, the woman who supposedly scanned it, died during a plane crash (Google the Mysterious Death of Loretta Fuddy)…
Bullshit. The birthers simply waited for anyone remotely connected to the case to die, knowing that it was a statistical certainty to happen eventually - and then pile on the BS claims.
It’s hard to imagine that the acting Director of the Department of Health was the one doing the scanning. And in any case, as mentioned above, Obama’s birth certificate was released and validated years earlier.
This all went down after Sheriff Joe Arpaio launched the Cold Case Posse investigation…
Which turned out to be an empty claim from a con artist. Just like Trump he keeps making grandiose claims about soon-to-be-released earth-shattering evidence… but he never produces it.
To this day, no federal judge will touch this fraud case…
That was birther doctrine for a long time: Their “evidence” had never had its day in court . Just you wait!
But that was years ago. The Birther Scorecard (PDF) now stands at 226 original court actions, 120+ appeals, and 35+ Supreme Court decisions. All on birther claims. Birther wins: 0
You can pretend this is all fiction…
No need to pretend.
Remind yourself of the rationale behind Obama’s very first executive order…
Something something something Presidential records.
Which no matter how you try to misrepresent it, it won’t affect the state records in Hawaii. Which released and validated Obama’s birth certificate in mid 2008 under a Republican state government and a Republican Presidency. Nor would it affect his birth announcements in the local papers decades earlier. Nor the records of his mother living in Hawaii at the time.
10 Likes
I, for one, welcome our new giant gecko overlords.
8 Likes
Ironically, his first executive order was to rescind a Bush-era executive order that limited access to Presidential records.
Obama’s first executive order was to open up access to records. Kind of the opposite of what the Birthers claim.
7 Likes
I read this the headline as “Google refuses to alter search results to benefit Hillary Clinton”. But the intended meaning works too.
1 Like
Then who cares about his birth certificate?
4 Likes
I thought this was performance art at first: an elaborate parody of birtherer logic… until I realized he was serious.
5 Likes
Your reply reminds me of one of the funniest short exchanges I’ve ever seen on any forum:
User A: Insert crazy, flagrantly trollish statement here;__________
User B: Damn, I hope you’re driving trollies.
User A: Of course I am! Or… maybe I’m not. But maybe I am!
*lolz
You just never really know.
2 Likes
Ooh! Off to the band names thread!
9 Likes
There’s definitely something funny about this: Google “crooked hilla” and you’ll see “crooked hillary bernie”, which is most unusual since “crooked hillary” has nothing to do with Bernie Sanders. This doesn’t happen with other search engines. Seriously, just try it before you comment.
Wait…you’re saying that Obama really is Hawaiian? I thought all these guys (and gals) were lizards?
So confused.
This is the official response.
2 Likes
The funniest part about the denial and obviously web sites trying to curry favour or colluding at executive level. The authenticity of historical output autocomplete feature was question with regard to political bias and google response was to go to new, not historical output, to prove that the autocomplete feature that it controls does not because, I mean come on seriously guy, they can program that auto complete to produce what ever they want, the letter don’t even have to match, you could type in 123 and it could be programmed to come back with with Eric Schmidt is God, they can program it to do what ever they wanted it to do, NOW.
They should know it is a stupid and illogical defence and their use of it, tends to provide proof that they are corrupt in it’s use, they did not step back and consider if people are question that source we simply can not go to that source and provide ‘NEW’ results and claim that as proof of what occurred in the past.
I am shocked, shocked to hear of Google controlling, shaping search results. Or that its AI software is doing so.
‘Three black teenagers’: anger as Google image search shows police mugshots
Stark contrast in outcome for search term ‘three white teenagers’, which produces wholesome group pictures
2 Likes
This is what results if you google “three African American teenagers:”
Remember, the very word ‘black’ has had a negative connotation in this country for a very long time.
5 Likes
