Breaking: WH releasing long-form birth certificate
posted at 9:13 am on April 27, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
Well, I’m certainly glad this happened the day before I left the country on vacation. CNN and pretty much everyone else is abuzz with the news that Barack Obama and the White House have tired of playing with conspiracy theorists and will release the long-form birth certificate after all:
The White House released President Obama’s original birth certificate Wednesday.
The surprise release follows recent and sustained remarks by businessman Donald Trump, among others, that raised doubts as to whether the president was born in the United States.
Haven’t seen the actual form yet, but I’ll be sure to add it when I do. So far, news outlets are only showing the CoLB that they’ve had for almost three years, but we should be able to see the original shortly.
The big question is this: will it make any difference? The conspiracy theorists have long speculated that the state of Hawaii’s law that allows parents to get a birth certificate after having a child abroad (true) gives them the option to declare Hawaii the birthplace (not true). Others insist “natural born” means born of two American citizens, which is not only not true but would have disqualified Michael Dukakis in 1988, whose parents were both Greek immigrants. I’m going to guess that this will only shake off those with minimal or moderate attachment to the birth certificate issue, and that the industry will somehow muster onward after this bleak day.
Update: Ah, CNN has the PDF here. And here’s the image:
Note that the long form doesn’t have any mention of religion at all, which was one theory as to why Obama was supposedly “hiding” it, nor does it list anyone else as Obama’s father, another speculative bit of nonsense peddled by the birthers. The place of birth box is checked as within city or town limits, signed as thus by the attendant to the birth.
This conspiracy theory should have died three years ago. Now, maybe we can focus on all the ways Obama is failing as President.
Update II: Some of those who pushed this issue over the last two-plus years are now crying foul, saying “Why did he wait this long to release it?” Why would Obama have wanted to release it? After all, it made for a perfect way to paint his opposition as lunatics. Frankly, I’m surprised he didn’t wait until after the GOP primaries. He could have used the bump more then than now.
You know who the biggest loser in this might be? CNN. They’re in the middle of their in-depth investigation of the birther movement, and now their unaired episodes are moot.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all
America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 19 20 21 22 23 Next »
Blink, your condescending, less-than-accurate attacks on people don’t help the situation at all.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 8:59 AM
I wonder if we can get Jesse Ventura to do a special on the Birther issue?..:)
Dire Straits on April 28, 2011 at 9:01 AM
Sorry I had to leave folks, but as I said I have responsibilities. I’m not sure if I should take up where I left off, or just start on the current page. I’ll look back through the comments and see if it’s worthwhile to backtrack or not.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:05 AM
Ah, the Pot calls the kettle black.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:06 AM
Speak of the devil…
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 9:08 AM
I suppose Obama feels that anyone questioning him ought to be punished severely. I said at the time that it would take a horrible person to allow someone to go to jail just because someone didn’t want to produce a document that would have cleared the whole thing up.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM
LOL!..Good point!..:)
Dire Straits on April 28, 2011 at 9:10 AM
And with a forked tongue no doubt. I’m sure you’ve had time to take a nice refreshing broom ride last night. Perhaps you will be in a more civil mood today?
:)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:11 AM
Well, I hope getting all of that out of our system was cathartic.
Count to 10 on April 28, 2011 at 9:14 AM
You have an astonishing level of patience in dealing with screeching crows. I commend you for it. My technique is more fun though! :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:15 AM
What is being lost in this debate is the fact that a minority of those labeled ‘birthers’ do believe that little Bammie was born in Hawaii, however has other problems with his eligibility for the office of president.
Unfortunately I’ve never seen a poll breakdown of what they (we) think is the exact problem.
slickwillie2001 on April 28, 2011 at 9:21 AM
So , in HA headlines the new Hawaii governor is claiming that they provided a copy of the original record. If that were true it would look like the Nordyke twins ones, so he’s continuing the farce.
bigmike on April 28, 2011 at 9:24 AM
2,000 posts or bust!!
PappyD61 on April 28, 2011 at 9:31 AM
Who is going to push this over the finish line!..:)
Dire Straits on April 28, 2011 at 9:33 AM
2000!
txsurveyor on April 28, 2011 at 9:37 AM
So, the article in the newspaper is essentialy claiming that they broke the rules as a special one time only effort to do a PHOTOCOPY of the original LFBC. Where’s Joe Wilson when we need him?
bigmike on April 28, 2011 at 9:38 AM
My first guess was Vancouver Canada. My Second guess was Seattle Washington. My third Guess was Honolulu Hawaii.
I never dismissed the possibility that he was actually born in Hawaii, I just didn’t think it was the most likely based on the way he was acting, and other circumstantial evidence.
At this point, it looks as though my least likely guess appears to be the truth. At least there is no better evidence to the contrary. If nobody comes up with a serious critique of the submitted birth certificate, this issue is pretty much over.
I think what was produced is not a very good document, but it does appear to have the signature of a witness, so that meets the required threshold for my Usual critique of the short form. Though how they got everyone to sign in that book is a mystery to me. I would have expected the signatures to be on individual birth certificates, (like the Nordyke certificate) not the pages of a large book. :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:39 AM
In celebration of passing the 2,000 post marker..I dedicate this great song by the Irish Rovers!..Enjoy!..:)
Dire Straits on April 28, 2011 at 9:42 AM
It’s refusing to post my messages again. I’ll do a post in two parts and see if that works.
My first guess was Vancouver Canada. My Second guess was Seattle Washington. My third Guess was Honolulu Hawaii.
I never dismissed the possibility that he was actually born in Hawaii, I just didn’t think it was the most likely based on the way he was acting, and other circumstantial evidence.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:42 AM
And the rest of my comment.
At this point, it looks as though my least likely guess appears to be the truth. At least there is no better evidence to the contrary. If nobody comes up with a serious critique of the submitted birth certificate, this issue is pretty much over.
I think what was produced is not a very good document, but it does appear to have the signature of a witness, so that meets the required threshold for my Usual critique of the short form. Though how they got everyone to sign in that book is a mystery to me. I would have expected the signatures to be on individual birth certificates, (like the Nordyke certificate) not the pages of a large book. :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:43 AM
Hmmm… it’s not taking the second half of my post. I’ll trim it further and see if that will post.
“At this point, it looks as though my least likely guess appears to be the truth. At least there is no better evidence to the contrary. If nobody comes up with a serious critique of the submitted birth certificate, this issue is pretty much over. “
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:45 AM
And the last part.
I think what was produced is not a very good document, but it does appear to have the signature of a witness, so that meets the required threshold for my Usual critique of the short form. Though how they got everyone to sign in that book is a mystery to me. I would have expected the signatures to be on individual birth certificates, (like the Nordyke certificate) not the pages of a large book. :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:46 AM
and it’s STILL not taking my final comment. 3rd try.
“I think what was produced is not a very good document, but it does appear to have the signature of a witness, so that meets the required threshold for my Usual critique of the short form. “
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:46 AM
5th try at posting this last part.
“Though how they got everyone to sign in that book is a mystery to me. I would have expected the signatures to be on individual birth certificates, not the pages of a large book.”
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM
7th try. I think it’s freaking out over the word I have now hyphenated.
(like the N-o-r-d-y-k-e certificate) not the pages of a large book. :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM
Must have some sort of filter for the word the aforementioned hyphenated word.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:52 AM
What issue is over? There’s still the question of his “natural born citizen”ship status.
Fed45 on April 28, 2011 at 9:52 AM
Waaaaay late to the party… but you’re saying that all blacks are not equal? Thasracess. ;-)
Abby Adams on April 28, 2011 at 9:53 AM
Yeah, but only to people who care about it. I think the chances of making it a main stream issue are pretty much done now. Ironically, the produced document pretty much ruins his chances of being considered the child of two citizen parents.
*I’m* still going to argue about it, but I suspect it is going to be like draining the Ocean with a tea cup. Of course I go in for being persistently stubborn about a point of fact.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:55 AM
Hey DL , I think it’s just slow, sometimes it looks like it’s eaten one on me and then maybe 10 minutes later it shows.
bigmike on April 28, 2011 at 9:56 AM
I thought that at first, but it has done this to me several times, and it is not the usual way it posts. Just for a test, i’ll attempt to post the word N-o-r-d-y-k-e in the next post.
I bet it won’t go through.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 9:59 AM
Someone else said that it might just be the last half of the word that is catching the filter. I may be wrong though…
Abby Adams on April 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM
Yeah, I’m surprised that worthless filth hasn’t seized the opportunity, given his propensity for attempting to turn the very accurate label of “conspiracy theorist” into a racial slur. I think even Al Sharpton would blush at that stretch.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:02 AM
Yep… it’s just the last half of the word. I just tried Nard-y-k-e (sans hyphens) and it got rejected.
Abby Adams on April 28, 2011 at 10:02 AM
Nope. That word won’t go through. It’s probably filtering on that word.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:02 AM
You didn’t know that calling someone crazy IS calling them the n word?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNgiOWezRNw
Abby Adams on April 28, 2011 at 10:09 AM
The analogy was perfectly apt. You people had characterized everyone who questioned the short form as a “conspiracy nut.” I repeatedly said “No conspiracy needed”, yet everyone kept trying to force the “CONSPIRACY NUT” label on me, and I just got fed up with it.
I correctly recognized it as a “class pejorative” and I used the most well known example in an attempt to make people FACE WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
Yeah, you didn’t like it because it showed you how UGLY you were.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:12 AM
Hey DL, Nordyke, Nordyke, Nordyke.
bigmike on April 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM
I guess I’m constantly calling Alex Jones a racial slur, then.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:16 AM
So everyone’s out to get you? Well, thanks for demonstrating that you’re not a conspiracy nut.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Ha! Instapundit has this comment.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:19 AM
No, just the @ssholes.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:20 AM
When are you going to demonstrate you’re not a nut?
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:21 AM
I didn’t say that they didn’t debunk the fact that the layering problem implies that the document was suspicious.
I said that the NRO didn’t debunk the fact that there was a layering problem.
It’s this type of inaccurate, condescending, dismissive attitude that has fueled the Birther movement.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:28 AM
haha
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 10:28 AM
My attacks are incredibly accurate, and, yes, they do help the situation.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:29 AM
So then you agree that the layering problem is not, in fact, a problem, if the layering does not imply editing or tampering.
…again, what? If the layering doesn’t imply editing or tampering, how is it a problem?
Okay, enough. What did I say that wasn’t accurate? And as for condescension and a dismissive attitude, you’ve given plenty yourself. For you, there are “birthers” and “RABID anti-birthers”. If you’re trying to make yourself out to be objective between the two, you’re doing a horrible job.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:31 AM
Talk about condescending.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:32 AM
You got me. It certainly didn’t work when *I* tried it. Perhaps they have imposed additional filtering on me? :)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:33 AM
Funny, I saw that you could type it. I cannot even quote your message. It simply won’t post.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:34 AM
Err…Bizarro. None of those statements are inconsistent. In fact, they’re all perfectly consistent. If you can find a quote of me saying it’s “impossible,” then well yeah, that was wrong. But you won’t be able to find that.
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 10:34 AM
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Amen.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:35 AM
I think it’s pretty clear he’s deliberately flaming at this point. Just let him be.
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM
Fox Business Channel, which is the most pro Constitution news channel on TV, have been bulldogs going after Barry Soetoro. Eric Bolling’s show Follow the Money last night created more questions and suspicions with the pundits after Barry produced another possible forged document. They are really pushing Corsi’s new book. This is starting to shape up like The Clinton Scandal and Nixon’s Watergate. Barry Soetoro was better off just avoiding the issue all together. But when your whole life has been sealed, is one big shady story, and there is good evidence that fraud has been committed, then the truth will come out eventually… especially when you have made a career out of throwing allies under the bus. The American people do not like to be sold chicken shiite and told it is chicken salad; Americans do not like to be treated and made to be fools in front of anybody.
I personally think that he his being pushed out by elements of his own party because I heard from several democrats that most dems begged him not to run for reelection. I only worry that the hard left with Barry Soetoro with his strong man dictator type personality might try something evil to keep power. This has always been my fear since he was elected and why I feel he should be treated and vetted just like every Candidate and President in the past. It is obvious that Barry Soetoro and his masters do not put the USA first, and they are actively trying to destroy our currency and create a multi-polar World with a severely weakened USA and brand new alliances.
I guess all there is to do is wait until Corsi’s book comes out and watch as the Clinton machine with Trump attacks him on one flank while Rinos/Conservatives/Tea Party members attack him from the other flank. Once Independents read that book they will attack right up the middle and that is when things will get very interesting.
I pray for my country during these times.
Watching_Cloward-Piven on April 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM
Stop pretending to be stupid. The layer was a problem because it allowed suspicions to immediately be raised. How is that NOT a problem?
However, the NRO credibly addressed the fact that the layering PROBLEM should not be considered material evidence of image manipulation.
If you find this issue too difficult for you to discuss accurately, then I recommend that you stay away.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:39 AM
That comment itself wasn’t condescending at all. It was cocky (although accurate), but not condescending.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:40 AM
Yes, they were. You’d be much better off simply admitting it.
Oh please. Just because you may not have used the exact term “impossible” doesn’t mean that you weren’t attempting to tell Birthers that Obama was UNABLE to get a long form BC from Hawaii.
Your back pedaling about this has sunk to the preposterous now.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:43 AM
I’m not flaming anything. I’m calling you out for being dead wrong about Obama being able to release his long form BC (he was able to do it within a week) and for lying about being dead wrong.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:45 AM
Stop being stupid.
…WHAT? So if anything raises suspicions, regardless of whether it SHOULD raise suspicions, it’s evidence? Is that your argument?
Yes…so then the layering is not a problem, as numerous people have pointed out. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?
Given that you’re now arguing that suspicion based on a flawed premise means that the suspicion remains valid even though it was based on a flawed premise, I’d say what’s too difficult for you is trying to maintain a semblance of objectivity on this issue. You are grasping at straws like a madman.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:48 AM
I still have reservations about the document produced, but realistically I can perceive that most people won’t, so unless some bombshell bit of news surfaces, I think the issue is dead.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:48 AM
I can see why you chose your username. Your statements leave people blinking in amazed disbelief at your narcissism.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:49 AM
I don’t think it’s deliberate. I think he’s so full of himself that he is somewhat blind to his own narcissism.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:50 AM
Are you freaking kidding me???? You don’t see how the layering of the LFBC was considered a problem yesterday? Good grief!
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:53 AM
I repeatedly argued with her about this. She was consistent and persistent in denying the obvious. We said all along that it was just a bureaucratic decision, and that it was in fact in violation of Hawaiian law. I cited the section of law at her a half dozen times, with links to the Hawaiian.gov website!
I pretty much said my piece to her earlier with two previous comments. I didn’t see the need to pile on.
“Back-peddle HARDER! FASTER! ”
And “She’s a Canadian?”
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 10:53 AM
I never argued any such thing. You are either stupid or delusional.
Something that raised suspicion is a problem. That doesn’t mean that the suspicion is still valid.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:55 AM
Yawn – not even remotely clever.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 10:56 AM
YESTERDAY. And then it was shown NOT TO BE WORTHY OF SUSPICION. What are you not getting about this? I sincerely hope you have nothing to do with law enforcement, or if you do, that they get some good comic relief out of your mind-bogglingly twisted view of evidence.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:58 AM
If the suspicion is no longer valid, it WAS a problem. You have the strangest deficiency in comparing past to present that I’ve ever encountered.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 10:59 AM
Which part was inconsistent, exactly? Yesterday I said “I never said it was impossible, I just said releasing it was against Hawaiian law and/or their administrative procedures.” Bizarro then provided a link of me saying Hawaiian law didn’t provide for the release of the document. Seems pretty consistent to me.
Hm. I feel like we’ve been talking past each other for awhile on this, and I think I’ve figured out why.
Are you aware that at least theoretically, almost every law or administrative procedure is waivable, either ex ante or ex post, as a matter of executive discretion? Heck, even a murderer can be pardoned or have their sentence commuted.
So when someone says “releasing this would be against current law,” or “administrative procedures don’t allow for this to be released,” it is of course, almost always still possible for someone to waive the application of that law or procedure in one instance. In fact, that’s exactly what happened yesterday.
To put it differently, when someone says “releasing it is against the law” there’s always an implicit exception for the executive just waiving the law or granting an exception to the procedures. And I actually did say in a post last week (which you’ve ignored) that that could happen.
So do you see the distinction between what I said, and what you think I said? I said (basing my statements off of official state sources), it was against the law and current procedures. There was absolutely nothing incorrect about that. What I never said, is that it was impossible to release it. You may wish I said that, but I didn’t.
Does that help you understand? If not, I’m honestly not sure how else to help you out.
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 11:00 AM
Do you think Corsi’s book that is years of investigative work, which many independents will read, will be the bombshell if it uncovers and shines light on Obama’s entire sealed and shady past?
Watching_Cloward-Piven on April 28, 2011 at 11:00 AM
No, you don’t. You’re a crazy Birther that will never be satisfied. You will jump from conspiracy theory to conspiracy theory because you’re stupid.
You never had simple, isolated, non-conspiratory type concerns about Obama’s short form BC that the rabid anti-Birthers will never take the time to understand.
You weren’t simply made suspicious by Obama’s refusal to release his LFBC despite the fact that he always had the full power to do so.
Admit it!
/sarc
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:00 AM
Better listen to her. She knows everything there is to know about arguing from a flawed premise. :)
I’ve seen the layering issue discussed before on that original Obama short form that was circulating on the net a few years ago. Nothing came of it then, and the guy that was pushing it was declared discredited. I figured if it didn’t amount to anything two years ago, it probably wouldn’t amount to anything nowadays, though I WOULD like to hear an expert opinion on it.
My biggest criticism of the proffered document is that it doesn’t look at all like the one we know to be true. The N-o-r-d-y-k-e birth certificate. And it has that weasel clause about possibly being an abstract of the record.
Neither characteristic imbues veracity in it.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:01 AM
Well, agree to disagree. I don’t think anyone could be this obtuse, accidentally. I mean the exchange b/t you guys about the NRO layering de-bunking is just too much.
LOL.
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 11:03 AM
It escapes rational understanding how you could claim that the layering in the pdf wasn’t a problem. You are almost as big of a denialist as crr6.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:04 AM
Apparently, this is how evidence works in blink’s world:
Person 1: Look, there’s layering! Doesn’t that imply tampering?
Person 2: Hang on…let me investigate…nope. That can happen as a normal course of events, so it doesn’t imply tampering.
Person 1: Oh, okay. I guess it doesn’t mean anything, then.
blink: Yes, it does!
Person 1: How? If it doesn’t mean anything, it doesn’t mean anything.
blink: But it did.
Person 2: Yes…when we weren’t sure if it meant anything. We confirmed it doesn’t.
blink: Yeah, but it did. So that means it does.
Person 1 and Person 2: *blinking in disbelief*
blink: Don’t be so condescending, you rabid anti-birthers.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:04 AM
Oh snaps! Watch out Madcon!
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM
Oh please. You claimed it was against Hawaii law for Obama’s LFBC to be released.
No change for waiver in the law was needed. Hawaii executives had the power all along to release the document.
And of course, Hawaii admin execs have the power to waive Hawaii admin law. That’s one of the reasons that it was so strange for you to act like Hawaii law was preventing Obama from getting anything released – especially since the Gov of Hawaii had said that he would do it.
You were stupid for making the claim then, and you’re lying about having made the claim now.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:09 AM
I agree.
In fact, I would almost go as far as to say that HA is now like the YouTube comments section.
Badger40 on April 28, 2011 at 11:10 AM
It escapes rational understanding how you could claim that the layering in the pdf didn’t cause a problem.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:12 AM
An article purported to be by an expert calling the released document fake.
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/critics-obamas-latest-long-form-birth-certificate-is-a-fake/
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:12 AM
haha, read the headlines page…
LOL.
Anyway, if you’ve read my post and you have basic reading comprehension skills I think you probably understand my point, and why you’re wrong, even if you won’t admit it. I understand that you’ve invested enough in the argument that you won’t backtrack and admit I was right. That’s fine, blink.
Anyways, carry on.
crr6 on April 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Btw, I didn’t say that the problem was insurmountable or that it wasn’t addressed, but that doesn’t mean that it didn’t cause a problem!
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM
*sigh* One last time.
It caused suspicion. That suspicion was determined to be unfounded. Hence, no suspicion remains.
By your logic, anyone suspected in a crime must continue to be considered a suspect, even after being cleared.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Ahh the Birther Hydra. You debunk one birther theory, and two more will sprout in its place. I’ve tried to keep track of the various species of Birther over the years. Here is my listing off the top of my head, please add any that i missed.
1) Obama has not provided any proof (2008 variety – pre-COLB)
2) Obama is a muslim. (Original)
3) COLB is a fraud. (tech-dude backers)
4) Obama has not provided enough proof. (post 2008 COLB – pre4/28/11 LFBC release).
5) LFBC says Obama is a Muslim.
6) LFBC says somebody other than Obama Sr. is Father (actual father is Malcolm X, Marshall Davis, Bill Cosby, Sammy Davis Jr., any famous black man in the 60′s)
7) LFBC has unknown as father (This variety of Birther usually includes very derogatory statements about Obama’s mother)
8) LFBC has somebody else as the Mother. (Various explanations provided.)
9) Not eligible because British Law states Obama could be a british subject. (British Law apparently trumps U.S. Constitution 14th amenedment)
10) Not eligible because Obama’s mother remarried an Indonesian (Soeterro). (Ignoring that step-parents don’t automatically adopt)
11) Not eligible because obama was adopted by Indonesian (no adoption records and no proof of anything. No evidence that Obama Sr. relinquished parental rights, as would be required)
12) Applied for college aid as a international student (No evidence provided. In fact no evidence that it would be more advantageous to apply for financial aid as international than a U.S. student. Most grants and loans I’ve ever seen are dependent on being a U.S. Resident. All internationals I went to school with griped that their parents had to pay more than the U.S. Students.)
13) Demand access to high school, College, and Law School grades, transcripts, papers, roomate questionaire, SAT Scores, ACT Scores, etc. (Never been provided by any prior campaign or administration)
14) Demand client files and client lists from Obama’s private practice (Nevermind that this is highly unethical and illegal to provide)
15) Demand passport records (never provided by any prior president or presidential candidate)
16) Claim that Obama’s travel to Pakistan proves he was travelling under foreign pasport (ignoring that travel to pakistan was not banned for U.S. citizens. Also ignores ontemporaneous news articles in U.S. Papers encouraging tavel to pakistan for tourists. Ignoring contemporanous State Department announcements indicating travel to Pakistan was normal.)
17) U.S. Constitution demands that “natural born Citizen” means not only a) naturally born a citizen (i.e. not naturalized after birth); but also b) born of 2 U.S. citizen parents. (Adherents usually indicate phrase was taken from French writer Vatel for definition of natural born Citizen, but ignore a) english copy of Vatel’s book not printed until 20-50 years after constitution signed; and b) French version available at time of constitution does not include phrase “natural born Citizen” or its french equivalent.
18) NEW There are layers to the PDF of the LFBC issued, therefore this new document is a fraud. (My new favorite. Also Already debunked by conservative news site)
19) Can’t believe anything coming out of Hawaii state Gov’t because they are all in on consipracy. (This variety either a) ignores that prior Governor for most of birther conspiracy was a republican or b) insists that Republicans in Hawaii aren’t real republicans but merely figure heads.
20) “I’m not a birther, I’m just asking questions.”
I’m sure I missed a couple along the way. Please fill in with any of the birther species I may have missed.
New_Jersey_Buckeye on April 28, 2011 at 11:14 AM
A problem that no longer exists! So what the hell are you babbling about???
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:14 AM
Are you actually claiming that this headline is accurate????
Do you not consider the governor of Hawaii to be a “Hawaii official”?
Don’t quote stupid, inaccurate headlines.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:15 AM
I don’t know. I know Jack Cashill has done some very good research on Obama and came up with all sorts of dirty doings. I’m not really familiar with Corsi, so I can’t really comment on his competence.
I suspect anyone who has done some digging has uncovered some astonishing stuff. Who would have thought that Naked pictures of his mother would be on the internet?
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:15 AM
Often times the loudest accusers are themselves hypocrites. They see the mote in other’s eyes, but not the beams in their own.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:17 AM
I was speaking with some people around where I live here in ND.
These people I am speaking of are regular every day working folks who very rarely, if at all, use the interent or even watch the news at all.
In their opinion, this BC issue is not dead.
Bcs of how BO has conducted himself from the beginning, no one trusts him & everything he does from here on out they will never believe.
Bcs he is a liar.
So take this for what it’s worth, but I seriously doubt this controversy in at least the regular Joe working class bunch, is really settled.
And these people are not to be villified for being ‘birthers’.
They know nothing of the things that we read & research about.
Badger40 on April 28, 2011 at 11:18 AM
For what it’s worth, it sounds as if there are people who have scanned docs & checked out layering & it has happened to them, too.
It doesn’t sound as if the ‘layering’ is any big deal.
Evidently, it does not take away from the BC being the original.
Badger40 on April 28, 2011 at 11:20 AM
Oh please. You claimed it was against Hawaii law for Obama’s LFBC to be released.
Arguments with these people remind me of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM
(Monty Python’s arguing clinic.)
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:20 AM
There’s two kinds of conspiracy theorists:
1. People who are entertained by the mystery of conspiracy theories, but don’t place any real stock in them. They willingly admit their fascination with them, but never go as far as to push them as having real basis in reality. They admit the flaws and holes. They openly admit to being conspiracy theorists. I’m actually one of them. The JFK conspiracy is fun to look into.
2. People who genuinely believe their conspiracy theories are not only valid, but unarguably true. They will argue for hours using every dodge or fallacy possible to demonstrate that no amount of evidence can prove them wrong. They will never admit to being conspiracy theorists, and take great offense at the label.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:23 AM
Something that caused credible suspicion, even if only temporary, is a problem. Something that has the possibility of prolonging the Birther issue for the most devote Birthers is a problem.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:30 AM
I think everyone agrees that it would have been much less of a problem if the pdf didn’t have any layers.
blink on April 28, 2011 at 11:32 AM
Nice cut and paste, was that from DailyKOS or Moveon.org?
Rebar on April 28, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Not if the suspicion would have been averted had proper knowledge been possessed.
Holy s**t. We’re in agreement.
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:38 AM
How ’bout we quit using the word ‘theory’ to indicate hypothesis?
Bcs when you say someone is a conspiracy ‘theorist’ what you’re really meaning is that they are hypothesizing there is a conspiracy, which is perfectly legitimate.
Even though the JFK conspiracy hypothesis has pretty much been disproven, it is still quite the fishy story.
So is the BO BC hypothesis. It has pretty much been debunked, but it’s still quite the fishy sotry.
Americans are upset bcs they know something is not right.
While Hot Arians spew vindectives at each other here, the rest of Amcerica is confused & angry about all of this.
We should quit the name calling of birthers, birtherism, etc & at least acknowledge some of these people have very valid points.
And all you can do is present the evidence & let them decide.
To polarize this does not help anyone.
The liberals are getting off on this chaos.
They’re eating it up.
Why can’t all of you getting nasty over this just STFU & let’s get to the real buisiness of getting rid of this socialist communist-sympathizing muslim-sympathizing destructive POS?
That’d sure be nice.
Badger40 on April 28, 2011 at 11:39 AM
You know what I find irritating? It’s knowing that Judges amend birth certificates for adopted children, and that state officials will issue these known amended documents as genuine originals. (Falsely asserting that said adopted children were actually BORN to their adopted parents.)
This is standard practice among all the states record keepers, yet if you try to point this out to people, they call it a “CONSPIRACY.”
“You must be some sort of “conspiracy nut” if you believe that all these government officials are LYING! ”
Jeeze.
DiogenesLamp on April 28, 2011 at 11:45 AM
Time for more “conspiracy theorizing”? Since you have special knowledge of the adoption process:
If a child is adopted, and their birth certificates are amended, what happens to the “original original” birth certificate? Is it typed over with the new info, or is a copy made with the new info and the old one sealed away, destroyed, or what?
Rebar on April 28, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Multiple people within the government lying to cover something up would be…not a conspiracy?
MadisonConservative on April 28, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 19 20 21 22 23 Next »