Should Romney demand that Obama release his college records in exchange for tax returns?

posted at 12:01 pm on August 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

That’s the suggestion from former Libertarian Party VP candidate Wayne Allen Root, who graduated in the same disciplines as Barack Obama at the same time (1983) from the same college, Columbia University.  If Harry Reid wants to play the “there must be something scary in those records” game, why not challenge Obama by offering to release 10 years of tax returns if Obama will release 10 years of college records?

Obama and his infamous strategist David Axelrod understand how to play political hardball, the best it’s ever been played. Team Obama has decided to distract America’s voters by condemning Mitt Romney for not releasing enough years of his tax returns. It’s the perfect cover. Obama knows the best defense is a bold offense. Just keep attacking Mitt and blaming him for secrecy and evasion, while accusing him of having a scandal that doesn’t exist. Then ask followers like Senator Harry Reid to chase the lead. The U.S. Senate Majority Leader appears to now be making up stories out of thin air, about tax returns he knows nothing about. It’s a cynical, brilliant, and vicious strategy. Make Romney defend, so he can’t attack the real Obama scandal.

This is classic Axelrod. Obama has won several elections in his career by slandering his opponents and leaking sealed documents. Not only do these insinuations and leaks ruin the credibility and reputation of Obama’s opponents, they keep them on the defensive and off Obama’s trail of sealed documents. …

My answer for Romney? Call Obama’s bluff.

Romney should call a press conference and issue a challenge in front of the nation. He should agree to release more of his tax returns, only if Obama unseals his college records. Simple and straight-forward. Mitt should ask “What could possibly be so embarrassing in your college records from 29 years ago that you are afraid to let America’s voters see? If it’s THAT bad, maybe it’s something the voters ought to see.” Suddenly the tables are turned. Now Obama is on the defensive.

My bet is that Obama will never unseal his records because they contain information that could destroy his chances for re-election. Once this challenge is made public, my prediction is you’ll never hear about Mitt’s tax returns ever again.

I admit that this scenario would give some satisfaction after Reid’s attack-dog McCarthyism of the past week or so.  There is precedent for release of both tax returns and college records; in 2004, both candidates released at least part of their college records, which showed that George W. Bush had a slightly better undergrad GPA than John Kerry, and both earned good grades in pursuit of their post-graduate degrees.  Other than that, the topic was completely uninteresting, because it had little to do with the issues in the election, and also because they came out early — well before either campaign could build a sustained narrative about them.

Tax returns hold the same cachet and relevance.  They’re usually dry affairs, especially for people who can afford to have professional preparation for their tax returns.  As I wrote earlier, they don’t really serve any purpose but to allow critics to seize on legal income and tax structuring in order to paint their opponents as too rich to trust.  That’s exactly what Barack Obama and David Axelrod want to do with Romney, which is why he’s balking at releasing any more of his returns.  The risk for Romney is that the refusal makes him look secretive, which Team Obama has already claimed, when in fact it’s no one’s business what’s in his tax returns.  Romney, just like all other politicians at the federal level, is required to make disclosures about his wealth in order to disclose potential conflicts of interest, which is what is actually relevant to the pursuit of public office.

People have criticized Obama for not releasing his college records, especially in 2008, when he ran as a super-intelligent outsider whose lack of experience was an asset to bringing a fresh perspective to Washington and policy.  Poor grades would certainly have been relevant at that time, but probably not so much today.  (Root argues in his piece that he thinks Obama scored scholarships as a “foreign exchange” student based on his years spent in Indonesia, but Obama had been in the US all through his high-school years, so that doesn’t seem very plausible.)

The problem for Romney in this kind of strategy is that it will serve as a distraction from his central premise: that Obama’s record as President shows that his policies have failed, and that the US needs new leadership, especially on the economy.  Even if he did adopt this strategy, the Obama campaign has Harry Reid playing Tail Gunner Joe on this issue, keeping a safe distance from the mud-slinging.  Even if, as Root supposes, Axelrod has been running Reid as a front man, a Romney challenge on Obama’s college records won’t shut Reid up.  Instead, Romney will end up punching below his weight, way off message, while Team Obama stays ostensibly on the sidelines and benefits from the derailing of Romney’s messaging. And by making the offer at all, Romney legitimizes the demand for the release of his tax returns.

In the end, Obama’s betting that people care more about Romney’s tax returns than their own pocketbooks.  If they stick with that strategy, they’re going to be in for a rude surprise in November — and the more the economy slides toward recession, the more the reminders of Romney’s business success might backfire on Obama.

Update: A couple of commenters are angry with me for using the term “McCarthyism,” claiming that the communist infiltration that Joe McCarthy claimed turned out to be real.  But that’s not what the term means.  As I wrote two years ago in another context, Joe McCarthy may have been right in general, but he ended up doing a lot of damage:

Note: People objected yesterday to the use of the word “McCarthyism” in my post, but I use it for two reasons.  First, it’s a term that the Left throws out with abandon any time people dissent from their orthodoxy and have the temerity to question their motivations.  Second, it is a clear, concise description that immediately conveys the kind of guilty-until-proven-innocent abuse of power from government officials when it occurs.

Some people objected because later information proved Joe McCarthy correct in general about Communist infiltration in the government, but that doesn’t acquit McCarthy of his abuse of power.  He accused people without evidence, many of them the wrong people, and did so as a representative of the government that is supposed to protect the individual presumption of innocence until evidence proves contrary.  McCarthy was a dangerous man, and perhaps even more for the discredit he heaped on the anti-Communist effort when the Soviet Union was at its most aggressive.

Specifically, McCarthy smeared people as Communists or Communist sympathizers when he didn’t have evidence to back up those claims, then demanded that they prove themselves innocent rather than him proving their guilt.  It was a despicable tactic then, and it’s a despicable tactic now.  No one should waste time trying to rehabilitate McCarthy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4 5

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:05 PM

So if Romney were actually a tax cheat he’d only be qualified to be Treasury Secretary of a Democrat Congressman?

Did these concerns surface for you when Kerry was running for president (he’s richer than Romney but didn’t actually earn it – he married someone who married someone who earned it).

How about the Kennedy family? How did they get their fortune?

How about Pelosi getting sweetheart IPO offerings?

How did Reid – a poor country lawyer in “public service” – become a millionaire?

gwelf on August 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Like you do here on an hourly basis?

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM

And that’s fine, whatever, it was fun to poke fun at W’s bad grades once they were released.
 
libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:40 PM

 
Probably the high point of this thread was reading a current professor (and probably A&B (and C’s?) undergrad) joke about a “C” in the ’60s being “bad grades”.
 

“By the end of the last decade, A’s and B’s represented 73 percent of all grades awarded at public schools, and 86 percent of all grades awarded at private schools”
 
- NY Times, 2011

rogerb on August 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM

The only two constitutional requirements for President are age 35 years or older and natural born citizenship. And proof of that is scoffed at as “stupid”. So, why should anyone on any side get their panties in a bunch over what else is or is not produced?

If either side is serious about this, and considers it vitally importnat, then set a date, and have Romney and Obama go before a long table, televised, and match school record for school record, tax return for tax return, physical for physical, psych eval. for psych eval,, birth cert for birth cert, military record for military record, etc. If one side comes up short, then they can get “blasted”.

If this isn’t done, then I wouldn’t submit anything. Any time Romney is asked for any records, say, “show me yours, I’ll show ya mine”, etc.

Saltyron on August 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM

A fair exchange, I’d say, transcripts for more tax returns. Axelrod has exploited confidential records of Obama opponents, like Jack Ryan, while putting Obama’s own curious history under lock and key. Not a birther issue. It’s goes back to why HIS transcripts are taboo? Are yours or mine taboo when applying for a job. Under the consent of the governed, we are the Obama’s employer. Obama and Axelrod know what he’s hiding, and it probably is a game changer. Surrogates for Romney should make it a gambit for Obamapologists to dissemble, and let Romney and his Veep remain above the fray.

TheStatistQuo on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

And suckers pay how much per year to be “educated” by the likes of you?

MNHawk on August 7, 2012 at 1:10 PM

More importantly, how much were us poor taxpayers forced to pay to “Educate” this fool.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

exploitation of loopholes

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:05 PM

All laws and exemptions passed by the Congress, and signed by presidents, you know…the likes of Reid, Pelosi and Obama.

What a shame that you are supposed to enlighten. You are one of the most idiotic creatures around.

You never deserve to be free. May you go under in your self-imposed ‘shackles. Shame that you influence others to remain so when they c/b free and productive citizens.

If you and Obama don’t like the laws, attempt to change them. What utter fools both of you are, thugs extraordinaire, degenerates like no others.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Ed, Ed, Ed… More McCarthy references? Seriously, Venona proved McCarthy RIGHT. I’ll buy your linkage of Reid & McCarthy if 20 years from now Romney releases his tax returns and Reid’s found to be correct. Until then, would you mind NOT slandering the good name of those on our side?

RationalIcthus on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

How did he obtain student loans?

The same way everyone does, he applied for them. Jesus.

How did he get on Harvard Law Review while never writing a Law Review article?

This is the one time I’ll agree with you folks. That is some obvious liberal guilt. What can you say, its Harvard…

Why did he remain only as an adjunct law professor at Chicago Law for 12 years?

Because

he never write an article on Constitutional law during that time.

Why did he resign his Illinois bar card and what were the details of the accusations against him?

Lies, fairy tales and fallacies. Both Michelle and Barack changed their bar status to “inactive” because they weren’t working as practicing lawyers. This avoids bar requirements like fees and continuing legal education and lots of people (including my father) do it.

Why did he say in his publisher’s bio that he was “Kenyan born” and if that was an error, why did he let the error continue for 16 years?

Maybe he didn’t notice it, maybe he thought it added flavor, maybe he didn’t care.

How did he structure his land deal with Tony Rezko?

Who is Harrison J Bounel, someone Obama says he never knew but whose name appeared on the title to Obama’s Chicago home?

I know nothing about the documents relating to any other Presidential candidate’s home purchases…why should I know anything about Obama’s?

Why does Obama have a Social Security card with a Connecticut prefix and how did he get it?

You know Obama’s social security number? I doubt it.

Where are Obama’s selective service records?

http://wiki.birtherdebunkers.net/index.php?title=President_Obama's_Selective_Service_Registration#Rumor_Two:_.22Obama.27s_draft_registration_was_falsified..22

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

BWAHAHAH… That’s actually kind of funny, since the one person that the POTUS cannot issue a pardon to, is himself.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM

That argument can be made, but there is no legal precedent to support it. It is legally undefined territory since the Constitution has no such restriction in its language.

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

I have an interest in a President’s college transcripts when they say that they sought out Marxist professors, and when their classmates recall them vehemently arguing for Marxism.

How does one get good grades from Marxist professors? By trashing America. So let’s see Obama’s transcripts and maybe someone in the media can finally ask him at what date did he renounce Marxism and what made him do a 180 and change his mind.

OxyCon on August 7, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Even if Obama took classes from Marxist professors, and even if he got A’s in those classes, what would that prove? Maybe the professor was a generous grader and it was easy to get an A in the course. Maybe Obama’s essays from the class, even if they could be found, were merely descriptive and didn’t state any particular opinion about Marxism. Maybe the professor would be able to point to some prominent conservative who also took his course and also got an A. Or suppose we could see Obama’s transcript, and he took “Advanced Marxist Economics,” but got a C in that class. Obama’s defenders would use that to show that Obama is not a Marxist because he didn’t learn much in the class he took about Marxism.

Let’s face it, there are enough scandals from Obama’s actual presidency to try to focus the public’s attention on, without trying to convince people of the relevance of courses and grades Obama may have had 25 years ago when we don’t even know what those courses and grades were.

J.S.K. on August 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Isn’t fascinating brainfree refuses to tell us what he teaches? What kind of professor doesn’t reveal their course names at the very least?

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:13 PM

I thought I caught that it was something in the Liberal Arts. Political Science? Moron Studies? We can only guess the specifics.

MNHawk on August 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

More importantly, how much were us poor taxpayers forced to pay to “Educate” this fool.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Based solely on the hue of his azz. Obama is the same way. Everything was always gifted to them. They are thugs who commit theft.

Where is Resist We Much today? The good lady needs a shot at this.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:18 PM

another one of Wayne Root’s points is that he, nor many others, even remember Obama being at Columbia during those years. Yeah, I know, big school, lotsa people, but you’d think that there would be some witnesses….or transcripts that he attended.

Although this is certainly a side issue, its important in regards to the president’s honesty and transparency.

ted c on August 7, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Hold on a sec..
Obama spent a bundle to seal his records PRIOR to getting involved in a Presidential campaign ?? Really ?
No way he did that on his own. And no way he didn’t do it to hide something.
He was being coached, prepped and prepared. Clearly.
His own guy Gibbsy put it best. There is no way someone works so hard to hide something unless it is bad news.

Libfreeordie, if the schools are so good about keeping this stuff secret, why the significant effort to go beyond their security ?
If not negative, why the effort at all ?
Obama’s OWN actions beg the question.
Also, has any other presidential candidate taken such measures ?

Jabberwock on August 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM

In a free country this election should be about all of the issues that the government is planning to shove down America’s throat after the election is over during the lame duck. But the government, and both political parties are guilty, are scheming about the really important issues in secret, behind closed doors where voters aren’t welcome, and will not let their plans be known until after the election is over and it’s too late for voters to have a say.

Many of these same people have engaged in insider trading for years and supported the corruption that led to the housing/credit bubble and subsequent crash.

FloatingRock on August 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM

I guess you should ask George Romney that question.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:54 PM

I see that you too were Stupid enough to fall for Harry Reid’s claim when he started this whole Lie. He thought George Romney was still alive too!

A+++

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Ed, Ed, Ed… More McCarthy references? Seriously, Venona proved McCarthy RIGHT. I’ll buy your linkage of Reid & McCarthy if 20 years from now Romney releases his tax returns and Reid’s found to be correct. Until then, would you mind NOT slandering the good name of those on our side?

RationalIcthus on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

The question should be, why does Ed continue to propagate a documented lie whose sole purpose for existing and continuing to be propagated is to protect Marxist’s who have infiltrated the Federal Government of the United States of America.

Is Ed really this deceived, is he stupid? or is there some other reason for him carrying the water of protection for the Marxists?

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I thought I caught that it was something in the Liberal Arts.

MNHawk on August 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I think Liberal Arts covers a very wide range of useless degrees and garbage classes. Exactly which garbage class is he teaching in which useless field?

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Assignments:
Jindal: Columbia records
McDonnell: Harvard records
Portman: Occidental records
Christie: economy
Romney: economy
TBD: Rashid Khalidi tapes

/marching orders (er…um, draft)

ted c on August 7, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

You should know, you degenerate.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Note: People objected yesterday to the use of the word “McCarthyism” in my post, but I use it for two reasons. First, it’s a term that the Left throws out with abandon any time people dissent from their orthodoxy and have the temerity to question their motivations.

Exactly. You are supporting the leftist idiocy and smearing of conservatives. You do the same with the eligibility issue. Face it, you are cowed by leftists and scared to stand up for what is right. Rather, you take whatever the leftists feed you and repeat it using their perverted meaning, because … “it’s a term that the Left throws out”.

Second, it is a clear, concise description that immediately conveys the kind of guilty-until-proven-innocent abuse of power from government officials when it occurs.

Yeah … thanks for supporting the smear on a man who was doing the right thing and was proven correct, even as the left had smeared the living hell out of him. You are doing your best to perpetuate that. And to try to defend yourself (LOL) while doing it.

Sheesh. This ain’t rocket science. It ain’t even model rocket science.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Isn’t fascinating brainfree refuses to tell us what he teaches? What kind of professor doesn’t reveal their course names at the very least?

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:13 PM

I thought I caught that it was something in the Liberal Arts. Political Science? Moron Studies? We can only guess the specifics.

MNHawk on August 7, 2012 at 1:17 PM

He teaches “The historic struggle of the African-American Homosexual against White Supremest Imperialistic Oppression”

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM

This is a point that should have been brought up in 2008. It is nothing more than another distraction from current and more relevant problems, ie.. the Economy. Obama will not be beaten by bringing up his past discretion’s before his Presidency, He can only be beaten by his Presidency.

DDay on August 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM

We know Barky’s college record isn’t exactly stellar. Big deal.

Keep hammering him on the stellar decline he is determined to maintain.

Are you better off than you were 4 years ago? I can’t imagine anyone short of Soros answering that in the affirmative.

CorporatePiggy on August 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM

‘Toon of the Day: “That’s a Good Doggy!”

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/08/toon-of-day-thats-good-doggy.html

M2RB: Morrissey

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:29 PM

I guess you should ask George Romney that question.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:54 PM

What question? The one about him being “brainwashed” in Vietnam?

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Second is that the Obama campaign probably studied what happened to Bush and Gore and took measures to encourage media not to pursue his transcripts, no doubt suggesting that any media outlet who did so would instantly become persona non grata to the campaign.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:00 PM

In other words, you’re not only admitting that the Media has been in bed with O’bama all along (brilliant conclusion!) but that they also actively engaged in a conspiracy to hide the truth about his past from the American people who elected him.

As for “what happened to Bush and Gore” as a result of their transcripts being released, the answer to that question is “nothing”. Neither one won (or lost) vote based on those revelations.

So using your own “logic”,O’bama shouldn’t be afraid to release his college transcripts. What could go wrong?

We both know the answer. There is something in there somewhere that he can’t let become public knowledge.

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Heh, RWM, you appeared as soon as I channeled you :)

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Considering there is no way Obama will agree to this, Romney may as well do it.

Even if he agrees to it, advantage Romney.

I think Romney has nothing to hide other than perfectly legal tax credits, deductions, and capital gains/losses offsets. If Obama wants to make the election a referendum on taxation of capital gains, on a proposal to tax them as ordinary income, so be it. Many wealthy Democrats will not be with him, as they look over their own tax returns and ponder the affect such a tax would have on capital investment and the economy. Even the Chinese commies disagree with Obama on this, as well as all of the democratic socialist paradises in Europe he so admires.

On the other hand, I think Obama definitely has something to hide. Why in the world would someone want to hide their college transcripts? Might they reveal Obama learned absolutely nothing about economics, business, mathematics, and science? Something worse than that?

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Jeebus, Mary, and Joseph. Who cares about his transcripts? What will it show that we do not know? His transcripts are an ideological fight between hot air and the huffington post. The undecideds don’t care. So stop already.

Obama already has Romney’s returns and already has his attacks ready. He needs Romney to release them so as not to reveal the criminality of having Romney’s returns.

If any o e has the stones this tax return nonsense can end real quick. Use Axelrod’s favorite tactic against him. Vera Baker, that name shuts this down and fast.

Theworldisnotenough on August 7, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Romney needs to stay on track with the economy/jobs.

KenInIL on August 7, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Absolutely right!

To paraphrase Jane Austen–”….our surest way of disappointing..will
be to [say] nothing about it.”

EL on August 7, 2012 at 1:32 PM

What question? The one about him being “brainwashed” in Vietnam?

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:30 PM

No, the one about his friendship with Alynski.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:32 PM

I see a lot of people in this thread who are ignorant about history. Venona proved many of McCarthy’s accusations were wrong, not right. McCarthy was a deeply evil man.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Specifically, McCarthy smeared people as Communists or Communist sympathizers when he didn’t have evidence to back up those claims, then demanded that they prove themselves innocent rather than him proving their guilt. It was a despicable tactic then, and it’s a despicable tactic now. No one should waste time trying to rehabilitate McCarthy.

This is a flat out lie Ed, and you, who make the assertion of being a honest legitimate journalist should be ashamed of yourself for repeating it.

Senator Joesph McCarty did not make one single accusation that he did not have evidence to corroborate. Just as important is the indisputable fact that Senator McCarthy’s documented evidence came from the State Department and the FBI is the fact that the Verona Papers independently verified that all 59 individuals identified by Senator McCarthy were in fact either soviet moles or members of the Communist Party.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Foreign Exchange student

John the Libertarian on August 7, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Foreign Exchange student

John the Libertarian on August 7, 2012 at 1:34 PM

One possibility – to have gotten in on the cheap grades from Occidental, cheap fees and etc…not to mention the hue of his azz.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Second is that the Obama campaign probably studied what happened to Bush and Gore and took measures to encourage media not to pursue his transcripts, no doubt suggesting that any media outlet who did so would instantly become persona non grata to the campaign.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:00 PM

LOL. What were they going to do, lock the media offenders in a closet? Kick them off the campaign plane? Refuse to do press conferences?

Barky the Dog-Eating Retard did all those things … and the America-hating marxist press still wrote glowing, BS stories about how much of a genius the guy with an 84 IQ was.

Barky is dumb. Stupid. An idiot of immense proportions. And the MSM willingly did to America what the employees at Pravda had to be threatened into doing for the Soviet Union, because that is how dishonest, stupid, nasty, and nihilistic the Western media (and you and your leftist comrades) have become. And if anyone made any mention of any of this, you, the Indonesian Canine Connoisseur, and the depraved MSM would just launch into screams of “raaaacists!!!!” which served to scare people like ed and allah into submission.

You are despicable, lying scumbags and everyone knows it. You know it. I know it. We all know it.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 1:38 PM

We both know the answer. There is something in there somewhere that he can’t let become public knowledge.

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Exactly.
What is so damaging to the one that he has gone to great lengths to hide??????

Inquiring minds and all that.

D-fusit on August 7, 2012 at 1:39 PM

He teaches “The historic struggle of the African-American Homosexual against White Supremest Imperialistic Oppression”

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Seems rather incomplete. What about the historic struggle of African-American Homosexuals against African-Americans? I here getting out of The Hood alive is the most dangerous thing an African-American homosexual will ever have to face.

White people were the highest proportion of hate violence offenders: Where offender race was known, white offenders made up 41.5% of total offenders, black offenders comprised of 35.3% of offenders, and Latina/o offenders comprised 14.6% of total offenders.

Please note whites make up 72.4% of the population, while blacks make up 12.6%. Even in this report the authors stick their heads in the sand when it becomes clear who is committing most of the violence per capita.

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Just got in for lunch, have read all…4 pages of replies so I’ll just throw my two cents in:

While I’d support a quid pro quo of transcripts for tax returns, that’s not where the true gold is.

Romney should go do a press conference, and state that he will release his tax returns the moment Issa verifies that Obama has released every single page of Fast & Furious documents.

To stir the pot a bit more, have Terry’s family on stage with him and also add the caveat that Holder’s resignation should be in there as well.

Rogue on August 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Your beef is with media coverage from 2008. Just because the media went overboard in the Obama love in 2008 doesn’t mean Obama has a higher burden of disclosure than other candidates.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:51 PM

But Romney does? Just because the media foisted this intellectual lightweight on us in 2008 does not mean we should accept it to extend his job when his contract is up in November. We are just trying to do the job the media won’t do. Maybe we should import some Mexicans, maybe they can help us get answers to our questions!
What is Obama hiding?

Night Owl on August 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM

I guess you should ask George Romney that question.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:54 PM

What’s next? We should dig up Ted Kennedy and ask him about Obama? Or dig up Davis and ask him about Obama? You really are pushing the envelope for no good reason.

Deanna on August 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Correction: have not read

Rogue on August 7, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Why does it matter more than jobs reports?

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM

And I want to see Barky’s SAT and LSAT scores. Let his 400 math score (and 920 total score, at best) on the SAT and pathetically low LSAT sink in for those who know these things. Affirmative Action squared and AMerica screwed cubed by the MSM and the despicable, lying scumbag left who thrust a semi-functional America-hating ineligible retard on America and told lie after lie to divert from their clear attempt to destroy this nation (which is just about complete, now).

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM

This is great, we can’t even get the real birth certificate from Obama but they are making a huge noise about Romney tax returns.

Axion on August 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Mitt,

Don’t release anything until you are ready…if at all. Everyone knows that the Romneys are very well-off financially and no one in their right mind(pun intended) would think that they could even remotely get by with paying no tax. They’re not GE.

Releasing tax returns in response to a threat from Reid will not make anyone change their vote so why bother. Let the dems get all foamy at the mouth over this issue and we’ll continue to hammer them on verifiable facts.

JetBlast on August 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Why would Obama’s college records be of interest?
My guess is they are a piece of the puzzle linking him to Ayres.
Ayres and Obama were in close proximity while Obama was at Columbia, and their times at Columbia overlapped.
http://www.billwarnerpi.com/2008/10/barack-obama-bill-ayers-and-bernardine.html
The overlaps between the Obamas and Ayres/Dohrn are an amazing string of “coincidences” but I doubt anything more will come of this without a smoking gun and the cooperation of the mainstream media.
Better stick to the economy.

topdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM

How did he get on Harvard Law Review while never writing a Law Review article?

He wrote one “note” and it was UNSIGNED.

TORT LAW – PRENATAL INJURIES – SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS REFUSES TO RECOGNIZE CAUSE OF ACTION BROUGHT BY FETUS AGAINST ITS MOTHER FOR UNINTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF PRENATAL INJURIES

103 Harv. L. Rev. 823 (1989 – 1990)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/15458710/Barack-Obamas-Harvard-Law-Review-Student-Case-Comment

In 2008, the Obama campaign swiftly confirmed Obama’s authorship of the fetal rights note in the HLR and also provided a statement on Harvard Law Review letterhead confirming that the unsigned piece was Obama’s – the only record of the anonymous authors is kept in the office of the Review president – and that records showed it was the only piece he’d written for the Review.

It is highly unusual for the President of such a prestigious review such as HLR to only write one entry…and leave it unsigned.

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM

awww are their liberal feelings hurt? Tough $hit. The truth hurts sometimes.

Update: A couple of commenters are angry with me for using the term “McCarthyism,” claiming that the communist infiltration that Joe McCarthy claimed turned out to be real.

TX-96 on August 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Just as important is the indisputable fact that Senator McCarthy’s documented evidence came from the State Department and the FBI is the fact that the Verona Papers independently verified that all 59 individuals identified by Senator McCarthy were in fact either soviet moles or members of the Communist Party.

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM

From 1950-1952 alone, McCarthy publicly accused 159 people (does not even include his wild Army hearings). Evidence shows that only 9 of those 159 were working for the Soviets. The FBI already knew about 5 of the 9. Which means McCarthy’s real record during those two years is 154 new accusations, only 4 of which were correct.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 1:44 PM

I think Romney has nothing to hide other than perfectly legal tax credits, deductions, and capital gains/losses offsets.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Just calling attention to Mitt’s adjusted gross income numbers in the eight-figure range would do sufficient damage to cause him problems. Not to mention that any wrongdoing by any company Mitt listed as having invested in would be imputed to Mitt. (Imagine hearing something like this: “Romney invested in the XYZ Corporation, which was founded by the great-grandson of a Nazi and the great-great-granddaughter of a slaveholder. How will he explain his ties to Nazism and slavery? No wonder he was reluctant to release his tax returns that prove his investment.”)

J.S.K. on August 7, 2012 at 1:44 PM

You know, most every job I ever applied for asked for my college transcript. None of them ever asked for my tax returns. Just sayin’ .

DuctTapeMyBrain on August 7, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I thought everybody took 1040s to job interviews…

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:45 PM

I should clarify that “XYZ Corporation” was meant to be a fictional corporation, not a reference to any actual company with a name like that.

J.S.K. on August 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Such charlatanry needs to be beaten with incontestable numbers and mocked out of town, so as to never, ever, repeat. The land will prove her current level of decency in Nov.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM

2. Obama brilliant? I don’t know about that. I would say he’s a very intelligent man and a better than average writer. But brilliant? James Baldwin was brilliant, Toni Morrison is brilliant, Adolph Reed is brilliant, Paul Gilroy is brilliant, Patricial Williams is brilliant etc. etc. That’s not a word I use lightly.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Wait, you think he wrote those books? LOL

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Robert Gibbs said if you don’t release something then you’re hiding something bad….Obama’s grade must be horrible.

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:49 PM

No, the one about his friendship with Alynski.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Alinsky and George Romney once met to discuss the racial turmoil engulfing Michigan’s largest city, according to the book “Romney’s Way” by journalist T. George Harris.

I think you ought to listen to Alinsky,” Romney told his reluctant white friends. “It seems to me that we are always talking to the same people. Maybe the time has come to hear new voices.” Said an Episcopal bishop, “He made Alinsky sound like a Republican.”

“I think you ought to listen to Alinsky,” George Romney, a member of the GOP’s liberal wing and an unsuccessful presidential candidate, told his political allies in the wake of 1967’s devastating race riots in Detroit.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/24/when-saul-alinsky-met-george-romney/

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Romney should go do a press conference, and state that he will release his tax returns the moment Issa verifies that Obama has released every single page of Fast & Furious documents.

To stir the pot a bit more, have Terry’s family on stage with him and also add the caveat that Holder’s resignation should be in there as well.

Rogue on August 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM

I could go along with this.

Obama will never agree to the deal.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM

But why are the college records, of a 51 year old President of the United States, so important to keep secret? I think I know the answer.

If anyone should have questions about Obama’s record at Columbia University, it’s me. We both graduated (according to Obama) Columbia University, Class of ’83. We were both (according to Obama) Pre-Law and Political Science majors. And I thought I knew most everyone at Columbia. I certainly thought I’d heard of all of my fellow Political Science majors. But not Obama (or as he was known then- Barry Soetoro). I never met him. Never saw him. Never even heard of him. And none of the classmates that I knew at Columbia has ever met him, saw him, or heard of him.

But don’t take my word for it. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2008 that Fox News randomly called 400 of our Columbia classmates and never found one who had ever met Obama.

J_Crater on August 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Robert Gibbs said if you don’t release something then you’re hiding something bad….Obama’s grade must be horrible.

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 1:49 PM

He got all check pluses for effort and continuing improvement. That’s all that matters.

NotCoach on August 7, 2012 at 1:58 PM

If I believed Team Mittens was Machiavellian enough to “rope a dope” Obama onto releasing his college records buy sucking him with a fake “dodged his taxes” set up I’d send them a hundred bucks.

Bruno Strozek on August 7, 2012 at 2:02 PM

The right way to deal with this is to adopt a form of Reagan’s famous line “There they go again, throwing mud so they don’t have to talk about this disastrous economic policies”.

happi on August 7, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I could go along with this.

Obama will never agree to the deal.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM

That’s fine, puts Obama on the defensive and Romney and every surrogate and can respond to each tax return demand with, “The ball is in Obama’s court. What’s he hiding in those F&F docs? After all, as Robert Gibbs said, you only refuse to release things if you’re hiding something. The American people deserve to know what role Obama, Holder et al had in this illegal gun running operation that resulted in the death of Officer Terry…etc etc etc.”

Rogue on August 7, 2012 at 2:04 PM

I’m thinking it was a foreign exchange student issue as well. Obama could clear it up if he goes to Kinko’s and prints out some copies.

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 2:05 PM

They should have an ad with Robert Gibbs saying if you don’t release information then it’s really really bad with all the stuff Obama is hiding.

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 2:06 PM

$5 Trillion. Let’s try to focus.

applebutter on August 7, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Over to you, Bill Whittle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXEoQJ7ZMZs

Stu Gotts on August 7, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Let Trump demand the college records – Trump gets results.

jan3 on August 7, 2012 at 2:13 PM

I should clarify that “XYZ Corporation” was meant to be a fictional corporation, not a reference to any actual company with a name like that.

J.S.K. on August 7, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I knew what you meant. And agree about why the Dems want his returns. They want to do a public Marxist socialist morality audit on them and beat that drum up until the election.

That drum might get worn out and start sounding hollow fairly quickly. Obama will already get about 99% of the class envy vote and all of the socialist vote. But most Independents are not class warfare socialists. If they were they would not be Independents. They would be Democrats, and they would have become Democrats long ago.

Even so, as I noted, I very much doubt Obama would take the deal because I think he has something to hide that could seriously affect his electability while Romney would only be subjected to more of the same he has already been getting, and will likely continue to get the next 90 days with or without more tax returns.

Team Socialism’s campaign strategy is pretty obvious. They must destroy Romney as an evil greedy privileged capitalist, one of “those people” responsible for all that is wrong with America. They having nothing else. Even if “only” 49% of the American electorate buys this there is not much hope for the Republic.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Thanks RWM.

But, even more important, is the fact that nothing matters more in this election than the economy. Owning up to smaller missteps such as these won’t really matter like they did in Lindsay’s day. This time around, the big issue is the economy and why it isn’t improving. But Obama can’t possibly admit any real economic mistakes or it could spell political suicide. It’s Obama’s misfortune that a relatively minor transgression, like guessing wrong about the weather, won’t be enough to impact voters. The electorate often seems willing to give a “we’re all human” pass to a public official, provided the mistake isn’t egregious enough. But today, given the all-consuming economy issue, voters just don’t care much about those minor mistakes.

“It’s the economy” for all the stupid. It always will be.

Schadenfreude on August 7, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I could go along with this.

Obama will never agree to the deal.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Screw the deal. Mitt doesn’t have to release any of this stuff. Barky still has to release something to try and prove that he’s even eligible for the job and he owes America the rest from 2008. Mitt should not release any more records but he should be pounding the Indonesian Imbecile to release every little bit that he should have been forced to do 4 years ago.

No deals with Barky, who is the most untrustworthy, lying, despicable piece of sh!t to ever even come close the White House and the only AMerica-hater ever allowed there (Carter developed his intense disdain of our nation in his post-Presidency). He wasn’t eligible to be there now and he’s not eligible to run again. He needs to release all of the relevant records without having any right to demand anything of anyone else, other than documents that establish Mitt’s eligibility, which is not in question in any way.

But, no deals with Barky. He is not a person who can be bargained with in good faith and he should be treated commensurate with that understanding. No deals with liars.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 2:14 PM

But, even more important, is the fact that nothing matters more in this election than the economy.

Incorrect. The Constitution is what matters, not the state of the economy. We are not a Democracy. Even if this economy were great we would still have the same existential problems facing this nation. The economy is a side-issue. And important and relevant one, but a side issue at best. The nature of governance is the real story and whether America will be restored or whether we will be sentenced to continue as the American Socialist Superstate that we have turned into.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 2:19 PM

In addition to his college transcripts, Romney should demand the executive privilege be dropped on the Fast and Furious case, too and all documents that Congress has been demanding for two years be turned over. He should demand transparency from the President, just like he has demanded from him.

djaymick on August 7, 2012 at 2:25 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Obama won’t agree to any deal on anything.

The only reason for proposing any kind of tongue-in-cheek deal on anything is to shift the spotlight and highlight Obama’s hypocrisy, point out Obama is only trying to distract the electorate, draw a line in the sand, subsequently refuse to address the tax return issue any further, and then quickly return to emphasizing the economy, jobs, the deficit, and the debt.

Mitt is already trying to do this without offering a deal. I’ll defer to Team Romney’s judgement on this.

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Ed,

On McCarthy: Ann Coulter did a fine job of “rehabilitating” Joe McCarthy in her book Treason. In fact, she had a whole heck-of-a-lot more evidence than you have put forward.

Cary on August 7, 2012 at 2:28 PM

The Great Pretender: Have You Ever Seen A President Go To Such Great Lengths To Not Put Something Out?

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/08/have-you-ever-seen-president-go-to-such.html

M2RB – Queen

Resist We Much on August 7, 2012 at 2:29 PM

farsighted on August 7, 2012 at 2:26 PM

I’m with you.

I like what Trump and Root are trying to do but they are wrong in looking for some quid pro quo, especially from Barky, a guy who has never dealt in good faith in his whole miserable life.

In 2008 Root offered $10,000 for these docs from Barky and claimed that he would match his LSATs and grades against Barky’s (while Root got rejected by Harvard Lawn School). It never went anywhere.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 7, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Jay Carney already said the President is focused on issues that matter to the American people so why is this an issue if the President admits it’s not one?

Wagthatdog on August 7, 2012 at 2:34 PM

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 1:33 PM

From 1950-1952 alone, McCarthy publicly accused 159 people (does not even include his wild Army hearings). Evidence shows that only 9 of those 159 were working for the Soviets. The FBI already knew about 5 of the 9. Which means McCarthy’s real record during those two years is 154 new accusations, only 4 of which were correct.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 1:44 PM

You are so utterly full of shiite. McCarthy didn’t accuse them of working for the Soviets, he asserted that they were National Security Risk’s and all evidence available today proves he was right.

Now pay very careful attention because I don’t want this going over your head, or you ignoring it because it obliterates the lies you so deeply cherish.

VENONA files

In 1995, when the VENONA transcripts were declassified, further detailed information was revealed about Soviet espionage in the United States. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was among only a handful of people in the U.S. Government who was aware of the Venona project, and there is no indication whatsoever Hoover shared Venona information with McCarthy. In fact, Hoover may have actually fed McCarthy disinformation, or dead end files, in an effort to put pressure on relatives, friends, or close associates of real Venona suspects by threatening to reveal embarrassing information about them in a public forum if they failed to cooperate and reveal what they might have known about someone’s else’s activities and associations. [24][25] And there is no indication McCarthy might have known he was being used by Hoover in this way.

On February 7, 1950, three days before McCarthy’s acclaimed Wheeling West Virginia speech, Hoover testified before House Appropriations Committee that counterespionage requires “an objective different from the handling of criminal cases. It is more important to ascertain his contacts, his objectives, his sources of information and his methods of communication” as “arrest and public disclosure are steps to be taken only as a matter of last resort.” He concluded that “we can be secure only when we have a full knowledge of the operations of an espionage network, because then we are in a position to render their efforts ineffective.” [26]

McCarthy is said to have made the claim, “I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party.” The famous “List”, as it has come to be known, has always engendered much controversy. The figure of 205 appears to have come from an oral briefing McCarthy had with Hoover regarding espionage suspects the FBI was then investigating. The FBI had discovered on its own five Soviet agents operating in the United States during World War II; defector Elizabeth Bentley further added another 81 known identities of espionage agents; Venona materials had provided the balance, and by the time a full accounting of true name identities was compiled in an FBI memo in 1957, one more subject had been added to the number, now totaling 206. [27]

Much confusion has always surrounded the subject. While the closely guarded FBI/Venona information of identified espionage agents uses the number of 206, McCarthy in his Wheeling speech only referred to Communist Party membership and other security risks, and not espionage activity. Being a security risk as a CPUSA member does not necessarily entail or imply that a person was or is actively involved in espionage activity. Venona materials indicated a very large number of espionage agents remained unidentified by the FBI. When McCarthy was questioned on the number, he referred to the Lee List of security risks, by which it appears Hoover was attempting to match unidentified code names to known security risks. Hoover kept the identities of persons known to be involved in espionage activity from Venona evidence secret. Hoover in the very early days of the FBI’s joint investigation with the Army Signals Intelligence Service in May of 1946 did precisely the same deception with a confidant of President Truman using Venona decryptions. Hoover reported that a reliable source revealed “an enormous Soviet espionage ring in Washington.” Of some fourteen names, Soviet agents Alger Hiss and Nathan Gregory Silvermaster were listed well down the list. The name at the top was “Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson” and included others beyond reproach, thus discrediting the Hiss and Silvermaster accusations, which actually were on target. Hence the Truman White House always suspected Hoover and the FBI of playing partisan political games with accusations of various administration members’ complicity in Soviet espionage. [28][29]

The Venona project specifically references at least 349 pseudonyms in the United States—including citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents—who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies, however not all were ever identified. In public hearings before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) conducted by McCarthy, 83 persons plead the fifth amendment right against self incrimination. An additional 9 persons refused to testify on constitutional grounds in private hearings, and their names were not made public. [30] Of the 83 persons pleading the fifth amendment, several have been identified by NSA and FBI as agents of the Soviet Union in the Venona project involved in espionage. Several prominent examples are:

SWalker on August 7, 2012 at 2:39 PM

No one knew him at Columbia? Even his own roomate?

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM

No one should waste time trying to rehabilitate Bush Palin McCarthy.

It is a lot of effort, and well, if a liberal talking point has become received wisdom in the lamestream media (!)…Bush fought the wrong war in Iraq, waterboarding is torture, Palin is a quitter, etc., etc… then you’re just wasting your time and effort to correct it. Liberals control the media, so why bother?

Sigh.

sauldalinsky on August 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM

No one knew him at Columbia? Even his own roomate?

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Which one?

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 2:43 PM

NO.

Would you even trust anything coming out of the Obama camp?

No.

so-notbuyingit on August 7, 2012 at 2:44 PM

http://thekansascitian.blogspot.com/2011/11/barack-obama-accused-by-two-men-of.html

Larry Sinclair and cocaine in State Senate

lilium479 on August 7, 2012 at 2:50 PM

While there’s still time for it to gain traction, why not start calling Reid and his followers “taxers”. Then, anytime they say anything, or make a demand to see Romney’s returns, we can just laugh them away.
Romney’s provided the required disclosure documents. These people are just fishing because their OWS strategy backfired. They should be called out for what they are…fools.

Kenz on August 7, 2012 at 2:53 PM

No one knew him at Columbia? Even his own roomate?

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Which one?

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Let me guess – the roommate was a composite, too?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on August 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts. libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Explains why you’re a democrat. You can be fascinated as you read their desperate fund raisers.

Akzed on August 7, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Romney would do better to make that a throwaway line on a televised interview, not call a press conference about only that.

CNN: [middle or end of interview] “So what’s the deal with these tax returns? Why don’t you want to release them?”

Romney: “You know, ten year old tax returns aren’t going to help get this country back on track. I know what we need to do to get people working again and that’s what I want to talk about. All the rest of this is just a sideshow. But, hey, if he’s so interested in my tax returns, maybe he should release some college transcripts. I would if he would.” [chuckle]

alwaysfiredup on August 7, 2012 at 3:05 PM

How did he structure his land deal with Tony Rezko?
Who is Harrison J Bounel, someone Obama says he never knew but whose name appeared on the title to Obama’s Chicago home?

I know nothing about the documents relating to any other Presidential candidate’s home purchases…why should I know anything about Obama’s?

Why does Obama have a Social Security card with a Connecticut prefix and how did he get it?

You know Obama’s social security number? I doubt it.

Where are Obama’s selective service records?

http://wiki.birtherdebunkers.net/index.php?title=President_Obama's_Selective_Service_Registration#Rumor_Two:_.22Obama.27s_draft_registration_was_falsified..22

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Just gotta love them libs They have a knack for missing the details while painting unicorns that don’t exist

It was temping to take on all the comments but the last few just screamed to be tinkered with.

Who is Harrison J Bounel? Good question. What do we know about him? He appeared on Obama’s deed to his house and paid taxes. A background check shows he is related or married to Michelle Obama, and Michelle is said to be related, or married to Harrison J Bounel. Hummm. Interesting is the fact that shortly after that became public knowledge, Harrison J Bounel “disappeared” from the deed records. What is interesting is that it did since it should not have been possible and is illegal at best. It does appear that our president has an alias under another name, or Michelle has some explain’n about how she has a relative that she never met or knew who helped her buy their house with the help of a career criminal.

As to why you don’t know anything about this might be because it could not be explained or spun, it was damaging, and in liberal land that means it never happened or is not worthy of attention, or its best to pretend it was just a fabrication.

He does have a social security card with a Connecticut prefix. We have all seen it and the documentation is not hard to find, and it is not denied, or by most people anyway.

The question is how a 16 year old boy, assuming he did get it when he began working for the ice cream shop in Hawaii, get a card from his local state social security office with a number meant for someone in Connecticut? If his is like mine that was issued in Florida, they were pre-numbered in a stack and they just typed in my name when it was assigned to me. Has anyone else managed to get one from Connecticut who lived in Hawaii? You have to have a birth certificate to get it, but his seems to be lost in the state records … for some odd reason. There is no logical explanation for why he has that number and there have been attempts to justify it that failed, which tends to mean the question has no defense, other than to say it was obtained fraudulently.

This one is the icing on the cake so to speak. Look at the link first. “birtherdebunkers”. If you want to jump up and scream birther, go ahead, but first you must answer just a few questions the released certification of live birth raised. I will dispense with the moveable text since that was an honest mistake under the gun to get it done, and he forgot that last detail. Anyway the average person with eye balls cannot see the layers and register stamp being moved around unless they have a program that allows editing of layers.
Let’s go to the fact that two or three dozen different type writers were used to “type” this document. Those who have never used a typewriter might assume that like, the “typewriter” font which is always the same on any computer is the same on any type writer. They are not, not even with the same make and brand as just the process of soldering the type on the arm creates different angles and spacing. The type heads are engraved by individuals so even a letter of the same type style is different from those engraved by another individual. The COLB is filled with examples of different fonts and styles from various typewriters. It is clear that the creator of the document thought all he had to do was use period documents to avoid the problem that Dan Rather ran into. Mixing the letters from more than one word would insure that there would never be a perfedt match from one of the source documents. One last thought on this; if you have ever used a type writer you know that you can never get the type to realign correctly on the line and spacing from the next letter, unless you are really really and really good, every time. Just imagine that individual running around the office to each type writer, typing just one or two letters, then moving on to the next one. Of course that was what they all did, right? Explain that and you have a bonifide COLB.Then our eyeballs can see the line where the page curves, the line on the page curves, but opps, someone forgot to curve the typed text. Maybe someone forgot to lock the roller so the paper would not slip and it really is curving down on the original so it just looks that way on the “copy”. A look at the original would solve that problem, if they could find it.There are tons more and the fact that it has been totally reproduced right down to the same mis-match of fonts from other documents, and other birth records. Only the date stamp was changed so it could be distinguished from the original released created copy.

Now for that service record question. It is obvious that liberals don’t pay much attention to details and right there in clear detail is the date stamp. Every young man who got a filled out the card has a stamp with the full year shown in the stamp, except Obama. Really strange especially since it mysteriously looks just like a the 08 cut off a 2008 and turned upside down. If you notice there is a slight difference in the size of the top and bottom of an 8, they apparently hoped that this one was close enough that no one would notice.

My how the list goes on with the odd things that seem to have only happened to Obama and his records and no one else.

Franklyn on August 7, 2012 at 3:08 PM

No one knew him at Columbia? Even his own roomate?

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Which one?

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Let me guess – the roommate was a composite, too?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on August 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Well, there were apparently at least 2 of them.

Sohale Siddiqi is identified as “Sadik” in Obama’s memoir, Dreams From My Father, and is described as “a short, well-built Pakistani” who smoked marijuana, snorted cocaine and liked to party. Siddiqi was from Karachi, Pakistan, and Obama’s roommate when he attended Columbia University. Siddiqi was not a student at Columbia and became an illegal having over stay his tourist visa.

Phil Boerner

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/recollections-of-obamas-ex-roommate/

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 3:13 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

So you can learn to be better at it in the event that one day you won’t embarrass yourself so easily?

kim roy on August 7, 2012 at 3:14 PM

You are so utterly full of shiite. McCarthy didn’t accuse them of working for the Soviets, he asserted that they were National Security Risk’s and all evidence available today proves he was right

Oh, a Conservapedia siting. Would be like me using Wikipedia to prove a point except that Conservapedia has even lower standards for editing.

McCarthy publicly accused them of working to undermine the U.S. government in support of Soviet communism, at times even falsifying FBI statements about people to justify his charges. Of the 159 names, only nine appear in VENONA. You refer to “all evidence available today” but are unable to provide any to support McCarthy’s charges, while the real evidence is that the vast majority of McCarthy’s accusations were just plain false. Here’s a list of people and whether VENONA proves their guilt. Note that almost all have “not identified in VENONA” next to them.

http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page62.html

Everyone knew that there were Soviet spies in America in the 1940s and 1950s. The U.S. had spies in the Soviet Union too. We were enemies. VENONA confirms that there indeed were Soviet spies (which is as shocking as confirming that water is wet or fire is hot), and also confirms that McCarthy smeared a lot of innocent people based on flimsy evidence, or even no evidence at all.

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 3:16 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

That is funny coming from an Obama supporter.

Terrye on August 7, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Ed,

On McCarthy: Ann Coulter did a fine job of “rehabilitating” Joe McCarthy in her book Treason. In fact, she had a whole heck-of-a-lot more evidence than you have put forward.

Cary on August 7, 2012 at 2:28 PM

The thing that got McCarthy in trouble was the statement that he had in his hand a list of 205 names of known communists at the State Department, he did not.

Needless to say there were always moles, spies and traitors, but McCarthy went too far and in the process he hurt a lot of people who were not communists at all.

Terrye on August 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM

The REAL story of Joe McCarthy from a conservative site.

http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/mccarthy-conservatives/2008/04/07/id/323380

AngusMc on August 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Del Dolemonte on August 7, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Is ANYTHING about O’Butthead’s past real? Anything at all – of course, besides all the stuff he and his willing press accomplices don’t want us to know?

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on August 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM

The thing is even if Romney released those records, the Obama campaign would be as honest about what is in those returns as they are about everything else…meaning, they would lie, distort and confuse the issue and Romney would have to explain page after page after page of returns…all Obama wants to do is change the subject from his own sorry ass record.

Terrye on August 7, 2012 at 3:25 PM

I am fascinated at people’s total willingness to lie and twist facts.

libfreeordie on August 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Oh, sweet irony :)….

jimver on August 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5