Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 1:41 PM ET, 02/15/2011

Birthers love Sarah Palin far more than any other 2012 GOP hopeful

By Greg Sargent

The new poll from the Dem firm Public Policy Polling finds that a majority of likely GOP primary voters falsely believe Obama wasn't born in the United States. But this breakdown of their attitudes towards Sarah Palin is of particular interest:

A 51% majority of national GOP primary voters erroneously think President Obama was not born in the U.S. 28% know that he was. With the latter, Palin's favorability rating is 41-52 -- other than Ron Paul, the only candidate these voters view negatively. But with birthers, she has a soaring 83-12, far higher than for any of the others.

Birthers like Palin more than all the other 2012 GOP hopefuls to an overwhelming degree. And she is the only 2012 hopeful aside from Ron Paul who is viewed negatively by Republicans who know the President was born in America. I'd say this tells us a lot about the secret to Palin's appeal and about who she appeals to.

Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin report today that polls show Palin trailing significantly among GOP primary voters in early-voting states, folks who tend to take their role in picking a presidential nominee rather seriously. As Smith and Martin speculate, this suggests that Palin's general popularity among GOP primary voters -- which remains very high -- is rooted less in a desire to see her elected to a position of awesome responsibility and more in her ability to give voice to their contempt for Democrats.

That intepretation is supported by the above polling, presuming it's accurate. It seems fair to speculate that the success of Palin's approach -- her grievance-mongering, her strident attacks on Obama, her virtuosity in crafting the most lurid formulations to paint Obama as an alternately weak and tyrannical figure -- is rooted in her unique ability to speak directly to the far right wing base's seething underbelly of anti-Obama hatred.

This has enabled her to tighten her emotional grip on her legions of fervent supporters. But Republicans who are informed enough to know that the president is American and who aren't suffering from the most full-blown varieties of Obama Derangement Syndrome are well aware that she's bad news.

By Greg Sargent  | February 15, 2011; 1:41 PM ET
Categories:  2012  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: South Dakota legislator defends bill to make killing to defend fetuses a "justifiable homicide"
Next: The Leonard Lance saga, ctd.

Comments

"For all the press coverage she receives, Palin is not the GOP's frontrunner."

"Take note, assignment editors. What else is happening?"

Posted by: sbj3 | February 15, 2011 1:47 PM | Report abuse

...seething underbelly of anti-Obama hatred...

When you have a slow news day, I am glad you have fun with your writing.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 15, 2011 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Careful of the flood of birthers. They just invaded TMP lol.

It's like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, only more scary because the birthers are real.

I honestly think Obama and the Dems let this carry on to marginalize the crazies and those that won't denounce them to non partisan independent voters that are looking at these crazies and not wanting anything to do with them, to include being in the same voting block.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | February 15, 2011 1:49 PM | Report abuse

TMP = TPM.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | February 15, 2011 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Well, of course the birthers love Sarah best, because she is the looniest. But none of the rest of the R candidates are far behind.

Rand Paul even beats her on certain counts.

Posted by: fiona5 | February 15, 2011 1:50 PM | Report abuse

I'll just repeat what I said on the TPM post regarding the birtherism.

Honestly, how are you going to argue against a group of people that don't believe dinosaurs existed millions of years ago.

No matter what evidence is shown, they'll rely on their faith of whatever it is they want to believe.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | February 15, 2011 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Morons

...will always be among us.

Posted by: CalD | February 15, 2011 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Mike,according to recent polling, 50% --HALF -- of the gop base thinks Obama is a Muslim. These birthers are completely mainstream in the base, which has been driven insane by the fact that we have a black president and have to find a way to delegitimize him.

Posted by: fiona5 | February 15, 2011 1:56 PM | Report abuse

@shrink2 "...seething underbelly of anti-Obama hatred...

When you have a slow news day, I am glad you have fun with your writing."

It was either this, or another post about how the formulation of Obama moving to the center was wrong.

For something a little more interesting, check out Paul Krugman's take on the San Francisco Fed's contention that 6 - 7% unemployment could be the new natural rate of unemployment, which I think could well be accurate, absent another bubble.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/a-rising-natural-rate/

Posted by: jnc4p | February 15, 2011 1:58 PM | Report abuse

"Honestly, how are you going to argue against a group of people that don't believe dinosaurs existed millions of years ago."

The Flinstones was a documentary, dontcha know. Have a yabba-dabba good time!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 15, 2011 1:59 PM | Report abuse

For the future of theocracy, look to Iran for an illustration.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 15, 2011 2:05 PM | Report abuse

birthers, tea partiers, all those who believe he is a muslim - are all part of the "seething underbelly of anti-obama hatred". and those who know better but like to perpetuate and exploit these lies - such as boehner, cantor, limbaugh, palin, etc - are void of eithics and/or any moral decency whatsoever. the "real american" believers are just too stupid to know better - the others, the gop "leaders", are truly disgusting.

Posted by: ebproducer | February 15, 2011 2:05 PM | Report abuse

"Seething underbelly" pretty much nails it and is fun to read.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | February 15, 2011 2:09 PM | Report abuse

"I'd say this tells us a lot about the secret to Palin's appeal and about who she appeals to...."

I'd say you're full of 19 kinds of sh*t, and you STILL don't have a clue about Palin's appeal or who she appeals to.

Silly libs. Silly little, snot-nosed, stunted-growth libs. You lie, you cheat, you obfuscate, you browbeat, and still you are unable to convince anyone to move over to your side.

CONSERVATIVES = 40%
INDEPENDENTS = 36%
LIBERALS = 20%

The cyclone that is brewing for November, 2012 is going to make the Democrat shellacking of November, 2010 look like a phart in a hailstorm.

Posted by: QuineGeology | February 15, 2011 2:10 PM | Report abuse

jnc, "structural" or "natural" unemployment is a huge topic; unlike most socialists (and Krugman) for example I don't think make-work jobs, which is the idealized view of what a stimulus does, helps the rate of unemployment. With borrowed money it papers over the problem in the short term and that, for several reasons, tends to exacerbate the problem in the long term. If you want a workers paradise and what socialist doesn't, the work has to be sustainable and meaningful and thereby worth the living wage that is paid. Of the many problems with the old model of socialism, the old joke is, the workers pretended to work and the government pretends to pay them.

Posted by: shrink2 | February 15, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent is, of course, trying to mislead (no surprise there of course).

It's false to say that we know that O was born outside the U.S. *and* it's also false to say that we know he was born in the U.S.

The important part of the last paragraph is *what we know*. Because, we don't really know for sure where it was. While it's highly likely that he was born in the U.S., he has not definitively proven it.

All the forms of evidence he's presented so far are full of holes. For just one example, the announcements don't even list his name and there's no indication of who exactly caused those announcements to appear. They aren't proof.

For yet another example of just how sad the "AntiBirthers" are, I posted a smarts/integrity test for "AntiBirthers" over five months ago. Today, thousands of views later, only one (1) Obama fan has come close to figuring it out:

http://24ahead.com/n/10211

Five months and thousands of views later, only one (1) Obama fan has come close. That indicates a very serious problem.

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | February 15, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse

"These birthers are completely mainstream in the base, which has been driven insane by the fact that we have a black president and have to find a way to delegitimize him."

When all else fails, play the race card. It shuts your opponent down. Good liberal. Good boy. Now roll over. Now play dead.

Posted by: QuineGeology | February 15, 2011 2:16 PM | Report abuse

If over half of the Republican party believes that the President lacks a basic qualification for the office, shouldn't this be a prime topic during upcoming debates?

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | February 15, 2011 2:20 PM | Report abuse

"Falsely believe" Greg? What proof do you have? And why do Democratic polling companies keep bringing this up? Do they really think it helps Mr. Obama? BTW, I thought this fishwrap was in the middle of a "No Sarah, no way!" month...

Posted by: sandbear | February 15, 2011 2:23 PM | Report abuse

She owns the retard bloc.

Posted by: MrChip1 | February 15, 2011 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Funny how reporting on birthers always brings them out of the woodwork. They like any press; good or bad.

If the GOP ends up with Palin as the nominee, they will have FoxNews and the birther nuts to thank.

When you see stuff like this http://mediamatters.org/blog/201102140015 it becomes really hard to pretend that there is no racism involved in the right wing.

Posted by: Alex3 | February 15, 2011 2:24 PM | Report abuse

"I honestly think Obama and the Dems let this carry on to marginalize the crazies and those that won't denounce them to non partisan independent voters that are looking at these crazies and not wanting anything to do with them, to include being in the same voting block."

Mike from Arlington - I think you're on the money here. The crazies, as evidenced by some of the posts here, are going to turn off a Presidential electorate which tends to be a lot more centrist and not full looney tunes. I think Obama wants to encourage them without feeding the flames. The more nutzo Republicans seem, the less likely anyone other than the core FoxNews watchers will vote for them. And that base won't cut it in reality land.

Posted by: Alex3 | February 15, 2011 2:32 PM | Report abuse

QuineGeology and sandbear, I agree 100% with what you've posted, but it would be much better to leave the liberals alone to wallow in their hate on this subject. Check out the threads over here instead:

http://24ahead.com/n/10211

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 15, 2011 2:33 PM | Report abuse

sandbear: "And why do Democratic polling companies keep bringing this up? Do they really think it helps Mr. Obama?"

Yeah, it does. With independent and centrist voters. It makes them run far away from you. And that will make you lose the WH in 2012.

------

oldabandonedbeachhouse: "If over half of the Republican party believes that the President lacks a basic qualification for the office, shouldn't this be a prime topic during upcoming debates?"

The post says 51% of GOP PRIMARY VOTERS, not half of the party. Reading skills are good to have.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 15, 2011 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Post suggestion for Greg:

His take on Obama's news conference today:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/15/press-conference-president

I don't believe this statement is factual:

"THE PRESIDENT: On the budget, what my budget does is to put forward some tough choices, some significant spending cuts, so that by the middle of this decade our annual spending will match our annual revenues. We will not be adding more to the national debt. So, to use a -- sort of an analogy that families are familiar with, we're not going to be running up the credit card any more. That's important -- and that's hard to do. But it’s necessary to do. And I think that the American people understand that."

Middle of this decade = 2015.
"our annual spending will match our annual revenues. We will not be adding more to the national debt." = balanced budget.

I don't see any reports that we will have a balanced budget by 2015.

Posted by: jnc4p | February 15, 2011 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Obama's good pal, HI Governor Neil Abercrombie, must be a "birther" too because he told Mike Evans that there is no proof that Obama was born in Hawaii. He should know; he has the power to have the HDOH Director check their records. Evans said Abercrombie searched the hospitals and found nothing. And in an interview Abercrombie claimed there is something written in the State Archive. The only HDOH records authorized to be stored at the State Archive are 76-year-old COHB's and registrations of foreign birth.

And the HI Dept of Health itself has indirectly confirmed that Obama's BC was amended in 2006 and is thus not legally valid. That also confirms that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery (and the HDOH also confirmed that Factcheck is a forgery because the certificate number and "date filed" are incompatible). At no time has anybody from the HDOH ever said they have a LEGALLY VALID record for Obama.

So those of us with questions about this are just believing what Obama's good friend Abercrombie has already said, as well as what the official HDOH communications have said.

Documentation and much more at http://www.butterdezillion.wordpress.com

Posted by: butterdezillion | February 15, 2011 2:41 PM | Report abuse

The reason for the poll results is simple.

People feel no obligation to tell pollsters the truth. Conservatives feel even less obligation than others, when asked questions about liberal Presidents, especially when asked questions that have no relevance to their lives.

To prove the point, commission a poll to ask a question like: "Does President Obama bite his toenails?" You'll probably get similar results.

"Birthers" tell pollsters things to annoy liberals.

Governor Palin is the candidate who most annoys liberals.

So, the poll reveals the startling fact that conservatives like to annoy liberals.

Who knew!

Posted by: jfv123 | February 15, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

I love the way the President has been using the birthers. It's like putting up fly paper. Eventually they all stick to that alluring yellow strap hanging from the ceiling. If it wasn't the birth certificate they'd be screaming about, they would surely find another way to deny that their country could ever be run by a man of color.

Posted by: Eugene6 | February 15, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

This really isn't about Kenya versus Hawaii as his birthplace. It's about the fact that Barack Hussein Obama, Senior was not then or ever was an American citizen and his mother was too young as well. He could not confer "natural born" citizenship on BHO, Jr. Of course, no real evidence of Mr. Obama being born in Hawaii has ever been submitted, but that's secondary to NBC status. Funny that no physician or nurse has ever surfaced to say "I was there" at his birth. Read the constitution, it's not a long document.

Posted by: sandbear | February 15, 2011 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Sort of on topic, everyone should read this too:

Muslim vs. Moslem

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/11/muslim_vs_moslem.php

"Moslem" is a dog whistle to the ignorant Tea Party types.

A lack of ability to comprehend facts is literally the most distinguishing feature of Tea Party versus everyone else.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Such good thoughts from Mr. Sargent, wrapped in such poor messaging.

Let's start with the pejorative in the headline. Saying "Birthers love Sarah Palin" is roughly like saying "Pinkos and Commies love Obama". But, most op-ed columnists are usually uncivil and insulting except when a tragedy like AZ happens. Then they are all self righteous and accusatory toward the opposition. All the love and harmony lasts about a month then we resume the normal useless dialog.

Next, Mr. Sargent criticizes those who doubt, of which I am NOT one, without fairly addressing the core issue. Even the government in HI acknowledges it doesn't have proper paperwork for Mr. Obama. This raises a larger issue that Mr. Obama - what proof is required to show US birth for our President (as required by the Constitution) and who certifies those documents? Further, what is done in a case like Mr. Obama's where the documentary proof is in question?

Instead, Mr. Sargent takes the opportunity to criticize those with whom he disagrees in a one sided rant. Mr. Sargent could have written a much shorter column entitled "I have a dislike of Sarah Palin that I'm unable to articulate in any meaningful way other than Ad Hominem attacks" and leave it at that. Perhaps he's paid by the word?

Posted by: RichmondGiant | February 15, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse

wait a minute. Didn't this guy promise not to write about this miscreant for the entire month of February? Correct me if I'm wrong. Or did I miss another column taking that back?

Posted by: red2million | February 15, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Birthers don't love Sarah Palin. They love the new governor of Hawaii, a friend of Obama's parents, who decided to put the place of birth issue to bed by finding and releasing BHO's birth certificate.

He couldn't find it. It doesn't exist.

Posted by: tallyhohohoho | February 15, 2011 2:54 PM | Report abuse

wait a minute. Didn't this guy promise not to write about this miscreant for the entire month of February? Correct me if I'm wrong. Or did I miss another column taking that back?

Posted by: red2million | February 15, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse
========================================
I believe that was Mr. Milbank. I know, they are hardly distinguishable from each other and the usual cadre of WaPo op-ed contributors.

Posted by: RichmondGiant | February 15, 2011 2:56 PM | Report abuse

good post greg. and, yep. she IS the ultimate dog whistle for these crazies. and they do love her for it, as evidenced by commenters right here.

Posted by: ebproducer | February 15, 2011 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I can't wait to see Obama reelected in 2012...piss off these people all over again...how sweet it will be!

Posted by: wc1123 | February 15, 2011 2:56 PM | Report abuse

The post says 51% of GOP PRIMARY VOTERS, not half of the party. Reading skills are good to have.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 15, 2011 2:34 PM
-----------------------------------------
Thank you for pointing that out sue. All the more reason birther issues should get a full airing during the Republican primary debates, I think you would agree.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | February 15, 2011 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Like minded people are drawn together. The simple minded are no exception. So it isn't a shocker to see who is attracted to Palin.

Posted by: AverageJane | February 15, 2011 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Sally give birth to Sarah in a Canadian hospital... this explains how Sarah can travel to Canada and receive free medical care.

Posted by: whocares666 | February 15, 2011 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Because doctors remember every baby they deliver by name. I mean, most Ob-gyns only do a handful of deliveries in their careers and call it quits.

Posted by: cao091402 | February 15, 2011 3:06 PM | Report abuse

This is fun (!), seeing the Republican Party tearing itself apart. (Sort of like the Dems in the 1970s.) Like the Dems then, the Reps have reached the end of their political vital-ness and relevance, and like the Dems, they will wander in the wilderness until they fund a new paradigm and winning constituency. Their old formulas don't work for them in a new era, and what's left are the "full-mooners," baying blindly and plaintively and sometimes, crazily and violently. We had left-wing militants in the 70s, just as keen in their own way to reserve the right to use violence to overthrow a corrupt system as the rightwing gun fetishists and birthers are now. Makes you wonder, though, how a semi- (if not all that bright) adult like Boeher doesn't just scold his wayward children. He's score some points with the reality-based community -- even among Republicans -- if he did that.

Posted by: mylesgordon | February 15, 2011 3:06 PM | Report abuse


The proof that Obama was born in America is even sketchier than the proof that he was born in Kenya. He tries so desperately to keep the actual truth hidden one has to suspect that he not a native born citizen.

As for Palin, she's an idiot. Useful only to the media to sell ad space. No one in their right mind would ever consider her as a presidential candidate or even in any appointed government position. Any thoughts she might have concerning democrats just have no credibility.

Posted by: surfer-joe | February 15, 2011 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"Silly libs. Silly little, snot-nosed, stunted-growth libs. You lie, you cheat, you obfuscate, you browbeat, and still you are unable to convince anyone to move over to your side."

I think you just proved Greg's point.

Posted by: lcrider1 | February 15, 2011 3:13 PM | Report abuse

John Edwards should be indicted for walking around with that phallic appendage growing out of his neck. Edwards cheated on his faithful wife while she was undergoing breast cancer treatment; then shamelessly disowned his mistress' "love" child. Yet Leftists still muster the temerity to drive around in their Volvoes, comically sporting KERRY/EDWARDS bumper stickers.

When you see ObaMedia toadies up on their hind legs howling at Sarah Palin, understand the severe psychological transference which animates these obsessive Palin Derangement Syndrome sufferers.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:17 PM | Report abuse

icrider - classy.

Posted by: ebproducer | February 15, 2011 3:18 PM | Report abuse

[MrChip1 spat: "She owns the retard bloc."]

Congrats, Greg, for managing to sneer at Mrs. Palin without mocking mentally disabled children. That makes Greg slightly more classy than MrChip1, Barry "Short Bus" Obama or his "F'n retard" former Chief of Staff to discuss politics.

*stay classy*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:19 PM | Report abuse

All, the saga of Rep Leonard Lance, who wants repeal of health reform while enjoying a pricey state plan, just took another funny turn:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/02/the_leonard_lance_saga_ctd.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | February 15, 2011 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Palin certainly fits the "lightning rod" label; however, it's all rhetoric, literaly no substance. I've read some bashing above of liberals; and yet that is the only thing coming from the right. I'm not sure if it's because they're stupid or just lazy; but if American's don't wake up to the kettle calling the pot black, then we are in for more yuck! It's easy to find problems, anyone can do that; it's hard work to find solutions, and the republicans in congress continue to take the cowards route, blame democrats while selling out to special interests. Shameful!

Posted by: thegunslinger | February 15, 2011 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Woof! WOof!

Posted by: mmwatch | February 15, 2011 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Again, to Hofstadter...

"American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wind. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind. In using the expression “paranoid style” I am not speaking in a clinical sense, but borrowing a clinical term for other purposes. I have neither the competence nor the desire to classify any figures of the past or present as certifiable lunatics., In fact, the idea of the paranoid style as a force in politics would have little contemporary relevance or historical value if it were applied only to men with profoundly disturbed minds. It is the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant.
Of course this term is pejorative, and it is meant to be; the paranoid style has a greater affinity for bad causes than good..."

http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/conspiracy_theory/the_paranoid_mentality/the_paranoid_style.html

Posted by: bernielatham | February 15, 2011 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Question for birthers: Isn't it a bit late? Even if something were discovered, it's already been 2 years...

Would you guys want impeachment?

Posted by: Patzer111 | February 15, 2011 3:31 PM | Report abuse

I think the GOP establishment continues to play along with the birther theory precisely because it generates media coverage, under the "No publicity is bad publicity" rubric. This is also why, in contrast to past presidential campaigns, there is currently no accepted Republican front runner for the presidential nomination. Their press coverage exaggerates their numbers. Check how many poll respondents were willing to be considered "self identified Republicans."

Posted by: Lamentations | February 15, 2011 3:31 PM | Report abuse


WHO Believes they really think Obama wasn't born in America?

They just get their kicks saying it, like slly, snotty people Exacctly whtthey are.
That's all the attention they ever get!

As for Palin. She's been over for a long time now. She might screw up a GOP plan here or there, but who cares. Definately a minus...EXACTLY good ole Sharron Angle.

Posted by: whistling | February 15, 2011 3:34 PM | Report abuse

ronnieandrush barfed:

Sort of on topic, everyone should read this too:

Muslim vs. Moslem

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/11/muslim_vs_moslem.php

"Moslem" is a dog whistle to the ignorant Tea Party types.

A lack of ability to comprehend facts is literally the most distinguishing feature of Tea Party versus everyone else.

--------------------------------
Nice catch, ronbush! I have a link to a similar polemic on the difference between "idiot" and "moron" that you should find particularly enlightening, which I will forward to you shortly.

Posted by: mmwatch | February 15, 2011 3:36 PM | Report abuse

"I think the GOP establishment continues to play along with the birther theory precisely because it generates media coverage"

Play along? No way. That's way too easy on them. They feed the Birther stuff every single day.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 3:36 PM | Report abuse

*Shannanigan!*

Can Greg cite any actual evidence of this (alleged) "far right wing base's seething underbelly of anti-Obama hatred"? Or are we just to take his word for it?

It's not enough Greg spent much of January enflaming death threats with slanderous blood libels against Mrs. Palin and her family over the Leftist Zeitgeist shooter.

Now Greg has the temerity to climb up on his hind legs and spit slander at the right wing as "seething" with "hatred"?

Classy: Leftists Call For Assassination of Sarah Palin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxgJKNpjSNI&feature=player_embedded#!

Death threats: how progressive!

That seething underbelly of hatred is all yours, progressives. Own it.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:39 PM | Report abuse

It is telling how any MSM treatment of Obama's eligibility is so heavy on name-calling, ridicule, obfuscation, etc., and light on facts.

Why is that?

Maybe it because you have to cover for your precious Obama, and because it isn't easy to explain why he doesn't release the long-form document that would triumphantly end this controversy and vanquish his Birther tormentors.

So, Obama-protectors, who can explain why he hasn't released his long-form BC? Is he saving it up to release for maximum effect prior to 2012?


Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Nothing is new under the sun.

Birthers are just another variety of cultist drawn from the very large body of those in America with a propensity to rely on belief, instead of reason, to make decisions.

In America we have millions of rational people who know perfectly well that there is no god, but are afraid to be identified as Atheists, for fear of social ostracism. Millions more throw their lives into full-scale ethical ignorance via a deep belief in some foolish monotheist religion. These two groups number in the majority here, why should it come as any surprise that a percentage can be peeled off to believe in other nonsense, when that nonsense resonates with feelings of loss of personal prestige and feelings of victimization?

It's ironic to bother criticizing Birthers when all around you on Saturdays & Sundays fools practice lies en mass, as a social institution, and are respected for it.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Ignorance is Bliss. If you repeat a lie long enough you begin to believe it. That is nothing more than accepting lies as truths.
If the Tea Party believes the President of the US is NOT a US citizen, how do they accomodate his Mother as an American Citizen?

maybe the tea party wants to take away the rights of children, because they are angry at President Obama, and they want to take their Country back from the BLAKC President. That is he agenda of the teqa party, racist core values of inequality.

You can not take somethig back that was never lost. I do not believe we have lost the US merely because voted a Black President as our President.

For those that believe because we voted a Black man President is proof of America movoing forward from racism, just as all the Tea Party birther issues indicates the lack of racial equality, and moving backwards to racist attitudes again.

Having grown up during segregation, I recognize a racist whenever I hear one,as I have heard them before, declaring equality while we; Blacks; only had Thursday night available to socialize in the public.

Posted by: patmatthews | February 15, 2011 3:41 PM | Report abuse

According to LoneWack "The important part of the last paragraph is *what we know*. Because, we don't really know for sure where it was. While it's highly likely that he was born in the U.S., he has not definitively proven it."

I must not be a citizen either. My birth certificate (1949 in IOWA) is a xerox copy - a Certificate of Live Birth". Gee, all these years I thought I was a citizen.

One could argue the Hawaiian papers knew 40+ years ago that this one lone baby was going to be elected president so they put a blind item in the births section of the local paper. The local hospital also "knew" and issued a birth certificate including the fictional names of his parents. His mother, purportedly a US citizen, also a beneficiary of lies told years earlier when her so-called American parents registered her birth were more clever and chose the Midwest to perpetrate their lie. Then this family post-changed the Constitution to include that all children born in the US or with ONE parent a citizen would be also given citizenship.

Skipping forward to 2008 when Hillary didn't really want to be the nominee. Her husband happened to know a lot of important people, some who even work for law enforcement decided that while his wife wanted to be President, he didn't want her to be President so he helped the FBI cover up the fact that her main opponent (who said some bad things about him) wasn't a citizen. He told the FBI to risk their jobs and pensions to lie and to cheat his wife out of the nomination. Hillary, who has always trusted her husband 1000000% and has never known him to lie didn't bother to check herself. John McCain, who also knows a lot of people decided he really didn't want to win either -- he knew if he let it go he was sure to win on the big issues like character and intelligence.

So birthers you are either completely wrong and frankly a little intellectually challenged OR this is the biggest conspiracy since Elvis pretended to die so he could join JFK on that island with Marilyn Monroe. Me? Well since the US state of Hawaii has verified his birth THERE and sworn and attested to it meaning their jobs and pensions are now at risk I decided I'd concentrate on real issues.

Posted by: Lemon7221 | February 15, 2011 3:41 PM | Report abuse

The progressive "climate of hate": A comprehensive illustrated primer in 8 parts (2000-2010)
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Own the seething Leftist hate-mongering venom.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

mmwatch,

Did you read the article?

It says that racists, who also hate President of the United States, use "Moslem".

Those ignorant people are almost always aligned with the Tea Party, which consists of both "idiots" and "morons".

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

WillvK - Ha ha you fool, there isn't any, "long form BC."

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:43 PM | Report abuse

FLASHBACK August 2010: Michael Enright (Leftist "interfaith" volunteer) stabbed an anti-mosque Muslim NYC cabbie and faces trial this year.
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/08/25/left-the-muslim-cabbie-stabbing-was-right-wing-islamophobia-oh-wait-a-minute/

Leftists rushed to lynch the entire right-wing for that "progressive" hate crime, too.

Own the seething underbelly of hatred, progressives.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Palin will get elected President the same way Hitler did.

Posted by: skinky_1999 | February 15, 2011 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Leftists have a total monopoly on President assasination chic.
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

Own the seething underbelly of President hatred, Leftists. It's all yours.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:45 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst Haha ha ha you post a Michelle Malkin URL and expect anyone to look at it? Wow you are nuts.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:45 PM | Report abuse

In their defense, most republicans don't know Hawaii is part of the United States.

Posted by: MarilynManson | February 15, 2011 3:45 PM | Report abuse

"""The progressive "climate of hate""""

From the esteemed, highly-credible, non-partisan Michelle Malkin!

Hilarious!

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Did I read this right? A *majority* of GOP voters think Obama is not a citizen? You are surely kidding me. And we actually let these morons vote?

Posted by: wabisabi | February 15, 2011 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Obama's Leftist toadies spent the last decade on CNN committing acts of criminal mayhem during their kristalnaght-style, anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as "peace" protests) in support of Islamo-supremacism to achieve their hate-America political agenda. http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame

Yet Greg now has the temerity to climb up on his hind legs (without a shred of evidence) and howl about (alleged) "hatred" from Palin supporters?

The last decade of seething hate-America gutter rioting is all yours, progressives. Own it.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Yo, Birthers:

Here's a little exercise for you. Go online to the city/state in which you were born to order a birth certificate (as I did when my original was lost). Lo and behold!!!!! A certificate will come to you THAT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL, that will look EXACTLY LIKE THE ONE THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA POSSESSES.

You know, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. How sad for you that you've wasted two years of your life on this stupid conspiracy. Grow up, move on, and contribute something PRODUCTIVE to the world around you.

Posted by: hsubyma | February 15, 2011 3:48 PM | Report abuse

"""kristalnaght-style, anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as "peace" protests)"""

Totally offensive.

Talk about seething hate.

This is the Tea Party "intellect" on full display. Bravo, mental midgets, bravo. You win in the race to the bottom.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 3:51 PM | Report abuse

It's the same Lee Atwater type politics that Wallace used to rally racists in Alabama. You pump up a pack of lies to get the dense, angry, Christian white racists to come out and defend their supremacist ideals on Nov 15. You ignore them on Nov 16 but that's not a problem.

They don't check you for sanity at the polls. A racist's vote counts the same as any other.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:54 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst - Thanks for the link to "Zombietime.com" !!!!

Now THAT's a Birther on his game! Lol! too funny!

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Yo, QuineGeology:

Why don't you take a look at some CPAC pictures? Look for the Sarah Palin look-alike who showed up and fooled all the idiots there. What you will find are about two dozen twenty- to thirty-something LITTLE BOYS swarming around her and drooling. THAT is who $arah Palin attracts. Otherwise, she is a know-nothing, mean-spirited, emotionally trapped 14-year-old racist who is po'd that she got beat by a black man. Dontcha get it??

Posted by: hsubyma | February 15, 2011 3:58 PM | Report abuse

[ronnieandrush bedwet: "Totally offensive."]

And how would Leftists characterize those kristalnaght-style, anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as "peace" protests)? The highest form of patriotism?

Take a good hard look in the mirror and explain why my description is inaccurate.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame

Don't be apologists for Leftist hate-mongering your whole life, progressives.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Nothing is new under the sun.

Birthers are just another variety of cultist drawn from the very large body of those in America with a propensity to rely on belief, instead of reason, to make decisions.

In America we have millions of rational people who know perfectly well that there is no god, but are afraid to be identified as Atheists, for fear of social ostracism. Millions more throw their lives into full-scale ethical ignorance via a deep belief in some foolish monotheist religion. These two groups number in the majority here, why should it come as any surprise that a percentage can be peeled off to believe in other nonsense, when that nonsense resonates with feelings of loss of personal prestige and feelings of victimization?

It's ironic to bother criticizing Birthers when all around you on Saturdays & Sundays fools practice lies en mass, as a social institution, and are respected for it.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 3:59 PM | Report abuse

One can not be seen as a *alternately weak and tyrannical figure** No one is scared of a weak person or figure..You think the russians were scared of Stalin b/c he was weak or because he was oppresive, cruel, disturbed, animalisitic...I don't think any russians were scared of Stalin b/c he was a *alternately weak and tyrannical figure**..

Posted by: Realistic5 | February 15, 2011 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Oh my......Stalin...replace the ST with *P* and you get Palin....She is Stalin re-born....RUN>>>>>RUN>>>>>>...LMAO

Posted by: Realistic5 | February 15, 2011 4:03 PM | Report abuse

This Palin smear campaign is absurdity on stilts. Where were these lamentations from media elites when billionaire George Soros rent-a-mobs trashed our national Mall? They and their Islamo-fascist co-conspirators routinely assaulted peace officers and committed acts of public mayhem during their kristalnaght-style, anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as “peace” protests) to achieve their political agenda. EVIDENCE? Behold the Leftist-fascist Hall of Shame;
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame

Today's Leftist-fascists proudly carry on the sordid legacy of the Weathermen domestic terrorists. They don’t merely engage in hate speech... they orchestrate acts of political extortion by domestic terrorism (e.g. RNC 8) and should be prosecuted as such.

But these idiotarian toad-eaters are suddenly terrified by Mrs. Palin's legions of grannies? Really?

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:03 PM | Report abuse

I like Sarah Palin. I also think Obama has been a pretty good president, and is getting better.

Put that in your pipes and smoke it, oh ye mongers of stereo types!

""It seems fair to speculate that the success of Palin's approach -- her grievance-mongering, her strident attacks on Obama, her virtuosity in crafting the most lurid formulations to paint Obama as an alternately weak and tyrannical figure -- is rooted in her unique ability to speak directly to the far right wing base's seething underbelly of anti-Obama hatred""

I also think Obama was born in America, is an American, and is not a Muslim. FWIW.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | February 15, 2011 4:07 PM | Report abuse

So, when is billionaire progressive George Soros financing the unhinged Leftist rent-a-mob rally against ObaMao's summary execution of three (un-Mirandized!) Somali teens at sea? Afterall, Hussein's tactic was clearly more "extremist" than Mubarak's secret police beatings-- or even patriotic Americans requesting Barry's birth certificate.

The two year anniversary of Hussein's high seas shooting spree is fast approaching. Get busy, progressives!

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:07 PM | Report abuse

"WillvK - Ha ha you fool, there isn't any, 'long form BC.'"

Ah, more insults with no facts, right on cue.

So, the State of HI doesn't have one an original 'Certificate of Live Birth' (aka long-form) document on file for Obama? Why do you think that is?

Like this:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/nordyke%20twins/syc1959/M1139416728Inverted.gif

And, oh, since I am such a fool, and cultist, and whatnot, set me straight. Which hospital was Obama born at? Queens Medical Center or Kapi’olani Medical Center?

Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Death threats: how progressive!

ABC: Death Threats Against Sarah Palin at “Unprecedented Levels”
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/blood-libel-sarah-palins-controversial-reference-riled-emotions/story?id=12601352

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The people who claim to believe that president Obama might not have been born in the United States are suffering from a debilitating mental disease that allows them to justify their beliefs for reasons that have nothing to do with the reasons for belief. The truth is that the great majority of birthers don't actually care whether or not Obama is a US citizen. What they care about is the fear they feel at the threat he poses to their sense of security. The desire to escape their fear provides them sufficient justification to either lie about their beliefs or to avoid thinking about the evidence (and thus technically avoid the moral conundrum of having to lie to defend their fear.)

Posted by: mmyotis | February 15, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

FLASHBACK 2008: Remember when spitting, rock throwing and chemical spraying were "the highest form of patriotism"?
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/02/rnc-protest-update-spitting-rock-throwing-poison-spraying-and-cub-scout-harassing

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Run Sarah Run don't back down from the cowedly men bashing you! Remember more love you an support fully, than hate you. It has been propheted that a woman would win the office of President in America. Only a woman could clean up the filthy mess America is in. She will tell the truth an people don't want to hear the truth. Sarah run girl run don't fear the men are too corrupt to ever change. Beat them Divine Intervention says you will.

Posted by: JWTX | February 15, 2011 4:13 PM | Report abuse

What exactly inspires the seething underbelly of Leftist hatred?

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” [Obama at a Philadelphia fundraiser, June 2008]
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/obama-knife-crime-tough.png

*wicked smaht*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:16 PM | Report abuse

What inspires today's seething underbelly of progressive hatred?

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” [Obama at a Philadelphia fundraiser, June 2008]
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/obama-knife-crime-tough.png

*wicked smaht*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:17 PM | Report abuse

it takes a m0r0n to like another m0r0n obviously

Posted by: calif-joe | February 15, 2011 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Palin and the birthers are all useful idiots for the GOP. As long as they can keep their base focused on this kind of crap, then they won't pay attention to continuing mess they are making out of this country.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | February 15, 2011 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone imagine Palin supporters fantasizing about Barry's severed head?
http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2008/10/festival-of-obama/

Own the seething underbelly of President hate, progressives.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:20 PM | Report abuse

The end of it... Not voting Palin ever....

Posted by: mykey2 | February 15, 2011 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Way to go, Mr. Sargent! I laughed my butt off reading your article. 51% GOP voters believe Obama is not a U.S. Citizen (hilarious!). Palin favorability rating among Birthers is 83 (milk shot out of my nose!). Then I realized this was not a joke and these numbers represent actual people, fellow Citizens...now I am depressed.

Posted by: goodtoknow | February 15, 2011 4:32 PM | Report abuse

[AIPACiswar sneered: "all around you on Saturdays & Sundays fools practice lies en mass, as a social institution, and are respected for it."]

...but don't dare disrepect the Fridays fools. Definitely don't want to offend your Friday allies.

For a more scholarly discussion of the Leftist-Islamist Axis of Hypocrisy, see "Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left" @
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

Don't be an Islamo-supremacism hugger your whole life, AIPACiswar.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:33 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst, you're cracking.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

The fact that 51 percent of Republicans believe Obama wasn't born in the US is pretty telling. The Republican Party has become an anti-science, anti-education collection of flat earthers, birthers, and eight grade dropouts. The birthers love Palin because compared to them, she looks smart.

Posted by: ElectricBill | February 15, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

People believe Obama is Muslim because he was a practicing Muslim. This matters because Obama is now what Islamic law calls a murtadd (apostate), an ex-Muslim converted to another religion-- who (under sharia law) is subject to the most severe penalties. Obama's apostate status clearly has enormous implications for his relationship with the Muslim world.

Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam
http://www.danielpipes.org/5354/confirmed-barack-obama-practiced-islam

In sum: The cited evidence demonstrates that Obama was an irregularly practicing Muslim who rarely or occasionally prayed with his step-father in a mosque. This precisely substantiates the assertion that Obama for some years had a reasonably Muslim upbringing under the auspices of his Indonesian step-father.

Therefore, what Quislings consider a media falsehood is in fact confirmed by evidence as truthful and accurate. The fact that so few understand this about Obama is a testimony to the Obamedia puppets disinformation and denial campaigns.

Denying Obama's Muslim heritage is in itself a falsehood.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:36 PM | Report abuse

[ronnieandrush: "you're cracking."]

Your boasting is empty. I accept your inability to refute cited EVIDENCE as admission of your intellectual bankruptcy.

"Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam"
http://www.danielpipes.org/5354/confirmed-barack-obama-practiced-islam

/checkmate

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:40 PM | Report abuse

The whole birther thing was brought up in a lawsuit brought by Democrats that wanted Hillary! It was pushed aside by the judge who decided that they didn't have "standing" to question whether Obama was a citizen. No lawsuit has ever been allowed to enter discovery because then Obama would have to produce evidence. Think about it, you're running for President. Some "lunatic" sues you to produce your birth certificate. You can spend $25 and get a certified copy from Hawaii. Instead, you hire a team of lawyers! Who thinks like this?

Forget the birther issue. He is a child living in Indonesia. It is decided that he is going back to Hawaii to live with the grandparents. He doesn't have a US Passport (at the time, children traveled on their Mother's passport). He flies to Hawaii but his Mother and Stepfather stay in Indonesia. How did he get back? What passport did he travel on?

Forget that passport (he was a kid after all). He had international travel as an adult yet has never had a US passport. How did that happen?

He goes to college. What is his nationality on his applications? Why are his records sealed.

He is an Associated Professor of Constitutional Law in Chicago (not that he seems to know a whole lot about the Constitution). Nobody can be found that has ever taken a class by him, there are no records of him ever having taught there. Professors had the same problem with this in Alabama and people went to jail.

*Crimes and Misdemeanors*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I haven't found God. He must not exist either.

Posted by: cao091402 | February 15, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Which is actually more wicked and more representative of "the paranoid style in American politics?" Questioning whether Obama was actually born within the US and therefore Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President, or believing that George Bush is responsible for the death of thousands in the World Trade Center? The overall percentage of Democrats who are "Truthers" who believe exactly that is, by a statistically insignificant margin, greater than the percentage of "Birthers" among Republicans, and included some Democrat members of the House.

What percentage of Truthers would vote against Palin if she were to run? What does this say about the moral and intellectual stature of Greg Sargent? Remember, when you point your finger, you have three fingers pointing back at you.

Posted by: Ken16 | February 15, 2011 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is a favorite for people with no ability to think.

Posted by: ExConservative | February 15, 2011 4:45 PM | Report abuse

[cao091402: "I haven't found God. He must not exist either."]

If you sincere seek Him, then He will find you.

In the meantime, why can't Barry sincerely spend $25 for a certified copy from Hawaii to satisfy Hillary's legal query?

Just askin'.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 15, 2011 4:49 PM | Report abuse

So many extreme conservatives blog the same talking points, express the same anger which they get from the same radio personalities. This makes them what Ayn Rand would call "Second Handers"; yet they claim to admire Ayn Rand. They don't ask, “Is this true?”, she wrote, "They ask is this what others think is true?” If Glenn beck supported the events in Egypt, so would they. They are "second handers"

Posted by: TedfromRichmond | February 15, 2011 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Of course they love Palin! After all, stupid IS as stupid DOES!

Posted by: slamming | February 15, 2011 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Of course they love Palin! After all, stupid IS as stupid DOES!

Posted by: slamming | February 15, 2011 5:00 PM | Report abuse

QuineGeology wrote:
CONSERVATIVES = 40%
INDEPENDENTS = 36%
LIBERALS = 20%

I may have missed something but what does the above represent? A breakdown of all registered voters? people who support Sarah Palin? people who think Obama is a Muslim? people who believe Sarah could win a general election/aka those who believe pigs can fly?

As usual with that group, high on emotion and low on data.

Posted by: chris76543 | February 15, 2011 5:11 PM | Report abuse

This is what passes for a breaking news story from Greg. Great scoop, Greg, keep up the good work.

Posted by: tom75 | February 15, 2011 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Of course white-supremacist liars like Palin. She appeals to them while GoP leaders like Boner refuse to "refudiate" lies about Obama's citizenship and religion. It's right out of the Hilter/Atwater/Rove playbook: repeat a lie often enough and the uneducated parrots will begin to believe it.

Posted by: areyousaying | February 15, 2011 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Soap-box gossip and endless criticism has nothing to do with fixing anything - Sarah Palin is VERY close to the edge and will likely have an emotional meltdown within 3-4 months. Then the sideshows will end so candidates can voters can concentrate on details/aspects for solutions.

The country is now discussing the budget.
Read this to see if your state takes more from the fed than you pay in.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/266.html

Do something useful and tell your governor how much you are willing to spend (in extra state tax) or sacrifice to "shrink" the federal government and lower your own state budget.

Posted by: chris76543 | February 15, 2011 5:22 PM | Report abuse

KDE,

You ask, "why can't Barry sincerely spend $25 for a certified copy from Hawaii to satisfy Hillary's legal query?"

(1) It was never "Hillary's legal query." Neither Hillary nor her campaign ever sought legal redress to obtain Obama's birth certificate.

(2) Barack Obama did obtain his Certificate of Live Birth from the State of Hawaii, made it available on the internet, and allowed media to examine it. But you know that. Just as you know that FactCheck.org has an extensive review of the authenticity of the COLB. (And we all know that you will discount FactCheck.org as bastion of liberal misinformation).

(3) No, the form of Obama's COLB is not the same as the birth certificate posted for one of the "Nordyke twins." But that birth certificate states, on its face, that it was a certified copy issued in the 1960s. Obama obtained his in 2007 or 2008 (I forget which), by which time the Hawaii Department of Health had switched completely to issuing computer-generated COLBs rather than photocopies. If one of the Nordyke twins were to request a birth certificate from the Department of Health today, she would get one that is indistinguishable from Obama's. If she asked for one that looks like the so-called "long form," she would be told that the computer-generated form is the only one the State now issues.

(4) The computer-generated form, with certification from Department of Health, is a legal birth record from the State of Hawaii. HRS Section 338-13 (Section 338-13(c) specifically authorizes computer-generated forms).

(5) Two newspapers reported the birth in their "Vital Statistics" sections within a week after the birth. You may insist that a relative could have asked that the birth notice be included in the paper. But even World News Daily, which checked on this, reported that one of the newspapers expressly stated that the information published in 1961 came from ONLY one source -- the State of Hawaii:

"The Advertiser's Marsha McFadden told WND at the time of Obama's birth announcement, the newspaper got all of its information from the state Department of Health. That would include the address."

"'If we published it, it came from the state,' she said.

"She said today's rules are different. Anyone can submit information for announcements but the newspaper requires a birth document to verify. It also no longer uses addresses."

(6) Where in the Constitution are the federal courts given the authority to determine the qualifications of candidates for the Presidency, or to determine the qualifications of a sitting President? The Constitution has an electoral college, part of the purpose of which was to ensure that foreigners could not become President. It is quite well explained in Federalist 68.

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed68.htm

How strange that you who purport to honor constitutional government and the rule would look to the federal courts rather than the Electoral College.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 5:34 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's good pal, HI Governor Neil Abercrombie, must be a "birther" too because he told Mike Evans that there is no proof that Obama was born in Hawaii."

This has been debunked by Mike Evans himself.

"Evans later apologized and said he "misspoke" when quoting Neil Abercrombie. Of course, Evan's correction is not getting the same kind of press in extreme right-wing blogs as his original statement which started the entire controversy. Such is the birther world as we know it, where any information supported the birther theory is quickly held up as sacred while any information disproving the theory is ignored or dismissed."

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/another-birther-conspiracy-theory-blows-up#ixzz1E4NjCOiv

Posted by: Alex3 | February 15, 2011 5:35 PM | Report abuse

instead of plum line,this should be called sargents hit pieces.falsely,erroneously,believe obama wasn't born; Repulicans who KNOW obama was born;please someone tell me how i can KNOW where obama was born.post a web site where i can see the PROOF everyone is talking about.

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Birfers unable to figure out that the audience for the comments thins out considerably once newer posts are up. Too funny.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | February 15, 2011 5:41 PM | Report abuse

alamodefender,

Go find it yourself.

Posted by: ronnieandrush | February 15, 2011 5:42 PM | Report abuse

1) Take all birthers and add up their collective IQ's : Result = 65 (rounding up)

2) Add Sarah Palin's IQ : Result = 44 .

'Nuf said??

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | February 15, 2011 5:50 PM | Report abuse

"alamodefender"?

Does that mean you work security at a car rental lot?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 5:51 PM | Report abuse

sometimes,just for fun,i tie a VOTE SARAH PALIN banner to my rear bumper with ten feet of rope and go riding around to see how many deranged liberals get dragged to death with their teeth caught in it.

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Morons and fools love to have one of their own to idolize. They can buy her books, attend her appearances, and follow her on facebook and twitter. And she just laughs all the way to the bank. It only proves that you don't have to be smart to make it in America. You don't even have to finish a job.

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | February 15, 2011 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"Vote Sarah Palin"???

She quit her last two jobs.

Is she running for something now?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 5:53 PM | Report abuse

P.S.,just the kind of liberal proof i was expecting. B.S.

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Ah-h-h-h-h-h, to be a "birther" and love sarah palin (lower caps on purpose) ... is to share a unique form of idiocy ... like, stupid is as ... stupid is ... as stupid is truly stupid ! ! !

Posted by: loretoguy | February 15, 2011 6:00 PM | Report abuse

P.S.,just the kind of liberal proof i was expecting. B.S.

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 5:55 PM
+++++++++++++

http://factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 338-13

Pub. L. 108-458, title VII, Sec. 7211(a)-(d), Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat. 3825-3827 (federal definition of "birth certificate")

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Here's the thing I don't get about the birther group- they're asking us to believe that, during the run-up to the 2008 election, when the entire national security apparatus was under the control of the Republican Party, doing the background checks on Obama, getting the necessary security clearances on him before he could be briefed on intelligence matters, the "fact" that he wasn't a U.S. citizen just slipped past them and the Republican National Committee, only to be unearthed by somebody cruising the internet after the election. Apply Occam's Razor to this scenario and see what you come up with.

Posted by: ancguy49 | February 15, 2011 6:13 PM | Report abuse

wait a minute. Didn't this guy promise not to write about this miscreant for the entire month of February? Correct me if I'm wrong. Or did I miss another column taking that back?

Posted by: red2million | February 15, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse

You're wrong.
Wrong columnist.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
All you missed was brains when they where being handed out.

Posted by: law1946 | February 15, 2011 6:14 PM | Report abuse

A Sec of Teeth, Hair, and Ass is good enough for Birthers. Lol.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 6:19 PM | Report abuse

A small village in Kenya can't find their idiot.

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Apply Occam's Razor to this scenario and see what you come up with.

Posted by: ancguy49 | February 15, 2011 6:13 PM
+++++++++++++

Or to choosing between these two scenarios:

Scenario One: Young woman, pregnant with her first child, chooses to give birth at a hospital in Honolulu, blocks from the University she attends and a few miles from her parents' house. Hospital registers the birth with the state, which reports the birth to two local newspapers, which publish the information days later.

Scenario Two: Same young woman chooses, at an advanced stage of pregnancy, to travel to Kenya, necessitating several days of air travel (Honolulu to mainland, mainland to London, London to Nairobi -- even to this day there are no direct flights from the U.S. to Nairobi), at an expense of thousands of dollars, to give birth in a place she has never been, in a hospital she has never seen, attended to by doctors and nurses she doesn't know. She exits the United States and returns with a child, but manages to leave no records of having done so. And days later, two local newspapers get the birth information from the State of Hawaii, which to this day says the child was born in Honolulu.

Tough choice between two equally plausible scenarios, right?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 6:30 PM | Report abuse

alamodefender,

I provided links. Now, where is your evidence that Obama was born in Kenya?

And if you are going to refer to the transcript of the interview with his "grandmother," provide the whole transcript, including the part where she says that he was born in the United States, not Kenya.

But documents would be much better. Have any of those?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:"(3) No, the form of Obama's COLB is not the same as the birth certificate posted for one of the "Nordyke twins."... the computer-generated form is the only one the State now issues."

You *are* aware that the State of HI distinguishes between the 'long-form' Birth Certificate and the computer-generated COLB and recommends the latter for application for Hawaiian Home Lands program?

"Primary Documents

Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.

"The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."

http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl

The State of HI had *required* the long form for Home Land status, dropping this requirement--coincidentally-- in 2008.

You are stating that the certification requirements to receive HI government welfare in 2008 are higher than to demonstrate Constitutional eligibility for the Presidency?

For HI welfare: "Show us your long-form BC".
For US President: "Oh, a computer-generated COLB is fine and dandy".

Is that what you are saying?

Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"alamodefender"?? Really? You sure you aren't "poopiepantsdefender"?? You are childish enough!

alamodefender - That username is enough to make me blow my coffee out my nose in laughter. WHAT A RUBE!!

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 6:42 PM | Report abuse

For HI welfare: "Show us your long-form BC".
For US President: "Oh, a computer-generated COLB is fine and dandy".

Is that what you are saying?

Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 6:37 PM
++++++++++++++

Absolutely correct!!! You get an "A"!

The "Homelands" program in Hawaii applies only to persons of native Hawaiian descent. You know that, of course. The State reasonably requires more documentation for that program.

But ethnicity is irrelevant to eligibility for the Presidency under Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the U.S. Constitution. And the U.S. accepts Hawaii's form as a birth certificate under federal law, as proof of birth in the United States.

Thanks for playing.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

WillvK - You are blathering like a fool.

Here in NH, a Cert of Birth is a "vital record of the state," perfectly suitable for all court and public purposes.

You need to a.) learn to be concise, & b.) get a life.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 6:45 PM | Report abuse

alamodefender - That username is enough to make me blow my coffee out my nose in laughter. WHAT A RUBE!!

Posted by: AIPACiswar | February 15, 2011 6:42 PM
+++++++++++++++

"Alamodefender" apparently is not aware that only two of those who actually defended the Alamo survived the siege. And those two have presumably been dead for a long, long time (given that the siege occurred 175 years ago).

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Here is proof of Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii. All of you who are "birthers" read it and weep.

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

jrobinson7

Posted by: jrobinson7 | February 15, 2011 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Still waiting for a birther, any birther, to provide proof that Obama was born anywhere other than Honolulu, Hawaii. I find it fascinating that they apply such strict standards to evidence offered in support of Obama's birth in Hawaii, yet they can't be bothered to provide evidence that he was born anywhere else.

Of course, there is a simple explanation. He was born in Hawaii.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Stupid attracts stupid.

Posted by: jimward21 | February 15, 2011 7:19 PM | Report abuse

True story. Talking with a temporary co-worker. He says "Obama is a Muslim." Without confronting him, I probe: his admission, "actually, my dad can't stand having a black person in the white house."
The ENERGY of the birther delusion is supplied by racism--so details like the actual facts are helpless against it.

Posted by: scientist1 | February 15, 2011 7:22 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw: "The State reasonably requires more documentation for that program..."

So it is perfectly *reasonable* for the State of HI to require a specific document for a welfare program, but those those who request this same document to establish "eligibility for the Presidency under Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the U.S. Constitution", are "cultists"?

The State of HI retains in their records the 'Certificate of Live Birth', which in the State of HI is "preferred for their greater detail". It would eliminate any and all doubt about the Obama's eligibility. It *could* be produced, if Obama requested it.

Funny, though insults get tossed around here freely, no one has provided a reason for Obama not to do so.

Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 7:23 PM | Report abuse

AIPACiswar,as long as you're blowing coffee,how about you blow this?

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 7:27 PM | Report abuse

People were so ugly to George W. Bush that they eventually had to close the Yahoo! comments boards. Now liberals are complaining because the Birthers persist in their animus.

The biggest problem Birthers have is that to be true, you would have to believe that Barack's parents believed he would be president. I mean, if he needed to be naturalized then that would have been easy enough. The only reason to fake a birth announcement would have been to fake a birth on US soil, and the only reason to fake that would have been to be eligible for the Presidency.

Of course, if it's really all that important, I'll share this... to fake his birth, he would have to have been born earlier than the birth announcement. Likely by about a year or so. 12 months difference shows between first and second graders, especially with a bean pole like Barack.

Find a first grade class photo for him and see if he's too tall compared to his peers.

Posted by: blasmaic | February 15, 2011 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Palin has run her course. She's irrelevant.

Posted by: MadamDeb | February 15, 2011 7:29 PM | Report abuse

WillvK,

Truly dense you are.

There is NO, ZERO information necessary to determine eligibility for the Presidency that is not already on the Certificate of Live Birth the State of Hawaii has provided. It states his date of birth, from which a person can determine that he was at least 35 years old. It states that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, which establishes that he is a natural born citizen of the United States.

If you want more information from him, that is your prerogative. But it has nothing to do with the legal sufficiency of the COLB to establish place and date of birth.

Again, the Hawaii Home Land program is for persons of native Hawaiian ethnicity. Do you get that? There are state programs that also have income eligibility requirements. That doesn't mean that in order to be President, you legally have to provide proof of your income. Different program, different requirements.

By the way, where is your proof that Obama was born somewhere other than Hawaii?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Now liberals are complaining because the Birthers persist in their animus.

Posted by: blasmaic | February 15, 2011 7:27 PM
++++++++++++++++

No, you've definitely got that wrong. "Animus" means "strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude." If you want to say that you hate Barack Obama, that you can't stand his guts, fine. You are entitled to dislike anyone for any reason.

What I (and many other liberals) object to about birthers is that they try to cloak their "animus" in a veil of rationality. In other words, they deny that they hate Obama, and instead just insist that they are waiting for him (unlike any white President before him) to appear on their doorstep and provide them with proof beyond doubt that he is a natural born citizen of the United States.

I'd rather that birthers be honest and admit they hate him and that nothing he or anyone else says or does will ever change that.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

how about you blow this?

Posted by: alamodefender | February 15, 2011 7:27 PM
++++++++++

Folks, Eric Cartman is in the house!

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 8:06 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw:"Truly dense you are."

Ahh, insults.

"There is NO, ZERO information necessary to determine eligibility for the Presidency that is not already on the [COLB]...It states that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, which establishes that he is a natural born citizen of the United States."

The info on the COLB is the word of anonymous bureaucrat. On HI's website it states that COLB's are generated for non-HI births.

"Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country."

http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/index.html

HI's COLB does *not* prove that Obama fulfills the Constitution's NBC requirement, as it could have been obtained post (foreign) birth.

Since I am TRULY DENSE, maybe you'll have to make it simple for me. Just tell me at which hospital Obama was born?


Ahh...I thought so. You don't know. Why is Obama's birth hospital a State Secret?

Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 8:14 PM | Report abuse

WillkV,

You are completely adrift. HRS 338-20.5 (set out in its entirety below) allows the state to issue a birth certificate for a foreign-born child, but expressly provides:

"The new certificate of birth shall show the true or probable foreign country of birth, and that the certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child for whom it is issued . . ."

Clear enough for you?

On top of that the law was adopted in 1979 -- it couldn't have been used by Obama's parents.

§338-20.5 Adoption; foreign born persons. (a) The department of health shall establish a Hawaii certificate of birth for a person born in a foreign country and for whom a final decree of adoption has been entered in a court of competent jurisdiction in Hawaii, when it receives the following:

(1) A properly certified copy of the adoption decree, or certified abstract thereof on a form approved by the department; and

(2) A copy of any investigatory report and recommendation which may have been prepared by the [director of human services]; and

(3) A report on a form to be approved by the department of health setting forth the following:

(A) Date of assumption of custody;

(B) Sex;

(C) Color or race;

(D) Approximate age of child;

(E) Name and address of the person or persons adopting said child;

(F) Name given to child by adoptive parent or parents;

(G) True or probable country of birth.

The true or probable country of birth shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation. This report shall constitute an original certificate of birth; and

(4) A request that a new certificate of birth be established.

(b) After preparation of the new certificate of birth in the new name of the adopted person, the department of health shall seal and file the certified copy of the adoptive decree, the investigatory report and recommendation of the director of human services if any, the report constituting the original certificate of birth, and the request for a new certificate of birth. The sealed documents may be opened by the department only by an order of a court of record or when requested in accordance with section 578-14.5 or 578-15. The new certificate of birth shall show the true or probable foreign country of birth, and that the certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child for whom it is issued or for the adoptive parents. [L 1979, c 203, §3; am L 1990, c 338, §3]

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 8:36 PM | Report abuse

WillkV,

Kapiolani Hospital is likely where he was born, but HIPAA (federal law, don't you know) prohibits the hospital from releasing medical (including birth) records. Look on Google Maps -- the hospital is right next to the University of Hawaii.

By the way, I wasn't aware that birth in a hospital, or identification of the hospital, is a qualification for the presidency. Where is that in the Constitution?

Now, back to the hand you are playing: where is your evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Honolulu, Hawaii?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 8:39 PM | Report abuse

WillkV,

Maybe you intended to refer to HRS 338-17.8?

That allows the state to issue certificates for children born out of state. Your problem there is that the statute was enacted in 1982, when Obama was 20 or 21 years old. Well, you have one other problem: a complete lack of evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Honolulu.

I'm a lawyer with over 20 years in practice. Want to argue about the Hawaii vital statistics statutes? Fine. I've actually read them all. Have you? Apparently not.

[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.

(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Fact 1. No U.S. Supreme Court decision has found a child born to one or two alien parents to be an Article II “natural born Citizen.”

Fact 2. The Courts have ruled the Law of Nations is law in this country since its Founding.

Fact 3. The Law of Nations Chapter XIX: A natural born citizen is born to citizen parents.

Fact 4. The Constitution, Article II requires a President to be natural born citizen.

Fact 5. Barack Hussein Obama has an alien father.


Posted by: dancingrabbit | February 15, 2011 8:55 PM | Report abuse

dancingrabbit,

Wrong. The U.S. Supreme Court has NEVER used Vatell's Law of Nations as a basis for determining who is a citizen or a natural-born citizen. The term comes from English common law, and just means a person born within the country who is not either (1) the child of a foreign diplomat; or (2) the child of a hostile foreign occupier.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 15, 2011 8:59 PM | Report abuse

ronbush shat out:
"It says that racists, who also hate President of the United States, use "Moslem"."
------------------------------------
I guess you didn't find the article I was referring to (about the difference between "idiot" and "moron", so I'll give you an example:

An idiot is someone who finds significance and reason to hate other people in the observation that some people use the term "Muslim" vs. "Moslem", "Usama" vs "Osama", or "Kaddafi" vs "Quaddaffi" vs "Gaddafi".

A moron is someone who posts those thoughts to a public comment forum.

Got it?

Posted by: mmwatch | February 15, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse


Fact 6. The Supreme Court told us that a “natural born citizen” is a child born in the country to citizen parents.

Posted by: dancingrabbit | February 15, 2011 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Any Federal official who continues to neglect the natural born citizen status of Barack Hussein Obama is guilty of misprision.

Those that continue in this fraud cannot say they have a right to keep their shirts on their back.


Posted by: dancingrabbit | February 15, 2011 9:25 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1 (no relation), are you claiming that no one here at the Plum Line has ever given you evidence that Obama was born anywhere else? Even if you don't agree it's credible evidence, it's been given.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 15, 2011 9:31 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1: "You are completely adrift. HRS 338-20.5...was adopted in 1979 -- it couldn't have been used by Obama's parents".

Obama was born in 1961, and could have obtained a HI birth record for a foreign birth under the laws *prior* to 1979.

In fact, prior to 1972, HI had the convenient "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program", the depths of which I have not plumbed, but as these were legacy Territorial laws, they do not appear to be especially rigorous. Since you are a "lawyer with 20 years of practice", and I am hopelessly 'adrift', no doubt you will soon provide incontrovertible proof that a foreign-born Obama infant or toddler could not have been issued a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" circa 1961-2, and HI subsequent generate a COLB listing a birthplace in Honolulu.

"The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii. The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, during the statehood era".

http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/hawnbirth.html

Yes, we could root into the practices of HI vital records in the 1960's, but wouldn't it be easier to produce the actual root document from which the COLB has been generated? As 'a practicing lawyer' don't you insist on seeing all the documents that pertain to a case, especially those that are primary, contemporaneous and indelible?

That is unless the other practicing lawyer adage is in play here, of not asking questions to which you do not know the answer.


Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 11:50 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1: "The U.S. Supreme Court has NEVER used Vatell's Law of Nations as a basis for determining who is a citizen or a natural-born citizen."

The above statement is false and it tell us the writer knows very little about the Law of Nations and its role in the Courts.

The Founders attained the idea to unite the colonies into states and form the United States.

The justification of the American Revolution came from the Law of Nations.

Posted by: dancingrabbit | February 16, 2011 12:22 AM | Report abuse

bearclaw: "Kapiolani Hospital is likely where he was born, but HIPAA (federal law, don't you know) prohibits the hospital from releasing medical (including birth) records."

So, you *don't* know. Neither does Snopes, or Factcheck, or Polifact, or Fight the Smears. How peculiar! Only *imbeciles* think Obama wasn't born in HI, but his most ardent believers can't specify which of two hospitals.

HIPAA doesn't prevent Obama from indicating the hospital he was born at, or from authorizing release by signing a form. Why does the man with two autobiographies keep this innocuous fact a secret? There aren't any good explanations, except, oh...wait... I've got it. He was born at neither!


"By the way, I wasn't aware that birth in a hospital, or identification of the hospital, is a qualification for the presidency. Where is that in the Constitution?"

To reiterate: It is unusual that you are 100% sure he was born in HI, but 0% sure of which hospital.


"Now, back to the hand you are playing: where is your evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Honolulu, Hawaii?"

My evidence is that he could put NBC credentials beyond doubt in 10 minutes, but he obdurately refuses. I find this puzzling. A possible answer is that his credentials are lacking. The more I look into it, the more obvious this answer appears. When I see his defenders resort to the Emperor has no clothes game of calling the doubters stupid/crazy, then the more I think the Emperor is naked.

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 12:23 AM | Report abuse

The mainstream media and various other Obama apologists are quick to purposefully focus on the so-called "birthers" whenever any mention is made of the growing awareness of the fact that the current president continues to conceal virtually the entire paper trail of his existence in a tight shroud of secrecy.

By portraying the birthers as irrational or deranged individuals obsessed with the belief that Barack Obama was born in Kenya or Indonesia or elsewhere outside of the United States, they seek to avoid any emphasis on the astounding unprecedented totality of secrecy that guards practically every original record and document from his entire past.

This fact has nothing at all to do with Sarah Palin.

American voters of all political persuasions can recall the Obama 2008 campaign repeatedly promising that their administration would uphold the highest ethical standards with a particular emphasis on transparency.

A vast majority of these voters believe that the process of running for President of the United States should be the toughest public job interview on the planet.

The sad fact remains that the curent president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable background information that he has provided.

Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate, school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a considerable sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been their primary provider of these services.

A computer generated laser printed short form version of a birth certificate that a child could have forged was posted on the Obama 2008 campaign website, but it only served to intensify the filings and requests to see the original typewritten long form document, which has never been released or allowed to be scrutinized, if in fact it does indeed exist.

They also produced a one page letter from a physician attesting that Barack Obama was in excellent health for a man of his age.

This constitutes the complete extent of any release or disclosure of any records or documents from Obama's past.

Virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, continues to remain deeply hidden away.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 4:32 AM | Report abuse

In fact, astute observers in corridors of power around the world and other quarters consider that the infamous original typewritten long form birth certificate, the most widely discussed item from Obama's hidden paper trail, is actually the least relevant of all of his concealed records and documents, again, if in fact it does indeed exist.

They understand that the truths about Barack Obama's place of birth and the identity of both of his parents is far less important to the future of the United States than the truths about what makes him tick and who is pulling his strings, so to speak.

Whether the current president's biological father was the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." or the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis or the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate - see cashill.com among many other sources) or some other man is rather insignificant compared to the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that modern postwar era American voters had become accustomed to having the mainstream media provide for them, until 2008 when Barack Obama received a remarkable special exception from the traditional expectation that such candidates should allow for the release and disclosure of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

In their eagerness to "make history" by covering the campaign of the man whom they were clearly very interested in helping to become the first black president, the mainstream media failed in their essential national responsibility, namely to report on significant events with thoroughness and impartial objectivity. They ignored their duty to search for the truth and should be regarded with disdain by all people who value information in a free society.

Barack Obama was presented in 2008 as a brilliant intellectual with stellar Ivy League credentials whose cool low key style would transform the culture of Washington and lead America into a new harmonious postracial era while achieving miracles of bipartisan cooperation.

It has become quite clear how this ridiculous wishful fantasy has really played out.

There exists a widespread and fast growing international speculation that an objective examination of Barack Obama's hidden paper trail would clearly reveal that his meteoric rise up the educational and career ladders was largely the result of multiple affirmative action decsions and that his vaunted intellectual reputation was greatly exaggerated.

In short, just another leftist ideologue big city machine politician with more than a touch of narcissism and a proven record of self-serving dealmaking.

Barack Obama and his handlers were able to hide his past and explain away and minimize his associations with highly controversial individuals and groups.

What is being hidden and why are they hding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 5:07 AM | Report abuse

Birthers will never be satisfied with any documentary evidence or citations to law; instead speculation and supposition trumps all.

Posted by: adelef_2000 | February 16, 2011 8:19 AM | Report abuse

[slamming drooled: "they love Palin! After all, stupid IS as stupid DOES!"]

You betcha'!

Obama’s SOTU Address: Least Smart Since FDR
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/01/keeping_it_simple_obama_record.php

"President Obama now has the LOWEST average Flesch-Kincaid score for State of the Union addresses of any modern president — with his 8.5 grade level falling just below the 8.6 score recorded by George H.W. Bush during his presidency."

*wicked smaht*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 16, 2011 8:40 AM | Report abuse

And, where is the surprise in all of this? Enough about Palin, she's not going to run. She's in it for the attention (old beauty queens never just fade away) and the fees she can charge.

Posted by: jckdoors | February 16, 2011 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Forget the birther issue. He's a child living in Indonesia. It is decided that he is going back to Hawaii to live with the grandparents. He doesn't have a US Passport (at the time, children traveled on their Mother's passport). He flies to Hawaii but his Mother and Stepfather stay in Indonesia. How did he get back? What passport did he travel on?

Forget that passport (he was a kid after all). He had international travel as an adult yet has never had a US passport. How did that happen?

He goes to college. What is his nationality on his applications? Why are his records sealed.

He is an Associated Professor of Constitutional Law in Chicago (not that he seems to know a whole lot about the Constitution). Nobody can be found that has ever taken a class by him, there are no records of him ever having taught there. Professors had the same problem with this in Alabama and people went to jail.

Why all the stealth from this (alleged) champion of transparency?

*Crimes and Misdemeanors*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 16, 2011 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Wow that one sure got up the hit count.

You can go home early today, Greg.

And to think that these people posting this stuff are allowed to vote, to own land, to drive, to buy alcohol.

To bear children.

That is justbso wrong.

Posted by: caothien9 | February 16, 2011 9:29 AM | Report abuse

People believe what they want to believe. Obama was born in Hawaii, there is evidence for that. There is no evidence for anything else. Some people don't like the fact that Obama is president. Why? Because he's black, he's a liberal, he appealed to younger voters, he made a lot of promises, and he inspired hope instead of fear, and he's got a weird name. Some people just weren't/aren't ready for one or most of those things. So they cling to their persistent, erroneous belief (fact: belief is based on faith, not fact) that he was not born a US citizen.

Your world is what you make it - if you want to live in fear and be consumed with paranoia and suspicion and negative thoughts all the time - it's your life. It's a bitter one, but it's your life. Me, I'd rather be inspired by hope...

Posted by: ktvanw | February 16, 2011 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Contrary to a popular misconception, there is currently no requirement for the FBI or CIA or any other law enforcement or intelligence entity to conduct any sort of background investigation or security clearance on American presidential candidates.

The only vetting of them is the actual process of a presidential campaign, with the schedule of primary elections and nominating conventions and through to November, with public opinion and ballots cast as the ultimate deciding factors.

Once the results of a presidential election are certified by the Electoral College, the matter is a fait accompli.

Astute observers in corridors of power around the world and other quarters consider that Barack Obama's greatest political liability and obstacle to re-election is the fast growing awareness of the fact that he continues to conceal virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, in a tight shroud of secrecy.

American voters of all political persuasions can recall the Obama 2008 campaign repeatedly promising that their administration would uphold the highest ethical standards with a particular emphasis on transparency.

A vast majority of these voters believe that the process of running for President of the United States should be the toughest public job interview on the planet.

The sad fact remains that the current president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable background information that he has provided.

Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate, school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a substantial sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been their primary provider of these services.

Barack Obama and his handlers were able to successfully hide his past and explain away and minimize his associations with highly controversial individuals and groups during their 2008 campaign.

Will they be able to effectively repeat this deception between now and 6 November 2012?

Only if you let them.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 9:45 AM | Report abuse

["Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate, school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations."]

But they're still "The Most Open and Transparent Administration in History" (Tm).

*Hopey-Changey*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 16, 2011 9:58 AM | Report abuse

slamming drooled: "they love Palin! After all, stupid IS as stupid DOES!"]

You betcha'!

Obama’s SOTU Address: Least Smart Since FDR
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/01/keeping_it_simple_obama_record.php

"President Obama now has the LOWEST average Flesch-Kincaid score for State of the Union addresses of any modern president — with his 8.5 grade level falling just below the 8.6 score recorded by George H.W. Bush during his presidency."

*wicked smaht*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst
_____________________
Flesch-Kinkaid measures the readability of the text, not the intelligence of the writer. It actually takes more intelligence, and better writing skills, to write clearly and concisely, to a lower grade-level equivalent. Speeches in particular should be written at lower levels than text meant to be read.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 10:08 AM | Report abuse

slamming drooled: "they love Palin! After all, stupid IS as stupid DOES!"]

You betcha'!

Obama’s SOTU Address: Least Smart Since FDR
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/01/keeping_it_simple_obama_record.php

"President Obama now has the LOWEST average Flesch-Kincaid score for State of the Union addresses of any modern president — with his 8.5 grade level falling just below the 8.6 score recorded by George H.W. Bush during his presidency."

*wicked smaht*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst
_________________________
or to put it another way, FDR was even lower, and no one has accused him of being dumb. What it should say is that Obama wrote the best written SOTU since FDR, but couldn't quite match him.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

birthers consistently ignore what a birth certificate is, especially when referring to an "original" one. There is no such thing. Original simply means not a photocopy. A BC ordered the day after the state department of vital statistics records information received from the hosptial or doc or midwife is no more original than one ordered today. Both are original certificates by the state that their records reflect that you were born there.

State BCs take many forms, and have changed over the years, now including less information from the state records than used to be the case, for privacy reasons. The Nordyke twins have a HI BC that they got long ago. Obama's would look just like theirs had he ordered one then. The twins couldn't get another one that looks like their old one if their lives depended on it. Nor could Obama

Nor would HI have any version of a long form for Obama. States don't make BCs for themselves, and don't keep copies of those they issue. HI doesn't have a copy of the twins BC, and couldn't produce another one if they wanted to. What it can do is check its official vital statistics records and generate a BC on request.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 10:25 AM | Report abuse

or to do this at a lower grade level. I was born in SD. My parents orderd a BC the month after I was born. It has all the info BCs used to have. It was typed by a clerk, signed in ink and has a raised seal. It was GENERATED by a clerk sitting at a typewriter based on information received from the hospital and doctor (whoever filled out the form the state proscribes - which is not a BC).

SD did not make a copy to keep for its own amusement. I couldn't get another one that looks like it. No one in SD government could either. If I ran for president, there would be no original that either I or SD could produce if my mother hadn't ordered one the month after I was born or had I lost it in the years since then. I have ordered several more since then (for bar associations and others that require originals and keep them - note, "originals" - no way I was giving them my old one), and they have none of the info my old one has.

have I made myself clear?

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Interesting thing about this board. You can start at any spot, hit the page down key, and you'll hit a piece of moronic gibberish drooled by a slackjawed, inbred teabagger.

Posted by: Observer691 | February 16, 2011 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Astute observers in corridors of power around the world and other quarters consider that Barack Obama's infamous original typewritten long form birth certificate, the most widely discussed item from the current president's hidden paper trail, is actually the least relevant of all of his concealed records and documents, if in fact it does indeed exist.

They understand that the truths about Barack Obama's place of birth and the identity of both of his parents are far less important to the future of the United States than the truths about what makes him tick and who is pulling his strings, so to speak.

Whether the current president's biological father was the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." or the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis or the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate - see cashill.com among many other sources) or some other man is rather insignificant compared with the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that modern postwar American voters had become accustomed to having the mainstream media provide for them, until 2008 when Barack Obama received a remarkable special exception from the traditional expectation that such candidates should allow for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

In their eagerness to "make history" by covering the campaign of the man whom they were clearly very interested in helping to become the first black president, the mainstream media failed in their essential national responsibility, namely to report on significant events with thoroughness and impartial objectivity. They ignored their duty to search for the truth and should be regarded with disdain by all people who value information in a free society.

There have certainly been a few occasions when presidential candidates have been evasive or less than completely forthcoming in following this unofficial customary procedure.

The medical records of JFK were allegedly sanitized to delete his diagnosis of Addison's disease and history of treatments for STD related maladies. The financial records of LBJ were allegedly altered to conceal the extent of his business ownerships and investment holdings. The national guard service records of W were allegedly missing or incomplete regarding his attendance and compliance with certain standard regulations.

All of these instances pale in comparison with the astounding unprecedented totality of secrecy that guards practically every original record and document from the entire life of Barack Obama.

Virtually the entire paper trail of the current president's existence, from birth to the White House, continues to remain deeply hidden away.

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 11:59 AM | Report abuse

"birthers consistently ignore what a birth certificate is, especially when referring to an "original" one. There is no such thing....

Nor would HI have any version of a long form for Obama. States don't make BCs for themselves, and don't keep copies of those they issue. HI doesn't have a copy of the twins BC, and couldn't produce another one if they wanted to. What it can do is check its official vital statistics records and generate a BC on request."

Oh, the poor Birthers are confused, are they? Right. The State of HI at one point confirmed there was an "original birth certificate on record", its just that we cannot see it, so we have to take HI bureaucrat Chiyome Fukino's word for it.

“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wYOqE4H4V6U/SQ9jk0XwP8I/AAAAAAAAAZY/_LDcULdVwoc/s1600-h/08-93.JPG


So, there *is* an original long form, the State of HI has confirmed they have it, and it is not the birthers who are confused. We ask that it be released. How unreasonable is that?

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 12:00 PM | Report abuse

What the article fails to mention about this survey (biased crappy reporting again) is that 42% OF DEMOCRATS DO NOT BELIEVE OBAMA WAS BORN IN THE US.
The press does its best to make conservatives seem unreasonable, the problem is two-thirds of this country identify themselves as conservative.
If I show up for a new job I must present valid ID, this is a reasonable request. If I fail to provide the required documentation it would appear to my prospective employer that I have something to hide. This is not unreasonable.
I recently had to apply for a new passport and because I was born overseas to US military personell, I had to provide 3 different documents to prove my citizenship. A "certifiacte of live birth" would not be considered acceptable for a passport and certainly is not acceptable for landing the job of leader of the free world.
I repeat, according to the survey 42% OF DEMOCRATS DO NOT BELIEVE OBAMA WAS BORN IN THE USA.

Posted by: changein2012 | February 16, 2011 12:08 PM | Report abuse

"birthers consistently ignore what a birth certificate is, especially when referring to an "original" one. There is no such thing....

Nor would HI have any version of a long form for Obama. States don't make BCs for themselves, and don't keep copies of those they issue. HI doesn't have a copy of the twins BC, and couldn't produce another one if they wanted to. What it can do is check its official vital statistics records and generate a BC on request."

Oh, the poor Birthers are confused, are they? Right. The State of HI at one point confirmed there was an "original birth certificate on record", its just that we cannot see it, so we have to take HI bureaucrat Chiyome Fukino's word for it.

“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wYOqE4H4V6U/SQ9jk0XwP8I/AAAAAAAAAZY/_LDcULdVwoc/s1600-h/08-93.JPG


So, there *is* an original long form, the State of HI has confirmed they have it, and it is not the birthers who are confused. We ask that it be released. How unreasonable is that?

Posted by: WillvK
_______________________
it's very unreasonable. First, HI is referring to its records, kept in the form it keeps records, of the forms filed by the hospital and doc, or the information from them. they are not referring to what the Nordyke twins have. No state makes another copy of a BC for itself, long or short, signed in ink or sealed.

as for producing them, that's illegal in every state. not even Obama could get a copy of the records in the form kept by the state, let alone anyone else.

you are mistaken several times over.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 12:08 PM | Report abuse


What the article fails to mention about this survey (biased crappy reporting again) is that 42% OF DEMOCRATS DO NOT BELIEVE OBAMA WAS BORN IN THE US.
The press does its best to make conservatives seem unreasonable, the problem is two-thirds of this country identify themselves as conservative.
If I show up for a new job I must present valid ID, this is a reasonable request. If I fail to provide the required documentation it would appear to my prospective employer that I have something to hide. This is not unreasonable.
I recently had to apply for a new passport and because I was born overseas to US military personell, I had to provide 3 different documents to prove my citizenship. A "certifiacte of live birth" would not be considered acceptable for a passport and certainly is not acceptable for landing the job of leader of the free world.
I repeat, according to the survey 42% OF DEMOCRATS DO NOT BELIEVE OBAMA WAS BORN IN THE USA.

Posted by: changein2012
_______________________
if most republicans and 42% of democrats believe Obama was not born in the US, then almost half of all americans believe that. that's nonsense. no poll shows anything of the sort.

Obama's produced certificate is the only certificate the state of HI will issue to anyone, period. It is valid for all purposes, employment, passport, or otherwise, and must under federal law be honored by every state.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 12:13 PM | Report abuse

The story was posted almost 24 hours ago. In that time, not a single birther has dared to proffer evidence that Obama was born anywhere other than where his legally valid COLB says he was born: Honolulu, Hawaii. Yet the birthers are the ones demanding more evidence. Funny.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 12:38 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, that's untrue. WillvK gave you circumstantial evidence at 12:23 AM. On prior threads, you have been given direct evidence too. You still haven't answered my question to you from last night at 9:31 PM. I will only wait 24 hours.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's place of birth and the identity of both of his parents is far less important to the future of the United States than the truth about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

Why does Barack Obama continue to conceal virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, in a tight shroud of secrecy?

Back and forth arguing over the infamous original typewritten long form birth certificate, the most widely discussed item from Barack Obama's hidden paper trail, if it in fact does indeed exist, is merely a distraction from the essential question.

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 1:15 PM | Report abuse

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 1:15 PM
++++++++++++

You didn't vote for him, and you won't vote for him, no matter what information he provides you. We get that. Why keep playing your silly "I demand more information" game?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 1:29 PM | Report abuse

"Funny, though insults get tossed around here freely, no one has provided a reason for Obama not to do so.


Posted by: WillvK | February 15, 2011 7:23 PM "
__________________________________________

He hasn't provided the evidence for the same reason that Glenn Beck still has yet to produce proof that he never raped and murdered a girl in 1990.

Posted by: Patzer111 | February 16, 2011 1:32 PM | Report abuse

clawrence,

WillkV did not provide any evidence. He simply said that Obama could provide more evidence if he wanted to. Simple question: do you have proof that Obama was born somewhere other than Honolulu? Where? Put up or shut up. The COLB is legal proof of the date and place of birth, acceptable under federal law, and "self-authenticating" evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

And no Clawrence (JakeD), I'm not saying no one has ever proferred evidence. You have in the past (many months ago, when Weigel was still blogging at WaPo) offered up the incomplete transcript of an interview with his grandmother, leaving out the part where she clarifies that he was born in the United States.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's astounding unprecedented concealment of virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, is a disgraceful violation of his 2008 campaign's repeated promises of transparency.

It is also an infamous departure from the modern postwar tradition that presidential candidates should allow for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

The mainstream media's complicity in this deception marks them as worthy of the contempt of Americans of all political persuasions who value information in a free society.

Various Obamapologists who continue to defend the indefensible and obscure the real issue, which is personal truth and transparency, are also viewed with disdain by those who know better.

6 November 2012 is fast approaching.

cashill.com

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

6 November 2012 is fast approaching.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 1:46 PM
+++++++++

Gonna vote for Alan Keyes again?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 1:51 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, the fact that Obama won't consent to the release of Hawaii's records IS circumstantial evidence and his grandmother's statement IS direct evidence (whether you think it is relevant, probative, credible or prejudicial is a different issue). I am not JakeD, though, so I have no further "proof" (is that different than one piece of "evidence"?).

Patzer111, that's not true. Your analogy would be spot on if Glenn Beck asserted "I was in seclusion at an all-male monastery for the entire year of 1990" but then refused consent to the release of said monastery's records.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:

Just keep guzzling Obama's Kool-Aid, you deluded fool and/or leftist apologist.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 16, 2011 2:14 PM | Report abuse

clawrence:

I go into court. I present my state-issued COLB as evidence of the place and date of my birth. And your "evidence" that I wasn't born on that date, or in that place, is that I won't submit even more evidence in addition to the self-authenticating COLB?

That isn't evidence. It is argument. And in light of prima facie evidence, the burden shifts to you (if the burden was mine to begin with).

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think that the long form certificate would satisfy the birthers? You know that would make no difference to them. So how can anyone pay them any attention at all? They make themselves look so bad and it's useful for dems to show them for what they are. The GOP better distance themselves soon.

Posted by: fishinfool | February 16, 2011 2:25 PM | Report abuse

No, my "evidence" would include eyewitness testimony and documents including the fact that other people not born in Hawaii were able to procure the exact same type of COLB. In this hypothetical court, are you Obama's personal counsel (because YOUR birthplace is not at issue) on a quo warranto action filed by the Attorney General of the United States?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Quo warranto.

JakeD for sure.

'Bye.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 2:32 PM | Report abuse

fishinfool, is Chris Matthews a "birther"?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/12/27/chris_matthews_why_doesnt_obama_just_release_the_birth_certificate.html

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 2:34 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, I could be Orly Taitz too. Why aren't you accusing me of being a female dentist/lawyer instead? You were the one complaining that not a single birther dared to respond to you. Did the heat in the kitchen get too high for you?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 2:39 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1: You legal eagle you, I am still awaiting your proof that a foreign-born Obama could *not* have obtained a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" (CHB) under the lax Territorial laws existing up until 1972, which would be used to generate his COLB listing the birthplace as Honolulu.

It is because of these lax laws that the Homelands program didn't accept the COLB to prove their own version of native born.

The COLB may be good enough to get on the youth soccer team, but it doesn't cut if for the NBC requirement of the US Constitution.

So, since neither you nor anybody else can prove that the HI COLB is sufficient evidence of birth on US soil, maybe we can solve this by Obama having HI release his primary long-form document, whatever that may be. You know, full-disclosure and transparency. That is what you are against, correct?

And what is with you insisting I find evidence of his birth somewhere else? That's not my job. If you show up for youth soccer you don't make the coach prove you weren't born somewhere else. You don't show a newspaper birth announcement. You show the proper birth certificate. The long form certificate sufficient for the qualifications for office resides in HI archives. Out with them!

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 2:56 PM | Report abuse

It's just amazing that the press continues to feed the rabid cancervative dogs with the subject of President Obama's birth certificate, yet the press is chickensh*t when it comes to questioning the fact that Sarah Palin has NEVER produced Trig's birth certificate to easily and quickly end the suspected fake pregnancy.

And before any RWers respond with the usual "Trig is not running for president" retort, it speaks to her character and judgment, or lack thereof, that she would fake a pregnancy in this day and age to cover up a politically embarrassing family situation, and then use Trig as her "pro-life" credentials.

Mr. Sargent, now that 2 people have come forward to publicly state that Palin was not pregnant with Trig, not counting the masseuse, why hasn't Palin's FAKED pregnancy been investigated by reporters?

The Perfidity of Sarah Palin, Chapter 2, The "Wild Ride"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZSVMzeR5jU

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 16, 2011 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"The COLB may be good enough to get on the youth soccer team, but it doesn't cut if for the NBC requirement of the US Constitution."

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 2:56 PM
++++++++++++++

Really? But you can't cite the provision of the Constitution or federal law stating that a Certificate of Live Birth issued by a State, under its seal and signed by the authorized official, is insufficient proof.

And you probably can't identify any President in the nation's first 100 years who even had a birth certificate. So how can there be a constitutional standard that requires a particular form of birth certificate?

Don't worry . . . I all get the fact that it is insufficient proof for YOU. Any proof would be insufficient for you, who have no evidence Obama was born anywhere else.

I'm not going to waltz in circles with birthers any more today. So you can snarkily declare victory!

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 3:12 PM | Report abuse

WillvK, I suspect that we've seen the last of "bearclaw1" on this thread. It was too much to handle both of us ganging up on him.

ProChoiceGrandma, I agree that Sarah Palin should consent to Idaho releasing her original birth certificate if she indeed decides to run for President and (if Obama does the same for Sasha and Malia) Trig's too. Is that good enough for you?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Sorry Clawrence12, not good enough. Sarah Palin used her fake pregnancy of Trig to place her on the self-anointed throne as "pro-life" queen. The anti-choice crowd praise her for not aborting the baby, but she was never pregnant with Trig. She used Trig all throughout the campaign, in her speeches since and in her two books as her political prop.

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 16, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Anyone here actually believe the FBI didn't completely check the background of every president candidate?

Posted by: fishinfool | February 16, 2011 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Short of her running for President, she has no duty to provide you with anything. It was worth a shot to see if you would compromise though.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 3:33 PM | Report abuse

fishinfool, none of us would be privy to the results of an FBI investigation, but John Edwards is now facing indictment for misuse of campaign funds to hide his mistress and their love child.
The McCain campaign spent one weekend doing a google search to vet Sarah Palin.

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 16, 2011 3:39 PM | Report abuse

fishinfool, I believe that the FBI didn't completely check the background of every candidate. Now, do YOU believe that Chris Matthews is a "birther"?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 3:41 PM | Report abuse

clawrence12, why don't you answer my question - don't you think Sarah Palin could end all of the "speculation" surrounding her "pregnancy" with Trig if she simply provided his birth certificate? Why won't she?

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 16, 2011 3:43 PM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma, firstly, you never asked me any questions before your 3:43 PM. Secondly, I don't know why she won't, but I don't think the "speculation" would end if she provided Trig's birth certificate.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone else born in Hawaii get the long form? The state has laws that prevent anyone from getting it. If both governors of Hawaii say they saw it and are convinced of it's legitimacy, shouldn't that be the end of it? One governor was a Republican. What more proof does anyone need? Of course, some wouldn't believe if the birth was filmed with Pearl Harbor in the background. Can't convince them no matter what. Some people think the world is flat but it's not.

Posted by: fishinfool | February 16, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Dear Departed Bearclaw: "Really? But you can't cite the provision of the Constitution or federal law stating that a Certificate of Live Birth issued by a State, under its seal and signed by the authorized official, is insufficient proof."

Nor can I cite the federal law that keeps the 16 year old Canadian Justin Bieber from becoming President. Eligibility requirements are there in the Constitution plain as day, but have no enforcement mechanism. If statutes were drafted, they likely would require proof of a higher standard than a HI COLB. Many of the 57 States are considering laws to require proof of eligibility to be on the 2012 ballot. Great idea!

"And you probably can't identify any President in the nation's first 100 years who even had a birth certificate. So how can there be a constitutional standard that requires a particular form of birth certificate?"

There are provisions in the Constitution that have not been much adjudicated, but they are still there. Just because the Third Amendment has little case law doesn't mean the Government can quarter troops in my house.

Chester Arthur was the last time this came up, and a lot of the issues are similar.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/17/politics/main5246424.shtml

"Don't worry . . . I all get the fact that it is insufficient proof for YOU. Any proof would be insufficient for you, who have no evidence Obama was born anywhere else."

You say nothing will work. Birthers say they want HI to release the long-form BC. You are in favor of skulking secrecy, I am in favor of full-disclosure and transparency.

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 4:22 PM | Report abuse

fishinfool, I would gladly answer your multiple questions posted at 4:12 PM just as soon as you answer my simple question posted to you at 2:34 PM.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama cannot "consent" to the release of the "long form" if he wanted to, nor can he insist. Nor can he get a copy for himself and release it. HI law, like the law of all 50 states, precludes disclosure of original source documentation.

And it isn't what any of you birthers think it is in the first place. HI does not have a pretty, typed, signed in ink, raised seal BC for Obama like the Nordyke twins have, sitting in a vault somewhere. They don't make duplicate originals for themselves. There is no such thing as "the original 1961 Birth Certificate" unless Obama's mom ordered one in 1961 and kept it.

What the state has is some form of record of the data submitted by the hospital and the doctor. Every state collects the data on some sort of official form and then records it, usually electronically. None of these records is itself a BC.

When the person or the parent requests it, the state issues a certificate that the person was born there, hence the term birth certificate, or certificate of birth. The state doesn't keep one. It doesn't have one. HI couldn't produce another one looking like the Nordyke twins BC.

No state permits anyone to obtain, release or even see the state's own records. It would take a change in HI law unprecedented in US history to accomplish what the birthers want.

fishnfool: I used the video with Pearl in the background line a long time ago ;) happy to let you borrow it.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 4:37 PM | Report abuse

WillvK, some of the possible reasons Obama is refusing to consent to the release (other than he is guilty of fraud):

1). Some other information is contained therein which would be embarrassing but not relevant to where he was born;

2). He doesn't want to create a precedent for future Presidents;

3). He doesn't think it's anyone's business; or

4). He honestly doesn't know where he was born, so why chance it?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 4:40 PM | Report abuse

and just by the way, it takes the same state issued, raised seal BC to get your kid on the soccer team as it does to get a passport or admission to the state bar. The exact same one Obama has produced. I have done all three, for my kids and myself, with BCs that look exactly like Obamas. I have one that looks like the Nordykes, because that's what BCs issued long ago used to look like when we used typewriters and fountain pens to produce them, and we weren't worried about privacy and included lots of extraneous information on them. I don't use it for any purpose, and don't need to. It's no more official than one I order today.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 4:42 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, of course he could "consent". You are right that the State of Hawaii could not be forced to release the paper form allegedly transmitted by the hospital (it wasn't electronic back then).

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not refusing to consent to anything. There is no consent he could give, no form he could fill out, no official request for a BC he could submit, no executive order he could sign, that would cause HI to issue anything other than the BC it did issue, and which he posted, and which HI said was the real and only deal. If his mom didn't order one when they looked like the Nordyke's, there will never be one that looks like theirs. Not even the state has one that looks like that. It may have some version of the forms submitted by the hosptial and/or the doc, but they aren't BCs, and no state releases (or copies) them, not no way, not no how, not for anyone. period.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 4:49 PM | Report abuse

By the way, did you ever get around to reading that Michigan case I linked to on the other thread where a woman was prosecuted (and convicted) for using lethal force necessary to protect her unborn child but not necessary to protect her own life?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 4:52 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, of course he could "consent". You are right that the State of Hawaii could not be forced to release the paper form allegedly transmitted by the hospital (it wasn't electronic back then).

Posted by: clawrence12
___________________
we're making progress. the form to which you refer isn't a BC itself, long or short, of course. it's the record upon which a state relies in issuing BCs, whatever form they have taken over the years. Obama cannot "consent" to the release, because it's not in his power to "consent" because state law doesn't permit release or copying whether he consents or not. The state could care less, it doesn't release such documents.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 4:54 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1,

But, but, but, there is a law, or there oughta be a law, and if there was a law what it would say is that a COLB for a dark-skinned guy with a funny name born to parents of different races in a State that isn't even physically attached to the North Murican conteenent isn't adequate to prove eligibility to be Prezeedent of these Youknighted Stetes.

And I remember your image of the birth -- didn't you have Don Ho in the film?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 5:07 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, darn it, I thought you were taking your balls, leaving and never coming back.

JoeT1, of course there is no form he could fill out, no official request for a BC he could submit, no executive order he could sign. Now that you are done with the strawmen arguments, you really think that the (Acting) Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, Loretta Fuddy, would refuse if President Obama showed up in person, with the entire White House press corps in tow, and asked to see his vital records so that the reporters could document it for the sake of the historical record?!

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 5:09 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, darn it, I thought you were taking your balls, leaving and never coming back.

JoeT1, of course there is no form he could fill out, no official request for a BC he could submit, no executive order he could sign. Now that you are done with the strawmen arguments, you really think that the (Acting) Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, Loretta Fuddy, would refuse if President Obama showed up in person, with the entire White House press corps in tow, and asked to see his vital records so that the reporters could document it for the sake of the historical record?!

Posted by: clawrence12
_________________________
now we're really making progress if you admit that nothing short of what you describe would result in the production of anything other than the BC the state issues to those born there.

the answer to your question is two-fold. whether she would or not, she shouldn't, because it would be a violation of HI law for her to comply, and an abuse of power for Obama to ask her to violate state law (and an insult to state's rights, to boot, for a federal executive to pressure a state official to commit an unlawful act).

and finally, that it would take such a stunt is proof enough that there's no reason he should do it at all. Since it would take something that no one is entitled to do, officially or otherwise, why should he?

bearclaw: I've only used the Pearl Harbor visible from the delivery room window line. I've seen others with Don Ho ;).

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:19 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, I see NOTHING! I admit NOTHING!

Seriously, though, I simply asked a question (which you refused to answer; I think that Hawaii would release it short of a personal appearance like that and, obviously, I do not consider it a "stunt"). He should do it so that we can all move on to more important matters. Did you see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Since it would take something that no one is entitled to do, officially or otherwise, why should he?

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:19 PM
++++++++

Simple. Because then the birthers could spout off about Obama being a tyrant who ignores state law and demands special treatment.

And then the State of Hawaii would have to explain to the State Department, every state DMV, and youth sports leagues around the country why the signed, sealed Hawaii COLB should still be given "full faith and credit" when the State of Hawaii obviously thinks that the "real" evidence of date and place of birth is hidden away in state files.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 5:31 PM | Report abuse

or to put it another way - Obama could entertain the idea of intimidating a state official into violating her oath of office and committing an unlawful act by engaging in a gross abuse of authority and unconstitutional violation of state sovereignity.

or he could decide that that really isn't a great idea, and wouldn't satisfy anyone anyway.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:35 PM | Report abuse

I would not claim that the President was being a tyrant who ignores state law and demands special treatment if he showed up personally or even just made a phone call.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse

but I don't think the "speculation" would end if she provided Trig's birth certificate.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 3:55 PM |
+++++++++++

or he could decide that that really isn't a great idea, and wouldn't satisfy anyone anyway.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:35 PM
++++++++++++

Odd, but I think a consensus is forming.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 5:38 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, I see NOTHING! I admit NOTHING!

Seriously, though, I simply asked a question (which you refused to answer; I think that Hawaii would release it short of a personal appearance like that and, obviously, I do not consider it a "stunt"). He should do it so that we can all move on to more important matters. Did you see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12
____________________
as bearclaw notes, even if he could ask nicely for a personal favor, it would still be an improper abuse of privilege, and still undermine the authority of the state by underminining the bona fides of the state's official BC. a seriously bad idea.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I would not claim that the President was being a tyrant who ignores state law and demands special treatment if he showed up personally or even just made a phone call.

Posted by: clawrence12
_________________
but that's exactly what he would be.

bearclaw: you're killing me :)

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Top Ten reasons Obama is refusing to consent to the release (cont.)

5). Because then the birthers could spout off about Obama being a tyrant who ignores state law and demands special treatment.

6). It wouldn't satisfy anyone anyway.

Keep 'em coming!

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 5:43 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

7). Because Sarah Palin won't release Trig's birth certificate.

8). The DMV!!!!

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 5:50 PM | Report abuse

9). It would undermine the authority of the state by underminining the bona fides of the state's official BC, ultimately undermining those Chilean miners who were rescued and may want to someday run for President.

And the NUMBER ONE Reason:

Bo, the dog, ate it.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 6:08 PM | Report abuse

clarence12.....No I do not think Chris Mathews is a birther. No one in their right mind is a birther. Happy?

Posted by: fishinfool | February 16, 2011 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of which, Hawaii is rabies free and has a strict quarantine law for dogs from outside the State. THAT law was nonetheless waived when Bo visited with the First Family in December, 2010, but the State would never waive the law regarding Obama's vital records, no way, no how, not for anyone. period.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 6:24 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1"Obama is not refusing to consent to anything. There is no consent he could give, no form he could fill out, no official request for a BC he could submit, no executive order he could sign, that would cause HI to issue anything other than the BC it did issue, and which he posted, and which HI said was the real and only deal...[etc]"

You are just spouting nonsense. Do you have a link or substantiation for these claims? No.

The State of HI does retain original primary documents, and does issue them on request. This is spelled out in HI's brochure for "Applying for Hawaiian Home Lands."

See the image of the actual brochure here:

http://img593.imageshack.us/g/hawaiirulesone.jpg/

"Primary Documents

The primary documents used to show you are of age and a qualified native Hawaiian are:

A certified copy of Certificate of Birth;
A certified copy of Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, including testimonies; or
A certified copy of Certificate of Delayed Birth...."

None of these are the COLB. The brochure specifies how the applicant is to request these documents from the Vital Records Section of the DOH. Obama could follow these same procedures to produce his "Primary Documents", but doesn't.

Your and others claim that 'birthers' are cretinous morons would have more credence if your posts weren't completely false.

Why don't you do us a favor, read the brochure, and come back here contrite about your embarrassing errors.

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 6:28 PM | Report abuse

And the NUMBER ONE Reason:

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 6:08 PM
+++++++++++

5, 6, 7, 8, 9 . . . 1

Birther counting.

Maybe birthers are also so old they can't stay awake late enough to watch how Letterman does a "Top 10." Hint: it is a countdown, not a countup-down.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Your and others claim that 'birthers' are cretinous morons would have more credence if your posts weren't completely false.

Why don't you do us a favor, read the brochure, and come back here contrite about your embarrassing errors.


Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 6:28 PM |
+++++++++++++

Obama isn't trying to prove he is a "qualified native Hawaiian." Ethnicity is irrelevant to eligibility for the Presidency. Next you'll be asking why Obama hasn't produced the documentation required to become an enrolled member of the Capitan Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of California.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 6:46 PM | Report abuse

and the COLB is the one and only document available to Obama. none of those other certificates represent the hospital and physician source documents either. Obama couldn't apply for any of them, and the state doesn't have one of each just waiting for him to do so.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 16, 2011 6:53 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, you mean the one and only document LEGALLY available, right? LEGALLY, Bo should not have been allowed into Hawaii this past Christmas either.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 7:07 PM | Report abuse

The mockery of those who question Obama's birthplace and/or his eligibility to be POTUS has absolutely nothing to do with his race. Most are Christians that worship in multi-race churches. They would enthusiastically vote for Alan West or Cain. Many are those that supported Alan Keyes, a black man, that first stated in a debate for Illinois senate race with Obama "Well, you are not even American..you were born in Kenya" ..to which Obama replied: "Well, I am not running for President." Wonder why he would say that of all things? Could it be as someone who studied Constitutional law Obama knew full well that only a Natural Born Citizen could be eligible to be President..and that even the fact that his father was Kenyan at the time of his birth made him ineligible. Then you also have Phillip Berg, a Hillary supporter and lawyer, that brought the first lawsuit to challenge that Obama was not eligible because he believed Obama was born in Kenya. Maybe many of these supporters that question Obama's place of birth are former Hillary supporters that see the strength in Palin. No one supports Palin because of her own belief that Obama was born in Kenya because Palin doesn't touch the subject except that she says she takes him at his word.
That's all any of you have done is take him at his word because your so called evidence lacks evidence. I was a former birth certificate clerk at a hospital and many times someone who come by to get information on how to obtain a COLB for a student studying abroad that had a child overseas. All they needed was proof of permanent address for the mother, fill out the information on the long form, sign their own name, have it notorized and in a week to 10 days they received the COLB like the one posted for Obama online...The DOH then sent out announcements to the newspapers...all showing the permanent address. I then would tell the relative when they received the COLB from the state office to send it to the mother and she would have no trouble in returning with her American citizen child.
Ignorance is anyone who doesn't know that this type BC and the announcements could exist even if Obama was born elsewhere other than Hawaii.
Ignorant and uneducated are all the Republican politicians and media people listing Bobby Jindall and Marco Rubio as potential Presidential running candidates.
Ignorant and uneducated is the writer of this article, Mr. Sargeant, most media people, and many of our own politicians.. that has no idea what the difference between a citizen, a naturalized citizen, and a Natural Born Citizen is.
They don't even know that Obama has set precedence in being the only President in History that had a father that never ever became an American citizen. Other than the founding fathers who were exempt..there has only been Chester Arthur whose father was a subject of the British throne because he was born in Ireland. The opposition sought the whole time he was in office to oust him because of it.

Posted by: ParkerRules | February 16, 2011 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Bearclaw: "Obama isn't trying to prove he is a "qualified native Hawaiian." Ethnicity is irrelevant to eligibility for the Presidency..."

Bearclaw, I thought you were busy arguing cases before the Supreme Court or something.

You're not fooling anybody with this pretended ethnicity confusion. I posted the link for the Hawaiian Home Lands application because it proves that:(1)The HI Dept. of Health has retained the Primary Documents. (2) Until at least 2009, these had been available upon request, and (3)The Primary Document is considered by the State of HI a more credible document for purposes of establishing Hawaiian (and thus U.S.) birth than the COLB.

Please feel free to factually address any of these points, without trying to use tangential distractions. Is feigned confusion and a distraction one of your "20 years a practicing attorney" tricks?

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Is feigned confusion and a distraction one of your "20 years a practicing attorney" tricks?

Posted by: WillvK | February 16, 2011 7:48 PM
++++++++++++

The COLB is legal proof of the place and date of birth. The fact that Hawaii has in the past or may in the future issue different forms related to programs for which the President is categorically not eligible does not affect the validity of the COLB one iota. If it did, then a person born in Hawaii, who seeks to get a driver's license in California, or Kansas, or Illinois, who needs to prove that he was born in the United States, and is of a certain age, will be faced with the following,: "We cannot accept the State of Hawaii's COLB because there is another form that you could get if you were a native Hawaiian, and it has more information, so you are going to have to get that form, which categorically doesn't apply to you, but we don't care, because we want the form that has the most information."

You are making perfect birther sense, which is to say, no sense at all.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 8:06 PM | Report abuse

clawrence,

The Obamas didn't break the law bringing Bo into Hawaii:

"Typically, dogs and cats have to be quarantined for up to 120 days on arrival, unless they qualify for the newer "5 days or less" quarantine program. It requires at least two rabies vaccinations, with the most recent being at least 90 days before the pet arrives in the Rainbow State, and the pet has to take a blood test to make sure it is rabies free. Owners who want to use the expedited method also need to make sure that they have a microchip ID inserted into their pet.

This is Bo's first trip to Hawaii, but his family knew the rules and started planning months in advance, getting the proper shots and paperwork, allowing Bo to be released directly to the Obama's at the airport. State law allows that, at the state Agriculture Department's discretion, and a fee of $165."

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/obama-dog-bo-avoids-rabies-quarantine-hawaii/story?id=12475369

Summary: you lied.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 8:16 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, no I did not lie as I never stated the Obamas broke any law. I said they got the law "waived" but don't worry, I won't call you a liar about your accusation or that you weren't going to waltz in a circle anymore.

fishinfool, as I already said, no one else could probably get the long form (or whatever else Hawaii has from 1961). If both governors of Hawaii say they saw it (they didn't) and are convinced of its legitimacy, I don't think that should be the end of it. Even if one governor was a Republican, I want to see the original vital records. Notwithstanding, I am happy. This type of exchange is why I posted yesterday that it would have been to leave this thread alone.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 9:29 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1, no I did not lie as I never stated the Obamas broke any law.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 9:29 PM

LEGALLY, Bo should not have been allowed into Hawaii this past Christmas either.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 7:07 PM
++++++++++++

You lied again. About not lying. Legally, Bo met the requirements to come into Hawaii. And it wasn't a "waiver" of the law, it was in compliance with the law.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 16, 2011 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Does "I'm not going to waltz in circles with birthers any more today" qualify under your definition of "lying"?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 16, 2011 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Bearclaw: "The COLB is legal proof of the place and date of birth."

You are beginning to sound like Al Gore repeating "There is no controlling legal authority". The HI COLB may be de jure, but is not de facto.

I have established that in the laws existing prior to 1972 that a foreign-born Obama could have obtained a 'Certification of Hawaiian Birth' and subsequently been issued a perfectly legal COLB with a legal fiction Honolulu birthplace.

HI doesn't care if it can fob off their shaky COLB's on the DMV's of other unsuspecting States, but when their *own* money is as stake, as in the Native Hawaiian program, they spurn the COLB and insist on the long form. If HI won't accept their own COLB to distribute welfare, I don't see why the US is obligated to accept HI's suspect COLB to meet the specific eligibility requirements of the US Constitution.

Correct me if I am wrong. You believe:

--Obama has no obligation for full-disclosure and transparency regarding his Constitutional eligibility. Better that Obama should keep his little secrets.

---The HI COLB, which isn't valid enough to get a Hawaiian welfare, is a sterling credential to get (a Democrat) the Presidency.

---You don't care about the actual facts of eligibility, as long as some bureaucrat in the Hawaii Dept. of Health calls it legal, that will do for you.

Posted by: WillvK | February 17, 2011 12:11 AM | Report abuse

There is not a shred of evidence that Governor Palin has lent her name to this birther nonsense. In fact, on the main Palin websites such as Conservatives4Palin, posters who even raise the issue are banned. This attempt by yet another WaPo journo to associate Palin with another scandal just shows once again that that the 'blood libel' failed. I guess you are running out of lies.

Posted by: genecarr100 | February 17, 2011 5:24 AM | Report abuse

The entire debate about "birthers" and birth certificates, whether they be the computer generated laser printed short form version that was posted on the Obama 2008 campaign website, or the infamous original typewritten long form document which has never been verified to even exist, serves as a convenient smokescreen for the real issue, which is a simple matter of personal truth and transparency.

Barack Obama's place of birth and the identity of both of his parents are far less important to the future of the United States than the truth about what makes him tick and who is pulling his strings, so to speak.

Whether the current president's biological father was the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." or the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis or the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate - see cashill.com among many other sources) or some other man is rather insignificant compared with the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that modern postwar American voters had become accustomed to having the mainstream media provide for them, until 2008 when Barack Obama received an astonishing special exception from the traditional expectation that such candidates should allow for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

Barack Obama's 2008 campaign repeatedly promised that their administration would uphold the highest ethical standards with a particular emphasis on transparency.

A vast majority of American voters of all political persuasions believe that the process of running for President of the United States should be the toughest public job interview on the planet.

The sad fact remains that the current president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable background information that he has provided.

Virtually the entire paper trail of Barack Obama's existence, from birth to the White House, continues to remain deeply hidden away in a tight shroud of secrecy.

Thus, the real issue is about personal truth and transparency, not birth certificates.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Bearclaw: "The COLB is legal proof of the place and date of birth."

You are beginning to sound like Al Gore repeating "There is no controlling legal authority". The HI COLB may be de jure, but is not de facto.

I have established that in the laws existing prior to 1972 that a foreign-born Obama could have obtained a 'Certification of Hawaiian Birth' and subsequently been issued a perfectly legal COLB with a legal fiction Honolulu birthplace.

HI doesn't care if it can fob off their shaky COLB's on the DMV's of other unsuspecting States, but when their *own* money is as stake, as in the Native Hawaiian program, they spurn the COLB and insist on the long form. If HI won't accept their own COLB to distribute welfare, I don't see why the US is obligated to accept HI's suspect COLB to meet the specific eligibility requirements of the US Constitution.

Correct me if I am wrong. You believe:

________________________________
you have established nothing. you have not established that someone born elsewhere could get a COLB without being born in HI.

the native program is beside the point. all it proves is that a BC doesn't prove you are a native. of course it doesn't, it just proves you were born in HI, which is all it's supposed to do. a valid BC won't help a native american prove entitlement to tribal benefits either, but it's the only BC a native american can get, and a short form COLB is the only BC a native Hawaiian can get. All this means is that proving you are a native is complicated. It does not mean that Obama can get a long form, or that he would be able to if he were born in HI.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 10:54 AM | Report abuse

JoeT1:

You continue to prove my point. "Birthers" and birth certificates are a distraction from the real issue of personal truth and transparency.

Barack Obama continues to conceal practically every original record and document from his entire past.

Virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, continues to remain deeply hidden away in a tight shroud of secrecy.

Perhaps you could attempt to address that issue, instead of repeated postings blathering back and forth about birth certificates.

Unless that's all you got.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 11:09 AM | Report abuse

JoeT1, you keep saying "Obama can't get a long form" but you never answered my questions. Do you really think that the President of the United States and favorite son could not get Hawaii to open its file for inspection? Did you at least see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, as you can see, he won't even answer valid questions about birth certificates. You won't get anywhere with JoeT1.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

genecarr100 on 2-17-11 at 5:24 AM said:
"There is not a shred of evidence that Governor Palin has lent her name to this birther nonsense. In fact, on the main Palin websites such as Conservatives4Palin, posters who even raise the issue are banned. This attempt by yet another WaPo journo to associate Palin with another scandal just shows once again that that the 'blood libel' failed. I guess you are running out of lies."
--------------------------
Sorry to disappoint you, genecarr100, but yes she did join in the birther nonsense:

Rusty Humphries interviews Sarah Palin about Obama birth certificate:

http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/002387/

Palin goes birther: Obama birth certificate “fair question” and “public rightly is still making it an issue” 12-3-09

Transcript:
HUMPHRIES: Sarah Palin here on the Rusty Humphries Show. One of the questions Jason asks is would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?

PALIN: I think the public rightly is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue because I think there are enough members of the electorate that still want answers.

HUMPHRIES: Do you think it’s a fair question to be looking at?

PALIN: I think it’s a fair question just like I think past associations and past voting records. All of that is fair game. You know, I’ve got to tell you too, I think our campaign, the McCain-Palin campaign didn’t do a good enough job in that area. We didn’t call out Obama and some of his associates on their records and what their beliefs were, and perhaps what their future plans were, and I don’t think that was fair to voters to not have done our job as candidates and a campaign to bring to light a lot of things that now we’re seeing manifest in the administration.

HUMPHRIES: I mean, truly if your past is fair game and your kids are fair game, certainly Obama’s past should be. I mean, we want to treat men and women equally, right?

PALIN: Hey, you know, that’s a great point. And that weird conspiracy theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn’t my real son, and a lot of people that went "Well, you need to produce his birth certificate, you need to prove that he’s your kid," which we have done, but yeah, so maybe we can reverse that, and use the same [inaudible] thinking on the other one.

(Note: Palin has NEVER produced Trig’s birth certificate, has never proved she gave birth to Trig. She can't produce Trig's birth certificate because it would show he was born much earlier than 4-18-08)

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 17, 2011 11:20 AM | Report abuse

JoeT1, you keep saying "Obama can't get a long form" but you never answered my questions. Do you really think that the President of the United States and favorite son could not get Hawaii to open its file for inspection? Did you at least see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, as you can see, he won't even answer valid questions about birth certificates. You won't get anywhere with JoeT1.

Posted by: clawrence12
_________________________
clawrence: I have answered that question at length, and you know it. it would be an abuse of power for a federal official to ask a state to disregard its own laws, just for him, just as a favor. And it would be a waste of time. you are all asking for a nonexistent long form, ignorant of what a BC even is. Why would he waste the time, doing an improper act, knowing perfectly well that 90% of you wouldn't accept it anyway?

Flashharry: I have no obligation to take the conversation beyond birthers, which is the subject of the blog, just because you want to. Obama hasn't released all that much more or less than previous presidents. I don't recall seeing Bush's Yale transcript, thesis, SAT score or the like. He could spend the rest of his administration trying to disprove lunatic theories that he didn't go to Harvard and never taught Con law.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 11:41 AM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma, saying it's a "fair question" and that someone has the "right" to ask the President it is NOT lending her name to it. She has also said "at no point -- not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews -- have I asked the President to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States". What part of "I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue because I think there are enough members of the electorate that still want answers" don't you understand?

Also, saying she's proven Trig is her kid is not necessarily the same as providing a birth certificate. She has done the former, which is what she was referring to. She could provide the birth certificate, and just like Obama, someone will say that doesn't "prove" it.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Clawrence12, show me ONE place where she has "proven Trig is her kid". I dare ya'!

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 17, 2011 11:48 AM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma:

Perhaps you, too, might consider addressing the real issue.

I don't think anyone else in this entire thread cares about Trig's birth certificate.

So take a deep breath and think about personal truth and transparency, and the promises that were repeatedly made in 2008 from the man who now occupies the White House.

Barack Obama continues to conceal virtually the entire paper trail of his existence, from birth to the White House, in a tight shroud of secrecy.

If Trig's birth certificate, or the lack of it, is more important to you than that, then I would suggest that you have consumed too much Kool-Aid.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 11:49 AM | Report abuse

JoeT1, you have "answered" questions that I didn't ask. Here's a hint: the following questions call for simple "yes" or "no" answers (which you have repeatedly NOT provided).

A). Do you really think that the President of the United States and favorite son could not get Hawaii to open its file for inspection?

B). Did you at least see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 11:51 AM | Report abuse

JoeT1, you have "answered" questions that I didn't ask. Here's a hint: the following questions call for simple "yes" or "no" answers (which you have repeatedly NOT provided).

A). Do you really think that the President of the United States and favorite son could not get Hawaii to open its file for inspection?

B). Did you at least see that Chris Matthews recently asked for it too?

Posted by: clawrence12
__________________
my apologies. I didn't recognize those questions as being directed at me. taking them in reverse order, I did hear about Matthews. Expressing frustration at the persistence of the birther nonsense, ignoring how useless the whole exercise would be, and how improper.

as for your first ridiculous hypothetical, of course he could behave badly, and perhaps HI officials would behave just as badly and walk reporters up to the computer screens or source documents. Now answer my question. Why on earth would any intelligent person do that just because some nuts who won't be satisfied anyway want him to? Access to the source documents might shut up 1 in a hundred birthers, at best.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 11:58 AM | Report abuse

and even the current governor pondered changing HI law to allow persons to get BCs for persons other than themselves, and charge $100 for the privilege, to either stop the onslaught of requests that clerks have to answer, or at least open and throw out, or raise a fortune.

they decided, properly, that it was a lousy idea, because valid BCs, even in the hands of someone other than the person they refer to, can be used for identity theft.

the state of HI does not exist, or bend its laws, to try to put your lunatic conspiracy theories to rest, or to assist the president in doing the same, even if he were dumb enough to think it would help, and not undermine state sovereignty and the validity of all BCs (reason enough not to bother satisfying the six or seven birthers who would drop the nonsense.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Clawrence12,

The "birther" conspiracy about President Obama's place of birth was started by a right-wing nutjob Philip Berg in mid-August 2008, shortly before Palin was flown to John McCain's ranch. One “crazy birther conspiracy story” would certainly make a similar “conspiracy story about a birth” look suspicious and crazy, now wouldn't it?? The Republicans are very good at jumping ahead of a story in order to discredit it. It's called "projecting".

The McCain campaign had an embarrassing situation. The woman who would be the shiny object for the GOP to run as the first female GOP VP candidate had stupidly faked her pregnancy with Trig. (BTW, Trig was named after his genetic condition, Trisomy G, abbreviated as Tri-G, for Down syndrome) What better way to discredit any rumors about her faked pregnancy than to invent the "birther" conspiracy about Obama.

This timeline on two videos gives the basics about Sarah Palin's FAKED pregnancy.

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/07/two-videos-about-babygate-sarah-palins.html

The Wild Ride in Sarah Palin's own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZSVMzeR5jU

Trig is not running for office, but how can you trust in a person's judgment who would fake a pregnancy to avoid an embarrassing family situation, and what else would that person do in future embarrassing situations? THAT is why it is relevant that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy

Posted by: ProChoiceGrandma | February 17, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma, you are mistaken about Philip J. Berg (he is a DEMOCRAT and supported Hillary; he also demanded the disbarment of Scalia and Thomas due to their participation in Bush v. Gore and filed lawsuits against Bush himself for "conspiracy" as to 9/11 attacks and the Iraq war). He's one of YOU.

I've never said that Trig's birth certificate is irrelevant. I will gladly provide you proof and answer your question just as soon as you answer mine from before: what don't you understand about "I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue because I think there are enough members of the electorate that still want answers"?

JoeT1, because as President of the United States, he owes it to history to clear up what he can. Maybe you are right, though, and should wait until he is a private citizen again (I did postulate above about "not setting a precedent for future Presidents). I think that it would be more than 6-7 of us too.

I also don't think it would be tyranny approaching anything Abe Lincoln did.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1, because as President of the United States, he owes it to history to clear up what he can. Maybe you are right, though, and should wait until he is a private citizen again (I did postulate above about "not setting a precedent for future Presidents). I think that it would be more than 6-7 of us too.

I also don't think it would be tyranny approaching anything Abe Lincoln did.

Posted by: clawrence12
_______________________
you're assuming that the birther garbage is a legitimate controversy that history cares enough about to want Obama to clear it up. and that it would, in fact, clear anything up. I think neither.

I'm done here.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 12:35 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1:

"Obama hasn't released all that much more or less than previous presidents."

That is completely false.

Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate (if it in fact does indeed exist or has ever existed), school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a substantial sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been their primary provider of these services.

The sad fact remains that the current president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable background information that he has provided.

The most egregious factor in this continuing controversy is the fact that the Obama 2008 campaign repeatedly promised that their administartion would uphold the highest ethical standards with a particular emphasis on transparency.

It is certainly true that there have been a few occasions when modern postwar era presidential candidates have been evasive or less than completely forthcoming in following the traditional practice of allowing for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

The medical records of JFK were allegedly sanitized to delete his diagnosis of Addison's disease and history of treatments for STD related maladies. The financial records of LBJ were allegedly altered to conceal the extent of his business ownerships and investment holdings. The national guard service records of W were allegedly missing or incomplete regarding his attendance and compliance with certain standard regulations.

All of these instances pale in comparison with the astounding unprecedented totality of secrecy that guards practically every original record and document from the entire life of Barack Obama.

Virtually the entire paper trail of the current president's existence, from birth to the White House, continues to remain deeply hidden away in a tight shroud of secrecy.

Barack Obama and his handlers were able to hide his past and explain away and minimize his associations with highly controversial individuals and groups during their 2008 campaign.

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 12:40 PM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, supposedly "history" won't care about where Obama was born.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma, thanking you in advance for finally answering my questions to you.

As you well know, the McCain campaign got Gov. Palin's doctor to provide a two page letter proving (to me at least) that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig Palin. While that obviously does not satisfy you or Andrew Sullivan, it's two pages more than we have from the doctor who allegedly gave birth to Barack Obama. Do you need a link?

Again, she could provide the birth certificate, and just like Obama, someone will say that doesn't "prove" it. I suspect if she runs for President, she is going to have to consent to Idaho and Alaska opening up her vital records file for inspection, no matter the "tyranny". Why won't Obama do the same?

As for your question then: "how can you trust in a person's judgment who would fake a pregnancy to avoid an embarrassing family situation, and what else would that person do in future embarrassing situations?"

I wouldn't trust her if she faked her pregnancy, but I don't know what else that (hypothetical) person would do.

Now, how about my answer?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 12:55 PM | Report abuse

it's two pages more than we have from the doctor who allegedly gave birth to Barack Obama.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 12:55 PM
++++++++++++

Stanley Ann Dunham didn't get her Ph.D until 1992, 31 years after Barack Obama was born.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 17, 2011 1:22 PM | Report abuse

ProChoiceGrandma, it's two pages more than we have from the doctor who allegedly delivered Barack Obama. Furthermore, Sarah Palin's parent could both testify today if needed.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 1:38 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1:

"Obama hasn't released all that much more or less than previous presidents."

That is completely false.

Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate (if it in fact does indeed exist or has ever existed), school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a substantial sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been their primary provider of these services.

The sad fact remains that the current president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable background information that he has provided.

___________________
well if you are demanding he release documents that are mythical, like "original long form BCs" (of which there is no such thing) then he's not going to meet your standard, so get over it.

as for the rest of it, I haven't seen any president release SAT scores, have you? or thesis papers, or grades.

and if Obama has spent a nickel defending FOIA requests for these documents, the lawyers are ripping him off. They aren't in the hands of the government and FOIA doesn't apply to them. The "millions of dollars" defending requests is conspiracy nonsense. No one has any right to access them under any law, so there's nothing to defend. Anything that is subject to FOIA, there's also nothing to defend, and you will get it.

and yes, he could get any federal or private sector job with what he has produced. all that's requried is a birth certificate and a social security card. and if it's a competitive position, you might have to give them your grades, direct from your school, under seal, and not subject to a FOIA request by any third party.

you are wrong about everything you keep posting, over and over and over.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 1:41 PM | Report abuse

parent(s) and others present in Idaho to witness the birth.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

There exists a widespread and growing speculation that Stanley Ann Dunham was not the birth mother of the current president, and that his biological father was not the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr."

A compelling body of evidence (see cashill.com among many other sources) suggests that the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham was the actual father, the birth mother being an unidentified black woman from the Honolulu leftist beatnik scene that he was known to frequent with his close friend the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis.

Allegedly Stanley Armour Dunham very much desired to have a son (which is perhaps why he named his daughter after himself) and gave the infant to his daughter to raise.

Her marriage to the Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." was merely a matter of convenience that was of benefit to both parties, providing the baby boy with an ostensible father and furthering the Kenyan's ability to remain in the United States to continue his studies.

It was not difficult for a resident of Hawaii to register a child with the state in 1961 and obtain a certificate of live birth.

This may explain why Barack Obama's original typewritten long form birth certificate has never been released or even verified to exist. It quite possibly may never have existed.

It may also explain why there is no record or witness of Stanley Ann Dunham ever giving birth to a child anywhere in Hawaii, and why no physician or nurse or medical or administrative person has ever been located or identified themselves as having anything to do with the birth of the current president.

Astute observers consider this a likely scenario, but acknowledge that the matter may forever remain a mystery.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 1:56 PM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, supposedly "history" won't care about where Obama was born.

Posted by: clawrence12
_____________________
History knows where Obama was born. History will note the existence of lunatics who ignore facts and logic.

just as science knows that the earth is more than 6000 years old, and that the Ark is an allegory, and couldn't care less who discounts the evidence.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 1:58 PM | Report abuse

A compelling body of evidence (see cashill.com among many other sources) suggests that the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham was the actual father, the birth mother being an unidentified black woman from the Honolulu leftist beatnik scene that he was known to frequent with his close friend the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis.

Posted by: FlashHarry | February 17, 2011 1:56 PM
+++++++++++

Hilarious. I applaud your insanity!

And if all of that were true, Obama would be a natural born citizen of the United States and eligible for the Presidency. So your point is?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 17, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, either way (even if it proves that Obama is a natural-born citizen), I just want to know the truth. According to the liberals, however, "history" wouldn't care if someone uncovered proof that Chester A. Arthur was born in Canada too.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 2:15 PM | Report abuse

FlashHarry, either way (even if it proves that Obama is a natural-born citizen), I just want to know the truth. According to the liberals, however, "history" wouldn't care if someone uncovered proof that Chester A. Arthur was born in Canada too.

Posted by: clawrence12
_______________________
history would, indeed care. the operative word is proof. History can't be bothered demanding that every conspiracy theory be put to rest by folks with better things to do. like anything.

Posted by: JoeT1 | February 17, 2011 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Fine, JoeT1, you are "done here" so go all of those better things (like read the cases of women prosecuted for murder even though they were simply defending their unborn children from being killed; talk about Sophie's Choice).

ProChoiceGrandma, where are you?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 17, 2011 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Top 10 Birther Conspiracy Theories:

(10) Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

(9) Barack Obama was adopted by an Indonesian, and lost his U.S. Citizenship.

(8) Barack Obama Sr. wasn't his father; his real father was Frank Marshall Davis (scary commie).

(7) No one can know who Barack Obama is or where he was born because he hasn't released his college records, his SAT records, the complete White House visitor log.

(6) Barack Obama's father was Stanley Armour Dunham and his mother was an unknown black woman.

(5) We can't know that Obama was born in the United States because there are two hospitals in Honolulu.

(4) Nude photos of Stanley Ann Dunham taken on a beach in summer (showing a woman indoors at Christmas) prove she wasn't pregnant.

(3) Everyone in the State government of Hawaii lies and can't be trusted, and anyone who issues an official Certificate of Live Birth is just a "bureaucrat" who can't be trusted.

(2) If Obama wants to prove he is eligible for the Presidency, he must prove he is of native Hawaiian ethnicity.

And the top birther conspiracy theory:

(1) If Barack Obama were really eligible to be President, he would just force those recalcitrant Alaska officials to release Trig's long form birth certificate.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | February 17, 2011 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company