GOP Congressional Candidate: Obama Should Answer ‘Legitimacy’ Questions

Evans had not seen Hawaii’s documentation of Obama’s birth.

Yet another example of sloppy thinking by Weigel. The only reliable documentation from Hawaii is safely tucked away in their archives. All we've seen is a picture on a web page that Obama – someone who's been known to lie – says he got from that state. To people like Weigel that doesn't matter. However, when dealing with legal issues it's the difference between night and day. The cert wasn't released by the issuing agency to the public or to a panel of judges, it went through the BHO campaign. Imagine, for instance, in a criminal trial that someone left evidence sitting out in the open overnight; that would be tainted.

Now, that doesn't mean that BHO tampered with the cert. However, there is that possibility. And, the state of HI has *never* verified that what's shown on BHO's sites (one of which has since disappeared off the web) matches what's on file. They've *never* verified where he was born.

For the *facts* about this matter – not speculation, no tinfoil hat theories – see my coverage here.

You cannot prove President Obama was born anywhere except where he and the state of Hawaii officially states he was born.

You cannot disprove any of the official statements from the Hawaii Dept. of health.

In Short: you got NOTHING. ZIP. ZILCH.

you are an embarrassment.

Talk about sloppy thinking! The state of HI has never officially said where he was born. Go find a clear statement from an official saying he was born there (the statement from Okubo doesn't count because she won't confirm it and because she's not credible.)

And, I'm not trying to prove where BHO was born. What I have proved several times is that the MSM is lying about this issue.

Face it, you got nothing, and the only thing you have “proved” is that there is a small segment of the population that desperately wants to believe that Obama should not be president and you will go to almost any length to deny the existence evidence proving that not to be the case.

Yeah right, Okubos' statements don't count because you say so. It's more like her statements don't count because they make you look like a pathetic clown.

The only reliable documentation from Hawaii is safely tucked away in their archives.

Wrong. The official state issued COLB is reliable documentation, not to mention the only kind they give out. If you don't accept it you are a deranged birther.

All we've seen is a picture on a web page that Obama – someone who's been known to lie – says he got from that state.

Several journalists have viewed the paper document, and the State of Hawaii has repeatedly stated that Obama's records are handled in accordance with the laws and procedures of the state. The certificate is valid, the information is valid. You are a crazy ass birther.

The cert wasn't released by the issuing agency to the public or to a panel of judges

They don't do that, dumbass.

And, the state of HI has *never* verified that what's shown on BHO's sites (one of which has since disappeared off the web) matches what's on file.

No, what they have verified is that all the information on any COLB they issue, to anyone, comes from the original records, and that Obama's records have been handled just like anyone else's. That's enough for non-crazy people.

They've *never* verified where he was born.

Hawaii state officials have never done what they are lawfully prevented from doing, namely revealing personal information about citizens to the public. To expect that of them is unreasonable, and stupid.

Crazy ass birther.

The state of HI has never officially said where he was born.

Yes they have. It's on they COLB they issued. He was born in Honolulu (go ahead, check the local papers!).

because she's not credible

The opinions of birthers on others' credibility are so convincing.

And, I'm not trying to prove where BHO was born. What I have proved several times is that the MSM is lying about this issue.

No you haven't, but you have amply demonstrated your own stupidity.

Where is your proof that what they have on file matches the picture on BHO's site? (Hint: there's no proof since no one has confirmed a match, despite what BHO cultists have tried to say.)

AFAIK, the only people who've said they've seen a paper copy are from FactCheck, which isn't a reliable source. Others have simply seen pictures.

And, simply handling his records according to their rules doesn't mean he was born there.

There are even conflicting dates on when the COLB was supposedly received.

Face it: BHO cultists think everyone is as dumb as they are.

AFAIK, the only people who've said they've seen a paper copy are from FactCheck, which isn't a reliable source.

Only to crazy ass birthers who think spam email is reliable.

And, simply handling his records according to their rules doesn't mean he was born there.

It means his original records, from where the information was transferred, state he was born in Honolulu. As did two local newspapers.

There are even conflicting dates on when the COLB was supposedly received.

More shit you made up.

My proof is the official document, provided by Obama in June 2008, and viewed by several journalists, with seal and signature. You are the one with no proof, no evidence, and no brains. Crazy ass birther.

Wow. Interesting all the name calling and such.

24Ahead is spot on.

1. The only thing the state of Hawaii has verified is that they have ACCESS to Obama's full form birth certificate. That does not, in any way imply that he was born in the US. My brother was born overseas and guess what — he has the same form that Obama has shown. It is not, however, his actual full form birth certficate.
2. Until a few weeks ago, the state of Hawaii did not recognize the short form (which is what Obama has shown) as proof for various state services.
3. Why did the military revoke the orders for the serviceman who demanded proof before deploying? Why wouldn't they just say, he is certified and end of story?

Come on folks, we all have certified copies of long form birth certificates. You have to show them to get a driver's license and other services. They demanded to see John McCain's — he released his. Why not just show it be done with it? Why the double-standard? Why hide?

24Ahead is spot on.

24Ahead is deranged.

My brother was born overseas and guess what — he has the same form that Obama has shown

And where does it say he was born, hmmm? Crazy ass birther.

Until a few weeks ago, the state of Hawaii did not recognize the short form (which is what Obama has shown) as proof for various state services.

You are lying.

Why did the military revoke the orders for the serviceman who demanded proof before deploying? Why wouldn't they just say, he is certified and end of story?

He volunteered for a tour in Afghanistan, and then refused to go. His unit didn't want him anymore since he was such a buddy-fucking moron birther.

Come on folks, we all have certified copies of long form birth certificates.

I don't.

You have to show them to get a driver's license and other services.

In what state? You don't in my state. You don't in Hawaii. You only need what they give you, which is a COLB. That's all they will give you these days.

They demanded to see John McCain's — he released his.

They demanded to see Barack Obama's — he released his. What's the problem?

Why not just show it be done with it?

He did.

Why the double-standard?

There is none.

Why hide?

No one is hiding.

Crazy ass birther.

Why should he answer that likes of you? Who are you anyway. You may as well ask him for his ancestors freedom papers. Our President doesn't owe you any explanation. You all are just a bunch of nameless faces who what to believe that because of your ethnicity that you are owed some kind of special honor. Get a grip! This is America and you are not any more or less important than the next person. Why are you all so full of your own self importance?

The world has two kind of people living in it. Some choose to live in the light where they can see while others prefer to stay in darkness. That right to choose is given by the Creator to every mortal soul. Those who remain in the dark will curse, they will threaten, they will cheat and they will lie for as long as they refuse the light. They are blind to the wrong they do and the things they say. FEAR is all they know.

I'm an American citizen and the President answers to all Americans and is sworn to uphold the Constitution.

Mantis, let's hope they do pass Health Care Reform because you are in serious need of some mental help.

You could also benefit from doing actual research and not relying on all the misleading info they try to spoon feed you.

In what state don't you need a certified birth certificate? And, no, they don't just issue COLBs. Those are uncertified copies. I recently received a certified copy from my birth state. No big deal. They do indeed issue them.

McCain had to have his birth certificate ratifed by the Senate. He was born overseas and had a COLB. But the Senate actually went through the process to ratify it. They didn't with Obama. Any presidential candidate should be required to prove that they are in compliance with our Constitution.

It goes back to the article's point, if it only takes a moment to dismiss the issue (rather than not addressing and evading it), why not just get it over with? Submit the long form and everyone's happy.

In what state don't you need a certified birth certificate?

I didn't say that. Read it again, idiot.

And, no, they don't just issue COLBs.

Yes, that's all the State of Hawaii issues. I'll let them tell it:

When we spoke to a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health, she said too much was being made of the difference between the so-called “long” and “short” forms.

“They're just words,” said spokeswoman Janice Okubo. “That (what was posted on the Internet) is considered a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii.”

“There's only one form of birth certificate,” she said, and it's been the same since the 1980s. Birth certificates evolve over the decades, she said, and there are no doubt differences between the way birth certificates looked when Obama was born and now.

“When you request a birth certificate, the one you get looks exactly like the one posted on his site,” she said. “That's the birth certificate.”

As for the theory that Obama's original birth certificate might show he was foreign-born, Okubo said the “Certification of Live Birth” would say so. Obama's does not. Again, it says he was born in Honolulu.

Those are uncertified copies.

No they are not. Hence the word “Certification,” dipshit.

I recently received a certified copy from my birth state. No big deal. They do indeed issue them.

And Obama's has been public for over a year.

McCain had to have his birth certificate ratifed by the Senate.

No, he didn't. That was a non-binding resolution designed to put to rest arguments about his citizenship, which were unfounded to begin with. The point of contention was that McCain was born in Panama, not the United States (doesn't matter, but that is the argument). Obama was born in the United States. His birth certificate states that very clearly (as did two local newspapers at the time).

But the Senate actually went through the process to ratify it. They didn't with Obama.

He was born in the U.S.

Any presidential candidate should be required to prove that they are in compliance with our Constitution.

If he wasn't, don't you think Clinton or McCain would have said something? Or are they part of the conspiracy too?

Crazy ass birther.

McCain never released his birth certificate. His campaign let Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post take a look at it.

You demo commies are stoopid.

You state that Barry was born in “Hawaii”. a supposed “state”. I have never been to this so called “Hawaii” have you? What proof can you offer me that such a place even exists? Just because some web sites have “maps” that show this place is proof of how wide spread this conspiracy is!

wake up people and use some common sense!

FC!

You did great work on the Rachel Madow Show, sir. Keep up the good work.

Joe

Just to provide a data point, I've never needed my birth certificate, original or reprint, to get a driver's license or other services. I think one time I needed to fax a photocopy of it for a background check, but my memory is hazy.

It's fascinating how birthers can convince themselves that they need a long-form birth certificate for everything, in complete contradiction with their own personal experiences.

Exactly xcott, and why does Hawaii issue a COLB? Fun?

This contradicts what you are saying. I'm sure you have an answer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/21/rick-s…

You may be an American citizen, but that doesn't entitle you to know anything you want to any public servant.

Hawaii has issued a COLB – what it considers an official birth certificate. That certificate lists him as being born in Honolulu, Hawaii. That's all you need to know, and that's all the courts need to know. You are not entitled to know every facet of Obama's birth simply because that doesn't satisfy your needs.

Apparently, Hawaii deviously devised the COLB just to trip up people who THINK they're getting an official record, when in fact they're getting a piece of paper which is good for little else than framing and impressing your friends that you were born in Hawaii.

If you're gullible enough to believe that, I've got a conspiracy theory to sell you.

Unless, of course, he is illegally torturing people or spying on them without a warrant, in which case it is nobody's business, right?

Nahh, thats when you need the “Certified Certification of Live Birth”

Please, for the love of all that is great in this country, be COMPLETELY honest and admit that *even* if shown paperwork, or whatever you want at this moment as proof, that you will then conveniently call it suspect and demand even more proof. Your base here is one of not wanting Obama as President. It has *nothing* to do with the truth because if it did, you would have accepted what has been given to you already, but since you are not, your true nature is revealed. You don't like him, you didn't vote for him, you think he's destroying your idea of what the USA is all about. ADMIT IT.

Please please please, look in the mirror, take a second to look deep within yourself, and realize that your agenda will never allow you to accept that Obama is our actual legitimate president. NO MATTER WHATEVER PROOF IS GIVEN TO YOU.

Sir, the truth will set you free.

And for all of you 'birthers' who can't quite figure out *why* Obama isn't 'just producing the COLB', it's because if he responds to you, he is *legitimizing* your complaint. Look at it this way, he *already* attempted transparency when all this stuff first came out during the campaign, he did what McCain and others would've never done: he posted a pic of his Birth Cert., but look at the results, all of you just picked it to pieces. This is no different then having to provide more and more evidence to the 9/11 Truthers, the Holocaust Deniers, and even the still rabid We-Never-Landed-on-the-Moon wackos. He's doing the right thing – ignoring you! Your lives are entwined in a reality that is far far removed from where all of us normal folks are at.

What all you nutjobs are completely ignoring is that IF YOUR MOTHER IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, YOU ARE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. You can be born on Planet X, but you are STILL an American Citizen, this is something we've had on the books since the late 1700's. OMG, I wish you people would just go away.

All your points have been repeatedly dismissed, but I'll comment on #3:

“3. Why did the military revoke the orders for the serviceman who demanded proof before deploying? Why wouldn't they just say, he is certified and end of story?”

YouGo is a YouMoron. Why? Because the military has no business with Obama's certificate. And the soldier NEVER HAD TO GO ON TOUR – he volunteered, so his lame attempt at objecting fell flat on its face. That's why the Army just said 'you don't want to go? NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO. GOODBYE!' Read it all below:

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/77747…

But of course, the military now has been dragged into the conspiracy. Because of course Obama fulfills their need for… what? Killing the F-22 program to make way for the F-35? Come on, get a life!

To the wingnuts of the United States: If you have proof that the President was not born in the US I suggest you contact the FBI, your local US attorney or the Republican National Committee. I did not vote for Barack Obama and I do not support his policies, but your crazy comments are making the Republican party look very bad. Get on to the real issues of cap and tax, socialized health care, etc, and get off of this train to nowhere.

Sorry everybody, I checked again my brother's certificate and compared it to Obama's and I see now that they both show the actual place of birth and Obama's is Honolulu. I also read some more about Hawaii requiring more than the short form certificate and that's apparently only for some Hawaiian Homelands programs and the reason is that you need to prove native Hawaiian ancestry; it has nothing to do with birthplace or citizenship. I stand corrected.

Your honesty and candor is very much appreciated. That goes a long way toward getting at the honest truth.

Good heavens, Johnnie, but why shouldn't an American citizen be perfectly entitled to see proof that a “public servant” is qualified to occupy the office he holds? Wouldn't you be entitled to ask of, say, the Surgeon General of these United States some proof that he/she had at least graduated from an accredited medical school?

And don't you think that said Surgeon General would be perfectly delighted to name his/her alma mater, and would have his/her staff conduct you personally to his/her “I Love Me” wall in his/her office in Washington City, the better to examine that sheepskin and all the other certificates and tributes and photographs and plaque-mounted Kocher clamps and similar crap that accumulates over the course of a doctor's career?

But Barry and his birth certificate, now…

Well, that's a piece of paper it seems that NOBODY is ever gonna see, if Barry and his co-conspirators have anything to say about it.

Again and again and again, John, you don't KNOW that “Hawaii has issued a COLB.”

You've heard that in June 2008 the Obama campaign had e-mailed to their sympathizers at FactCheck and DailyKos a couple of JPG computer graphic images of what was supposed to have been a COLB issued to Barry in 2007. The Obamaphiles at DailyKos and FactCheck (to their everlasting regret) put those JPG images up on their respective Web sites, and millions of people downloaded them.

Some hundreds of the downloaders had a “Damn. That's funny…” moment when looking at these images, and started looking into them in depth and detail.

And y'know what? They came independently to the same conclusion, that these were the products of cut-and-paste half-assed Photoshop forgery, about as genuine as the proverbial three-dollar bill.

But even if they're not right, John, have YOU got any idea where that print-on-paper COLB got to? Those later photographs on FactCheck are ridiculous, and about as admissible in a court of law (except, perhaps, as evidence of criminal intent to defraud) as the output of a Ouija Board.

You Obamaphiles insist that such a COLB exists. Or, at least, that it did exist in June 2008.

So where is it?

Proof of a negative is not required, Mike. The positive statement requiring proof is this:

“The Keynesian socialist sonofabitch currently passing himself off as 'Barack Hussein Obama' claims that he is a 'natural born' American citizen and therefore qualified to be farting into that big, comfortable chair in the Oval Office while exercising the lawful powers of the Presidency of these United States.”

Okay, now prove that qualification.

If you want, you can prove the rest of it, too. I don't mind.

Nobody has to prove that he is NOT so qualified, Mike. Jeez, cop a clue, why don'tcha?

Good heavens, Johnnie, but why shouldn't an American citizen be perfectly entitled to see proof that a “public servant” is qualified to occupy the office he holds? Wouldn't you be entitled to ask of, say, the Surgeon General of these United States some proof that he/she had at least graduated from an accredited medical school?

– By your standards, you wouldn't accept his/her college diploma as sufficient evidence of graduation. You'd want to see the whole transcript.

And don't you think that said Surgeon General would be perfectly delighted to name his/her alma mater, and would have his/her staff conduct you personally to his/her “I Love Me” wall in his/her office in Washington City, the better to examine that sheepskin and all the other certificates and tributes and photographs and plaque-mounted Kocher clamps and similar crap that accumulates over the course of a doctor's career?

– I think Obama has far too many more important things to deal with than worry that some people don't think his birth certificate is his birth certificate.

But Barry and his birth certificate, now…

Well, that's a piece of paper it seems that NOBODY is ever gonna see, if Barry and his co-conspirators have anything to say about it.

- See, that's just it. “Co-conspirators.” This requires a whole army of people concealing what you seem to think is an obvious fraud. I suppose this also includes the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser as far back as 1961.

Again and again and again, John, you don't KNOW that “Hawaii has issued a COLB.”

- Sure I do. FactCheck.org has posted pictures of the actual COLB in question, which includes the raised seal applied to official state documents. That may not be enough for you, because your burgeoning conspiracy now includes independent political watchdog organizations, but it's enough for me.

You've heard that in June 2008 the Obama campaign had e-mailed to their sympathizers at FactCheck and DailyKos a couple of JPG computer graphic images of what was supposed to have been a COLB issued to Barry in 2007. The Obamaphiles at DailyKos and FactCheck (to their everlasting regret) put those JPG images up on their respective Web sites, and millions of people downloaded them.

- As I said above, I've seen high-quality photographs of the document by a well-regarded political watchdog organization, and I am satisfied with what I see, whatever it is that DailyKos did or didn't do.

Some hundreds of the downloaders had a “Damn. That's funny…” moment when looking at these images, and started looking into them in depth and detail.

And y'know what? They came independently to the same conclusion, that these were the products of cut-and-paste half-assed Photoshop forgery, about as genuine as the proverbial three-dollar bill.

- Refer to my comments above.

But even if they're not right, John, have YOU got any idea where that print-on-paper COLB got to? Those later photographs on FactCheck are ridiculous, and about as admissible in a court of law (except, perhaps, as evidence of criminal intent to defraud) as the output of a Ouija Board.

Why are the FactCheck photos “ridiculous”? And of course, no one is suggesting that photographs of a document could or should be admissible in court. That is a straw man argument. But the COLB itself would fully pass muster in court.

You Obamaphiles insist that such a COLB exists. Or, at least, that it did exist in June 2008.

So where is it?

If you're this skeptical, why do you take the word of Hawaii officials that a long-form document exists or did exist? Why so selective?

Given Barry's reluctance to release his undergraduate collegiate records (at Occidental and at Columbia) or his law school records (at Harvard) from under “seal,” I'd have to say that, no, I really wouldn't accept the sight of any of his diplomas as proof positive that the guy had matriculated at any of these institutions. He's lost credibility by all that stonewalling.

And if Barry is working in concert with other people to conceal the evidence of a federal crime (of which his and their culpability have reached what can charitably be called “hundreds” of counts), the only word to use – distasteful though it may be – is “conspiracy.”

What, you think that what Nixon involved himself in back in '68 wasn't a conspiracy?

Again, John, you have NOT “seen high-quality photographs of the document by a well-regarded political watchdog organization” but rather additional computer graphic images created by a bunch of J-school jerkwads employed by the Annenberg Foundation to run a partisan political Web site called FactCheck.org.

The fact that they CALL themselves “nonpartisan” (see http://www.factcheck.org/about/ ) ought to give you a clue that they're anything BUT nonpartisan. Does any other kind of con artist characterize himself as anything but an honest man?

Or are you the kind of mark who'd buy a used car from a dealer named “Honest Ernie”?

And the FactCheck photos are ridiculous because they're computer graphic images of what the J-school Obamaphiles at FactCheck say is a real, live, issued-by-the-state-of-Hawaii COLB when not a single one of these lightweights knows the least little goddam thing about what such a document actually looks like, or how to determine the validity or the provenance of such a document.

As this “Damn. That's funny….” situation continues to roll along, I think it reasonable to expect that “the word of Hawaii officials” thus far gained – which has NOT supported the contention that the birth of your Messiah had taken place in Honolulu, not in any way at all, please note – is going to have to be augmented by the production of whatever it is that they hold as proof that he'd been born so that it can be determined precisely WHERE that proof says he'd been born.

However else one looks at this, inasmuch as your “Hope & Change” Mahdi has slammed down every kind of obstacle in the face of the thousands of people who have been trying to learn about him such information as any similar candidate would be perfectly happy to disclose, and stretched out this costly (and I mean in terms of legal expenses approaching or exceeding one million dollars) process of legalistic blockade – up to and including the issue of a presidential executive order to slam a lid on this as one of his first acts in the Oval Office – there will always be reasons for Mr. Soetoro's enemies to receive whatever documentary support of his qualifications as forgeries.

This long and otherwise inexplicable delay can have resulted in no other supposition. If such documentary support had existed in June last year, Barry should've trotted it out right then, right there. Now….

Gawd. Can you sit there before your Amiga and admit – honestly – that even YOU trust that slick sonofabitch?

Well, you get to see your brother's print-on-paper COLB. How about if the rest of us get to see (or, at least, get to have a panel of forensic documents experts examine) the COLB that Barry's handlers purportedly scanned those JPGs from back in June last year?

If it exists – and if it reflects the information contained within those computer graphic images – where the hell is it?

Your response is not worthy of any comment. Keep on making your silly staements. You and the rest of your fools deserve each other.

Meaning, of course, that Mikey couldn't prove his Messiah's qualification any more than can any other blithering, gibbering, sweating Obamaphile.

There's a certain charm in seeing these specimens of the lower orders comporting themselves so predictably. Ya gotta love it when the data just hammers along in line with your hypotheses.

Taitz has dual US/Israel citizenship. Under her reasoning, her US born sons are not NBC.

She could be a Mossad agent, trying to undermine Obama, and drive him from office. It’s worth investigating.

Hey I spoke out when Bush went with the Patriot Act. (BTW, I didn't vote for Bush). You shouldn't assume that everyone who questions the birth certificate issue a) didn't vote for Obama and b) supported Bush.

Oh this is absolutely hysterical. What mantis, you couldn't rebute my arguments with facts, logic so you create another account to mimic me? Too funny.

Um, it was my understanding that our President is Commander in Chief. If there is question about his legitamcy (say for instance, he wasn't born in Hawaii or anywhere else in the US), military personnel serving in a war could be charged with war crimes.

And I would think that the military wouldn't just revoke orders because the guy changed his mind … that would mean too many people receiving deployment orders (whether they volunteered or not for that tour) could try to get out of their orders claiming the same thing.

I needed mine to get my passport. I actually have my long form certfied copy, as I believe most people who were born in the 60s and 70s do. (My kids, born in the 80s and 90s also have theirs.)

Um, my mom is NOT a US citizen (she's a legal resident) yet I'm a US citizen. (I believe you meant to say, one of your parents is an American citizen.)

And, if I'm not mistaken, Hawaii became a state just a few years before Obama was born so they had specific requirements regarding the transfer of citizenship.

As I've stated before, I think all presidential candidates should be properly vetted and am concerned that after 6 months, there's still a question about it, so it makes me question why the guy I voted for doesn't just re-release the damn thing and be done with it.

I only post under one name. YouGo is such a paranoid freak, he's seeing conspiracies here in the comments.

.And I would think that the military wouldn't just revoke orders because the guy changed his mind

When the idiot volunteered in the first place (as a reservist), they most certainly can. Why bother commenting when you don't even know what you're talking about. Oh right, that would mean you couldn't comment on anything at all.

that would mean too many people receiving deployment orders (whether they volunteered or not for that tour) could try to get out of their orders claiming the same thing.

No, that's not what it would mean. Not too bright, are you?

You needed a birth certificate to get your passport, not a “long-form” certificate. If that's what you have, then it works just fine, but it's not a requirement. I got my passport with an electronically generated certificate very much like Obama's (my original birth certificate was lost during a move when I was in high school). It doesn't have a hospital or doctor's name. I didn't need one at all to get a driver's license.

Given Barry's reluctance to release his undergraduate collegiate records (at Occidental and at Columbia) or his law school records (at Harvard) from under “seal,” I'd have to say that, no, I really wouldn't accept the sight of any of his diplomas as proof positive that the guy had matriculated at any of these institutions. He's lost credibility by all that stonewalling.

- So why even pretend to be the slightest bit interested about seeing President Obama's “long-form” birth certificate?

And if Barry is working in concert with other people to conceal the evidence of a federal crime (of which his and their culpability have reached what can charitably be called “hundreds” of counts), the only word to use – distasteful though it may be – is “conspiracy.”

- That's an awfully big IF.

What, you think that what Nixon involved himself in back in '68 wasn't a conspiracy?

- If you're talking about Watergate, that was 1972. And you know what, it was blown wide open within weeks. What you're alleging about Obama involves exponentially more people across the country and the world who are all working harmoniously in concert over years. Maybe you have your own theories of what people are capable of, but I don't find it the slightest bit plausible.

Again, John, you have NOT “seen high-quality photographs of the document by a well-regarded political watchdog organization” but rather additional computer graphic images created by a bunch of J-school jerkwads employed by the Annenberg Foundation to run a partisan political Web site called FactCheck.org.

- I'll let your argument speak for itself. If you are willing to delude yourself that such photographs can be faked, there's simply nothing I can do to help you.

The fact that they CALL themselves “nonpartisan” (see http://www.factcheck.org/about/ ) ought to give you a clue that they're anything BUT nonpartisan. Does any other kind of con artist characterize himself as anything but an honest man?

- Political leanings, such as they are, simply do not constitute technological evidence of forgery. You'll have to do better, sorry.

And the FactCheck photos are ridiculous because they're computer graphic images of what the J-school Obamaphiles at FactCheck say is a real, live, issued-by-the-state-of-Hawaii COLB when not a single one of these lightweights knows the least little goddam thing about what such a document actually looks like, or how to determine the validity or the provenance of such a document.

- Now, if you want to debate that they were PHOTOGRAPHING a forgery, that's one thing. Whether the photos themselves are forgeries is totally different – and a highly delusional proposition.

As for the document itself, I'm not taking FactCheck's word that the COLB is genuine because they say so. I accept their judgment because their photographs clearly show characteristics that an official document as described by Hawaiian officials is supposed to have. It's hard to dispute that the photographs clearly show a raised seal on the back of the document by the fold, which Janice Okubo has stated is perfectly normal on COLBs.

And I still haven't heard ONE SINGLE reasonable explanation for how the announcement of Obama's birth made its way into TWO Honolulu newspapers within days of the registration of his birth by the State of Hawaii. As far as I'm concerned, all discussion of the COLB aside, THAT is the smoking gun.

There are two types of birthers, those who voted for Bush and those who are legally not allowed to vote. Guess we know which you are.

Thats different, she is white.

Plus do you really think we have to worry about one of HER kids being elected POTUS?

“If there is question about his legitamcy (say for instance, he wasn't born in Hawaii or anywhere else in the US), military personnel serving in a war could be charged with war crimes.”

You don't understand international law or the law of war at all, do you? War crimes are specifically delineated in numerous conventions we've signed onto over the past century. Examples of war crimes include engaging in military combat without fixed emblems, or intentionally inflicting civilian casualties. But serving under a non-democratically elected leader – or even one alleged to be by fringe elements – is not a war crime under any interpretation of international law or the law of war. (Feel free to point to specific treaties or laws that say otherwise.) If this were a war crime, every country could prosecute the citizens of virtually any other country, because there are always disgruntled fringe elements in every country that can muster some sort of bizarre argument about why their government isn't actually their government.

Just a silly argument without ANY legal merit whatsoever. Next.

Well I will give this to you, you have admitted you were wrong. To date you are the FIRST birther I have ever seen admit that they were wrong about anything.

Actually, I believe there are three types of birthers.

1. Racist Republicans who just can't stand a black man being president (nearly all Bush voters)
2. Dedicated conspiracy theorists, who are usually also 911 troothers, PrisonPlanet, New World Order types (mostly Paulbots, not really motivated by race)
3. Deranged and bitter Hillary dead-enders (also known as PUMAs), some of whom are motivated by race, some of whom are just really, really angry that their gal lost.

Most of the commenters at this site seem to fall into the first two categories. The PUMAs tend to stay in their discourse free eco-chamber sites and aren't all that interested in engaging anyone outside their group. They just enjoy a months (years?) long pity-party.

It wasn't the real YouGo, but someone posting using his/her name. See the follow up comment where he/she accuses me (no, it wasn't me).

You'll see that I have mentioned several times that I am a US citizen (who actually does have a long form birth certificate). I am a registered voter and, no, I didn't vote for Bush.

BTW, I am black, not a conspiracy theroist and was never a Hillary supporter, so I would say that there are 5 or more types of birthers
4. non racist people who voted for Obama
5. non racist people who didn't vote for Obama

of course, one could argue that just because I'm black doesn't mean that I'm not racist but I'm certainly not racist about having a black man in the white house. And, yeah, simpleton that I am, I truly do believe that there are plenty of other people who don't judge by color of skin but by what the person stands for. It's 2009 folks, I thought we were all well past that.

You are in category two: Paranoid freak.

ok. I'll concede that I'm a paranoid freak because I:

1. believe that all presidential candidates should be properly vetted
2. believe that since 6 months into his presidency, people — including a congressional candidate, Lou Dobbs, Alan Keyes and others — are still bringing it up and, therefore, he should just release the long form and be done with it so we can move. (Come on, other than the hospital name, physician, his weight and length, all the other stuff has already been revealed by him so what's the big deal?)
3. would really prefer not to have history books talk about our first black president and how there was a cloud hanging over his presidency.

Yup, that makes me the freak all right.

believe that since 6 months into his presidency, people — including a congressional candidate, Lou Dobbs, Alan Keyes and others — are still bringing it up and, therefore, he should just release the long form and be done with it so we can move.

He doesn't have it. The State of Hawaii has the original. They don't give those out. They issue COLBs. Everyone but the crazies (Dobbs, Keyes, and that congressional candidate included) has moved on.

(Come on, other than the hospital name, physician, his weight and length, all the other stuff has already been revealed by him so what's the big deal?)

For the umpteenth time, he doesn't even have access to the document you want. The COLB is what the state gives out. That's it. Stop being so stupid. You've been told this a million times.

would really prefer not to have history books talk about our first black president and how there was a cloud hanging over his presidency.

They won't. The same way history books won't be talking about how Bill Clinton was a murdering rapist drug dealer. Because lunatic conspiracy theorists don't write history books.

Yup, that makes me the freak all right.

Yup.

“The fact that they CALL themselves “nonpartisan” (see http://www.factcheck.org/about/ ) ought to give you a clue that they're anything BUT nonpartisan. Does any other kind of con artist characterize himself as anything but an honest man?”

You're the gift that keeps on giving. If you bothered to search you'd see how back in '04 left-wingers were busy yelling that Factcheck was a stooge for the right-wing when it defended Bush against charges of being a deserter.

http://www.factcheck.org/bush_a_military_desert…

BTW, Leonore Annenberg (Walter's widow) endorsed McCain in '08. She recently passed, RIP to the departed, in all sincerity. The Annenbergs are well known conservatives. But I'm sure the conspiracy still holds up in your eyes.

ROFL thats funny. They say they are non partisan so that proves that they aren't. YEAH THAT MAKES SENSE.

“He doesn't have it. The State of Hawaii has the original. They don't give those out. They issue COLBs. Everyone but the crazies (Dobbs, Keyes, and that congressional candidate included) has moved on.”

Lawsuits still active; reporter brought it up in press conference a few weeks ago w/ Gibbs; Dobbs on tonight debating issue; MSNBC had segment today … apparently not everyone has moved on.

Interesting that my birth state has access to some state of the art technology and Hawaii doesn't: it's called a copier. They actually copy the original, emboss and sign it. Even comes out with that funky old typewriter type. Wonder if O can ask for some money for Hawaii so they can have that too.

But what can I say, you know us black folks, stupid to the core. Maybe if you repeat it a few more times, I'll finally get it. Aw, no, probably not.

You're just trolling now. Mantis specifically said everyone *except* for the crazies have moved on. You're only proving his point. And nice job race-baiting.

Interesting that my birth state has access to some state of the art technology and Hawaii doesn't: it's called a copier. They actually copy the original, emboss and sign it. Even comes out with that funky old typewriter type. Wonder if O can ask for some money for Hawaii so they can have that too.

They don't do that anymore. They digitized everything to make records processing more efficient and less costly. Why should the state change their rules to appease crazy ass birthers?

But what can I say, you know us black folks, stupid to the core. Maybe if you repeat it a few more times, I'll finally get it. Aw, no, probably not.

Probably not, but it has nothing to do with race. It's because you're a crazy ass birther.

Well, mea culpa on the date error for Watergate. I began hating Tricky Dick long before he got elected in '68, and of late I tend to rank his speech on the evening of August 15, 1971, as the most heinous of his many criminal actions in public office.

(( FYI, that's when the leader of the Republican Party announced suddenly that he was imposing the first peacetime wage freeze in this nation's history, hitting the country with an across-the-board 10% import surcharge, and “I'm closing the gold window,” meaning that he had summarily abrogated Bretton Woods and decoupled the dollar from even the illusion of specie redemption, opening the floodgates for the Zimbabwe stampede of currency debauchment the Fed is currently perpetrating. Big “conservatives,” these Republicans. ))

As for the newspaper microfiche records in question (for this is all anyone has produced of either of these Honolulu newspapers), we certainly seem to have birth announcements on those microfiches, don't we?

But we don't have the birth announcement for Dr. and Mrs. Nordyke's twin girls on that same date and in the same hospital that your Messiah was alleged to have achieved his first suck at a teat. Hm….

But back to those FactCheck photographs, and how it is that the crew at FactCheck could have known whether they were holding in their hands (and snapshot-ing) a genuine legal document….

Oh, well. We don't know that, do we?

But, of course, such a legal document DID exist in June 2008, right? That's what those photographs were supposed to evince.

Okay.

Where is it now?

Your definition of “nonpartisan” is fraught with the fallacy of the false dilemma.

You assume that someone is “nonpartisan” if there is evidence that they deal even-handedly – supporting or attacking – with both branches of the big, bipartisan, permanently incumbent Boot-On-Your-Neck Party (Democrat and Republican wings) in their joint campaign to turn civil government in this country into a vehicle of plunder at home and imperium abroad.

That may be termed “bipartisan,” I suppose. But “nonpartisan”?

Nah!

The Annenberg's have never been “partisan” toward the defense of individual rights in any way rising to a level at which they can be called advocates of constitutionality. Supporting the Red side at the same time as they support the Blue side merely means that whatever bunch of thugs gets its hands on government power, the Annenbergs always have a voice in how the pillaging goes down.

As for the newspaper microfiche records in question (for this is all anyone has produced of either of these Honolulu newspapers), we certainly seem to have birth announcements on those microfiches, don't we?

But we don't have the birth announcement for Dr. and Mrs. Nordyke's twin girls on that same date and in the same hospital that your Messiah was alleged to have achieved his first suck at a teat. Hm….

- Unlike some of the other claims we have debated, this one is subject to empirical proof. Don't lob insinuations. All you need to do is trek down to a library containing microfilm of the Honolulu newspapers in question, and come up with proof that the microfilm was (a) altered or (b) purchased after Obama entered public life so as to render it suspect. Until you or someone making similar insinuations makes such an investigation and produce hard evidence of forgery, it's a bunch of hot air.

Failing that, it's still a hot, smoking gun staring your claims right in the face.

But back to those FactCheck photographs, and how it is that the crew at FactCheck could have known whether they were holding in their hands (and snapshot-ing) a genuine legal document….

- As I have said before, I don't rely on their assessment so much as my assessment of the photographic evidence they have produced in conjunction with what Hawaii official have said about the characteristics of COLBs.

But, of course, such a legal document DID exist in June 2008, right? That's what those photographs were supposed to evince.

Where is it now?

- How should I know? And what difference does it make? Either the document shown was legit or it wasn't. Based on the photographic evidence I have seen, I am satisfied it was a legit document.

You know, we could raise doubts about anything if we set our evidentiary standards of proof that high. You repeatedly quote the James v. Obama complaint. But have you seen it? Have you held it in your hands? How do you know it was really filed?

How about the constitutional convention? How do we really know that it too place? From some oil paintings, yellowing diary pages, and books which claim write about historical events. But clearly those could have been forged. Maybe there is no real Constitution, and de Vattel never existed. Perhaps the existence of the United States of America is some elaborate hoax.

At some point we have to accept certain propositions as true, or everything becomes subject to question.

Those two bits of microfiche are a tertiary source, derived from a putative secondary source (the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin) which in turn are supposed to have gained the information from the Hawaii state government's announcement of the births registered on the dates specified.

Examining the archives of the primary source would sidestep suspicions of alterations in that tertiary source.

As for your personal “assessment” of the images later posted on the FactCheck Web site, your own qualifications as a reliable forensic documents examiner have not been specified. Care to do so?

And the question of where that supposedly issued-in-2007, photographed-in-2008 Hawaii state COLB has gotten since last June – and more importantly, why your Messiah's acolytes have not put it before such impartial assessors of its validity and provenance as might be able to attest reliably as to its contents and character….

Well, that's a question I don't really expect you – one of your Messiah's faithful – to answer, is it?

Some things you obviously want to take on faith.

I, however, do not.

“Those two bits of microfiche are a tertiary source, derived from a putative secondary source (the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin) which in turn are supposed to have gained the information from the Hawaii state government's announcement of the births registered on the dates specified.”

- Fair enough. But that doesn't address my point. Regardless of the source of the information, no one has yet to disprove with any reasonable argument that slightly over a week after Obama was born (whether you think it occurred in Honolulu, Mombassa, Jakarta or Bangalore), two Honolulu newspapers published information on his birth. So any conspiracy to hid Obama's birthplace, if there was one, would have had to have occurred no later than that time.

“As for your personal “assessment” of the images later posted on the FactCheck Web site, your own qualifications as a reliable forensic documents examiner have not been specified. Care to do so?”

No, but I'm not claiming to have an expert opinion. I am claiming a rational layman's opinion based upon what is plainly in those photos.

Since you're the person claiming some sort of forgery is involved, you have the burden of demonstrating how it took place, not me.

“your Messiah's acolytes…” “one of your Messiah's faithful”

This isn't a discussion about whether I support Obama's policies or not – and you have no idea what I think about them – unless you take it on faith what anti-birthers believe about the rest of world events. Gee, how easy it is for you to believe some things, but not others. Let's call it opportunistic skepticism.

I'm trying to discuss whether the arguments you are making stand up to the light of reason and the law, and in the end all you can do is attempt to discern my political motivations when you hit a bump in the road. That suggests a fundamental weakness in the confidence you have in your underlying argument.

On the microfiche records, why do you think that alterations “would have had to have occurred no later than that time” (i.e., proximal to your Messiah's incarnation)?

They could've been wiped of the notification of Mrs. Nordyke's twin daughters' delivery, the fraudulent “notice” of young Ms. Dunham's parturitional pains inserted, and the new microfiche films put into the archives. This could have been done at any time prior to the flaunting of these tertiary sources by Obama's fellahin.

That seems a possibility to be anticipated by “reason,” certainly.

Not that “the law” has anything to do with “reason,” of course.

As for your “political motivations,” why don't you specify? I certainly have. In so doing, I think I've couched my reasons for opposing this Kenyan Keynesian, and why I look upon the “birther” controversy as a route of attack whereby this enemy may be discomfited and perhaps even destroyed.

What do you wish to see happen to him?

Be careful, though! Little stevie seems to be in something of a permanent snit about wishful fantasies of seeing him flung from the summit of El Capitan and suchlike.

On the microfiche records, why do you think that alterations “would have had to have occurred no later than that time” (i.e., proximal to your Messiah's incarnation)?

They could've been wiped of the notification of Mrs. Nordyke's twin daughters' delivery, the fraudulent “notice” of young Ms. Dunham's parturitional pains inserted, and the new microfiche films put into the archives. This could have been done at any time prior to the flaunting of these tertiary sources by Obama's fellahin.

- First of all, define “they.” Second, you seem to think that the only place you can find microfilm is “in the archives.” This isn't the Zapruder film, I'm afraid. It is publicly available, with multiple copies in libraries around Hawaii and possibly other states. So “they” would have had to have gone around and changed all the microfilm in all the libraries. Why not just go to the library, check the microfilm, and ask when it was obtained. That can't be THAT hard, can it?

As for your “political motivations,” why don't you specify?

- Because it is irrelevant to the discussion over whether Obama's records have somehow been forged, or whether the law supports the theory that “natural born citizen” doesn't really mean what the Supreme Court has repeatedly says it means. A reasonable conservative who opposes Obama socialism and a reasonable liberal who supports Obama's policies can reach the same logical conclusion on those issues without agreeing in the slightest over the direction of Obama's presidency.

John C had written below:

[Quoting me}:On the microfiche records, why do you think that alterations "would have had to have occurred no later than that time" (i.e., proximal to your Messiah's incarnation)?

"They could've been wiped of the notification of Mrs. Nordyke's twin daughters' delivery, the fraudulent "notice" of young Ms. Dunham's parturitional pains inserted, and the new microfiche films put into the archives. This could have been done at any time prior to the flaunting of these tertiary sources by Obama's fellahin.

[JohnC]:- First of all, define “they.” Second, you seem to think that the only place you can find microfilm is “in the archives.” This isn't the Zapruder film, I'm afraid. It is publicly available, with multiple copies in libraries around Hawaii and possibly other states. So “they” would have had to have gone around and changed all the microfilm in all the libraries. Why not just go to the library, check the microfilm, and ask when it was obtained. That can't be THAT hard, can it?

[Me]:As for your “political motivations,” why don't you specify?

[JohnC]:- Because it is irrelevant to the discussion over whether Obama's records have somehow been forged, or whether the law supports the theory that “natural born citizen” doesn't really mean what the Supreme Court has repeatedly says it means. A reasonable conservative who opposes Obama socialism and a reasonable liberal who supports Obama's policies can reach the same logical conclusion on those issues without agreeing in the slightest over the direction of Obama's presidency.

I'm not terribly concerned with precisely who the “they” might be. I tend to judge an enemy (socialists, cancer cells, pathogenic microorganisms) by what they can do as well as by what they have done in the past, and I don't particularly need to tell them off individually. I don't know how many libraries in Hawaii archive microfiche versions of the Honolulu Advertiser or the Star-Bulletin, but I can't think it inconceivable that all of them couldn't readily have been “sanitized.” Get a single copy of the one microfiche page for each paper. Scan it into a computer. Scrub a section, insert text supportive of Barry's contention, print it out. Make a bunch of copies, and then go into each archive and substitute the new microfiche page for the existing ones.

Those archives are, as you point out, “publicly available.”

Not as difficult to do as making changes on the old-fashioned reels of microfilm which I worked with while conducting research in college, certainly.

Two more points. First, there is no such thing as a reasonable “Liberal.”

Second, you should not mistake me for a “conservative.”

In the modern usages of these two terms (“Liberal” = socialist/progressive/fascist, and “conservative” = brain-dead blue-stocking'd theocrat with mercantilist designs on his neighbors' economic lives), neither fits.

See von Hayek, “Why I Am Not a Conservative” (1960).

I'm not terribly concerned with precisely who the “they” might be. I tend to judge an enemy (socialists, cancer cells, pathogenic microorganisms) by what they can do as well as by what they have done in the past, and I don't particularly need to tell them off individually. I don't know how many libraries in Hawaii archive microfiche versions of the Honolulu Advertiser or the Star-Bulletin, but I can't think it inconceivable that all of them couldn't readily have been “sanitized.” Get a single copy of the one microfiche page for each paper. Scan it into a computer. Scrub a section, insert text supportive of Barry's contention, print it out. Make a bunch of copies, and then go into each archive and substitute the new microfiche page for the existing ones.

I can understand why you're not interested in defining who “they” are. Because any definition which would satisfy the needs of such a conspiracy would read like a phone book and come across as positively idiotic. You're probably safer sticking to “they.”

Unless the replacement sheet of microfiche is done perfectly, a relatively well-experienced handler of microfiche is likely to spot the difference. And what if it's a roll of microfilm, instead of microfiche? Then “they” would have to recreate an entire replacement roll. In any case, this process would have to be reproduced in every single library containing such records without fail, lest the conspiracy fall apart. The only people with that sort of information would be representatives of the microfilm/-fiche companies, meaning they are now solidly part of the conspiracy. And of course the libraries would be complicit because in at least some locales their employees would have to turn a blind eye to what was going on beneath their noses.

First, there is no such thing as a reasonable “Liberal.” Second, you should not mistake me for a “conservative.”

- I make no assumptions about your political persuasion. I do find fault with the way you view human behavior, especially with your belief that people have the capacity to pull off a massive, multi-generational conspiracy without a flaw, keeping you constantly guessing and scratching your head. And let's face it, if Obama and his allies are capable of pulling it off as you seem to think, then maybe he is the smartest and most capable person in the country.

Pshaw. I don't need to bruit the word “conspiracy” about as if it were a magical incantation. “Once is the thing itself, twice is coincidence – but the third time is enemy action.”

There are more than sufficient “Damn. That's funny….” elements in the history of your Mombasa Messiah to foreclose the acceptance of anything less than the complete disclosure of all his personal records, explicitly including the submission to a panel of qualified and impartial forensic documents examiners that very same supposed Certification of Live Birth that his acolytes claim was generated by the state of Hawaii at his request in 2007 and which had been allegedly scanned to produce the two computer graphic images which his campaign had emailed to DailyKos and to FactCheck in June 2008.

The guy has been covering up his crap with the frenzied intensity of a housecat dosed with a 30 cc bolus of castor oil.

And on the microfiche elements – not full rolls of microfilm, as I'd pointed out – has anyone competent to judge their provenance weighed in on this issue?

Need I remind you that “Liberals” have a long and sordid history of bogus documents manufacture when it suits their purposes?

As for what people can do when their nefarious purposes require such action as is both feasible and possible, just what part of the long story of Bernie Madoff don't you understand?

–
“Tout ce qu’un homme est capable d’imaginer, d’autres hommes seront capables de le réaliser.” — Félix Duquesnel

So go ahead and prove that every single microfiche/film of the two newspapers were doctored up. Show us any evidence that Obama was born anywhere other than where his COLB says he was, in Honolulu, HI. Show us proof that the online image of the COLB was in any way digitally manipulated, other than the redacting of the certificate number. Do you have any proof for any of your claims? No? I thought not.

Under what possible burden of proof do I labor, geek? I merely point out that these tertiary sources of information can be easily doctored, and that the elision of the notification of the Nordyke twins' delivery from those tertiary records gives reason sufficient to consider that they may, indeed, have been tampered with.

There are (or were) primary sources of information on hospital deliveries in Honolulu within this time frame, created and held in the records of the government of the state of Hawaii. Have these not been searched out? And if so, why not?

The efforts of the Obamaphiles have not been addressed to the questions raised about the paucity of provenance in the form of the much-altered Frankenstein's monsters of cobbled-together computer graphic images put up in June 2008, but rather to loud squeals of “See! See!” and pointing to such other rather thin “evidence” as these microfiche records.

This is not a matching exercise, geek. Each bit of information to be employed as “proof” that your Anointed One had, indeed, been born in Hawaii and is thus a “natural born” citizen of these United States has to undergo diligent scrutiny, and I'm afraid that – especially – given your beloved Barry's astonishing and otherwise inexplicable efforts to conceal his “permanent record” from public examination, asking anyone to take his word on this matter –

(( Ah, yes; the “word” of a Chicago political machine stalwart, and a “community organizer” who'd worked for and is backed by a huge criminal conspiracy called ACORN… ))

- or to accept anything less than iron-clad confirmation is a boat that's simply not gonna float.

Again and again and again, if there had been a Hawaii state COLB issued to your Messiah in 2007, and if it had been scanned to create those two computer graphic images, you yourself claim that it did exist and that it does suffice as proof of your Savior's birth in Honolulu.

All right. So where the hell is it? Why can your Anointed One not produce the damned thing, put it into the custody of criminal investigators qualified to examine it properly, and put to rest what is certainly for him a damnable point of contention drawing unwanted attention to his lack of bona fides and therefore to the various gadarene jerk-jobs he's trying to inflict upon these United States before the populace awakens to his malignancy and starts digging in their heels against him?

He needs this to “go away,” geek. Why the hell is he so determined to stonewall it in the hope that it won't continue to fester and grow?

Fellow birthers: News guy says last night that Hawaii destroyed original cert. Yeah right.

Non birthers: lots of posts from folks saying everyone except us birthers have moved on. Y U posting then? Move along now. ROFLMAO

Tuci test-taker, if you cannot tell the difference between the real YouGo and a fake that is obvious to any of us, why do you make a fool of yourself trying to talk out of your ass about forged birth certificates?

Seems to me you should stick with collecting Civil War figurines.

Hey, John. I know jj. He’s not dumb. He’d never pay for your conspiracy theory when the birthers are giving theirs away for free.

OK, if you say this “can” be easily doctored, where is your proof that it was? Why weren't you asking for this for George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan or any other president that was elected in your lifetime? I mean it's just as likely that they faked their credentials. And none of them ever posted their birth certificates for the public to see. And why should President Soetoro, the Kenyan usurper release a document that doesn't even exist? Even if he did have one to release and he did release it, that would never satisfy you, so what's the point?

Little stevie, I addressed the post, without bothering to check the identity of the poster. Why does this crawl into your crotch and start inflaming your scrotum, anyway?

Listen up birther imbeciles! You need to stop watching so much television! Your retarded conspiracy theory makes absolutely no sense, unless you are also asserting the the entire U.S. government is in on this conspiracy, especially our top national security experts, and that makes absolutely no sense–what would be the motivation?
You seem to forget that there is a lengthy and serious verification and national security clearance process that takes place with every incoming President of the United States. That process is not just a wink and a smile, but the submission of tons of documentation, including birth certificates, licenses, finger printing, etc. All these document are carefully verified and authenticated by top security experts. The incomming President's entire background is checked and verified. Until all this is not done, the incoming President is not granted the required highest level of national security clearance every President must have in order to do his/her job. All this is done between the end of the Presidential election and the swearing in of the President. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court also receives verification that the President -elect fulfills the qualifying requirement to be President as set forth by the U.S Constitution.
Unless you believe the entire U.S. Government, U.S. Supreme Court, and our National Security entities are all running a mickey mouse camp, run and secure our country like it was some kindergarten game, then it is virtually impossible for any President-elect to be able to actually be sworn in as our own President without the necessary official checks, security clearances, and verifications–unless that person is smarter than everyone else and was able to fool everyone–all the experts–and in that case, he deserves to be President just for being so smart!
You birthers are absolutely pathetic and should really get off the television and try reading something that isn't your conspiracy garbage. Perhaps in time, your brain will recover from the fog you put it in and may begin to think rationally once again.

Tell 'em about your standardized test scores, Tuci. That ought to convince them, since your absurd rambling conspiracy theory did not.

I see from this discussion that you still haven't bothered to consult Wikipedia for a functional definition of “burden of proof.” You go right on ranting about what the President must do to satisfy you. Keep making bizarre, overwrought death threats — though I notice you didn't resort to that on this particular thread yet. See where that gets you.

Undoubtedly yours is a strategy of genius. Don't stop believing, test-taker!

Again, in order to be able to be officially sworn in as President of the United States he must undergo months of security checking and identity verification–among the many original documents required for such an extensive test, is the original birth certificate. You think that our top national security experts who undertake the task to condicting the extensive identity and security tests of every incoming President, in order to grant them the highest level of national security clearance in the land, would forego all their verification, authentication and double checking for a wink and a smile? Don't be idiots! One must show proof of identity and citizenship for any regular job, you think nothing was required from our incoming President before they were officially sworn in by the highest court in the land and granted the highest national security clearance in the country? c'mon, not even you brain dead imbecile can possibly believe that!
The interesting thing is that you idiots only seem to have taken on the self described role of citizen police with President Obama, as if his citizenship was never verified in the past by official means–in any of his past educational institutions, jobs, or political posts. I never heard you demand to see proof of the birth certificate of GW Bush or Bill Clinton, why is that? because they are white? It that what all this crap is about? I thought so. Get over it, the United States of America has an African American President, deal with it and mover on. Or move to another country where your racist citizenship police skills may be better utilized.

You sure are showing your true colors, Beca.

Non-birthers post for the sheer amusement of poking racist dolts with verbal sticks.

You being a birther, logic and reason are lost on you, so I understand that you do not get the concept of mocking someone who is stupid but comes in here telling you that they and they alone can see the decades-old, 200,000-member vast Birth Certificate Conspiracy.

If they had this site when I was a kid, I'd have skipped the arcade to come here and whack you moles I mean trolls.

Prove it! I have my doubts that you are an Ameircan citizen, you sound like a plant to me! Show us verifiable and authenticated proof that you are an American citizen! We want the signed affidavits of both your parents that your father impregneated your mother on American soil–and we demand 10 signed affidavits of actual witnesses to this impergneation! We also demand signed affidavits from all the staff at the hospital where you claim to be born, plus an official notice from the judge of that county that you were indeed born alive in that county and state. Then we demand hair, mucus and saliva samples from all your relatives to confirm that they are your relatives and that they are also U.S. citizens. We also want DNA proof of you, your supposed birth parents, all people claiming to be your relatives, the doctor who claims to have delivered you, and 10 eye witnesses. Then we need your birth certificate to be signed and sealed in blood–your blood and that of those people you claim to be your birth parents, the county judge, the delivery doctor and the governor of the state you claim to have been born in. Oh, and an IQ test for you, your supposed bith parents, your supposed grandparents, all those people you claim are your relatives, the doctor who delivered you, the nurses attending the alleged delivery, the 10 witnesses, the governor of that state, and a signed statement in triplicate from the President of the United States verifying that you are indeed a human being.
Then we might still not believe you are an American citizen, it all depends how quickly and accurately you supply us with this information. Oh, and no copies, please, we demand to see the original of everything, including the afterbirth of your alleged birth. Dried up samples will not do, they must be fresh and viable or you are out of here!

Did you question the citizenship of GW Bush? or did he show you his original birth certificate along with the afterbirth from his birth?
Or you didn't think about it because he was white!

YouGo, you mentioned such, but you have not produced verifiable proof that you are a US citizen or that you are actually registered to vote! All we know, you are a plant from Iran trying to stir up crap over here to take the focus off of your country!
Prove you are a U.S. citizen

“The world is round not flat.” –MikeB

What evidence do you have to prove that the world is round not flat?

I'm talking legit evidence. Dont tell me about any of the obvious fakes that have been discussed and shredded by my online newsletter already.

It seems like such a simple request. Just back up what your saying, dude. ANY map that has a certificate (not certification) of authenticity should be able to prove your point, and then this whole thing will be laid to rest.

If you dont want to admit your wrong just say it libtard. Just say your wrong and this whole thing goes away.

_______________________________
jimpa:

Evidence :
Most Americans believe the world isn't flat. Just a small group of people believe that the earth is flat.
Astronauts and cosmonauts has seen the earth and state that the world isn't flat.
We have satellites orbiting the planet and their data says the world isn't flat.
Go to any main stream news source and it will state the world isn't flat.
Sailors at some point would fall off the flat surface.

_____________________________________________________
stephenperry:

Lies. Damnable lies.

1 – Link, please. Not to one of your commie libtard sites. Just a small group of people freed the U.S. mainland from British tyranny and lazy shiftless Native American Indians, pal. Dont tread on me.

2 – The moon landing was faked. Prove that it wasn't. Without using faked proof. I don't trust cosmonauts, they're commie fascist socialist marxist leftist rightist upist downists.

3 – You don't effing know what our satellites say unless you can read encrypted spy satellite code, libtard. We don't trust dumbocrats with national security.

4 – Main stream media is a libtard sewer.

5 – They'd have to go off the EDGE, Obamaphile. Who's dumb enough to sail off the edge? Sailors, like my grandfather and greatgrandfather who both served three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan AND Gettysburg, know how to steer a ship. Unlike you, libtard.

Jesus H. Christ. DO ANY OF YOU LIBTARDS HAVE A BRAIN IN YOUR COMMIE LEFTIST HEADS?

I have no idea how Florida Christian doesn't just giggle himself right off his computer chair every day.

Tsk for the 27th time (or so it seems). Look, geek, don't you understand deductive logic? Ever heard of SOAP (Subjective, Objective, Analysis, Plan) notes?

I'm a physician. Doctors get to MOST of their diagnoses on the basis of what we discover in the course of interrogating patients and caregivers. The Objective part of the paradigm – physical findings, results of diagnostic testing, tissue pathology analyses, etc. – serves predominantly to confirm or rule out diagnostic possibilities already considered as a result of what's derived from the Subjective information.

For that reason, doctors – like military operations and planning (S3) types – tend to look much more intensively at possibilities than at hard evidentiary information, which we know full well can be either deliberately or inadvertently falsified (patients are ALWAYS presumed to be unreliable, if not lying outright) or muddled by artifacts involved in the information collection process.

I don't need proof that the microfiche records WERE altered to observe that such alterations are possible, and therefore to observe that it were better to find the primary sources of this information rather than to rely upon a tertiary source so clearly amenable to falsification.

And if your Kenyan usurper is relying upon “a document that doesn't even exist” to prove his natural-born citizen status, then those computer graphic images released in June 2008 were created to defraud, and are now evidence of outright criminal felony.

Good on you, geek. So you've “come over from the Dark Side” at last?

This assumes that there is an incentive on the part of those anonymous people you assume to be responsible for your “months of security checking and identity verification” to actually ferret out the proofs required to support – or to scotch – the ascendency of your Anointed One, Beca.

In the words of Sportin' Life, “It ain't necessarily so.“

My point, of course, in mentioning performance on “standardized test scores” was to emphasize that they are not criteria to rely upon in exchanges such as these. Those who claim that they are have succumbed to a variant of the logical fallacy of argument from authority.

What matters is what is written to be read right here. “On the Internet, nobody can tell you're a dog,” and therefore claims of qualification are of no importance whatsoever. What's important in the content that appears online.

And, yeah, my Stanford-Binet scores put me in the “genius” category. So what? I haven't asked for yours, have I, stevie?

Proof of YouGo's “natural born” citizenship status is not relevant to this discussion. What's at question is the “natural born” citizenship qualification of your beloved Barry, which remains painfully unresolved for that malignant sonofabitch, and looks happily like it will bring him down and make him not only the first (nominally) Black President of these United States but also the first ever to establish his Presidential Library in a federal penitentiary.

And who says life isn't worth living for an old guy like me?

Well, there's also us constitutionalists, who favor lawful government constrained within the limits of that charter by which your Mombasa Messiah spuriously claims the authority to gang-rape the productive sector of our society.

Fallacy of the false dilemma, mantis.

So in other words, you have no proof or even evidence of anything, just speculation. You believe it because you want to believe it, nothing more. And you refuse to research any of the facts. The only “research” you seem to have done is through chain e-mails. It's ironic that you think you have any room to lecture me on logic. I've never seen such lazy thinking by a person who calls himself a doctor, unless you're lying about that, too.

And by “a document that doesn't even exist” I was talking about the so-called “long form birth certificate” that birfers are asking for.

Sure. I've got reasoned speculation, you've got unreasoned faith.

The burden of proof is on Barry and the Obamaphiles (sounds like a Motown group, doesn't it?), and they – meaning you, geek – got no proof at all.

Of course Obama has proof. You can find it here, here, here and here. If you think the sources are wrong, it's up to you to provide proof that they are. Since you have none, it is you who has unreasoned faith.

Tsk. FactCheck and PolitiFact and yet another computer image of what looks like a photocopy of a much-spindled and folded bit of newsprint, and nothing of a reliable primary source.

Yet more piling up of dubious “evidence” and no address of the reasonable critiques of the qualities of such “proof” as Barry's fellahin have been trying so desperately to pass off.

Besides which, of course, geek, there's all that stuff that your Mombasa Messiah is also struggling to keep hidden away.

Don't you ever wonder what juicy tidbits of fatally damaging information your beloved Barry – that friggin' crook – is sweating so stinkingly to keep you and everybody else from learning about him?

If you think that FactCheck and PolitiFact are unreliable, provide evidence that what they presented is not real. And even if the evidence is “dubious” as you put it, at least it's still evidence. You have no evidence at all, dubious or otherwise.

And what evidence is President Soetoro, the Kenyan usurper trying to hide? He's released more on this issue than any of the previous 42 presidents have.

Again with the demands for “negative proof” (“provide evidence that what they presented is not real“).

Jeez, geek, did you come by this mental incapacitation of yours by dint of organic pathology, or are you just psychotic?

And your Kenyan Keynesian has shut away more than any other presidential candidate or occupant of the White House has tried to bury since Grover Cleveland had his verrucous carcinoma carved out aboard the Oneida in secret back in 1893.

Again, I'm not seeing any evidence of these claims of yours. Not surprising since you have none. You don't even have any evidence that FactCheck and PolitiFact are unreliable sources of information. And by the way, argumentum ad hominem is not Latin for “good argument.”

Aw, geek. You really rely on partisan political Web sites as “reliable” sources of information? No “trust but verify” in you?

Damn, geek. Where the hell were you when I was selling magazine subscriptions in high school? I could've made my quota at your house in single afternoon.

And show us where I've fallen into any logical fallacy whatsoever. Are you one of those bloody schmucks who mistakes simple insult for argumentum ad hominem, geekster?

Well, hell. Why shouldn't you be? You're dumb enough.

Again, no evidence from you, but a lot more ad hominem arguments. Typical of one who has no logical argument.

Still determined to show your ass, geek?

Look, the Nizkor.org people maintain a really good online listing and explanation of logical fallacies. Why not click over there and check it out?

Simple insult is not argumentum ad hominem no matter how much you're determined to keep your head wedged firmly up your butt, little guy.

Still no evidence but plenty more ad hominem. Typical of one who lacks a logical argument. I guess that means you've given up.

Maybe Hawai’i will take some action to open up its birth records:

“The issue is not likely to go away, and Hawaii state Sen. Will Espero said he would introduce legislation next year to have birth certificates declared public records.

Espero (D, Ewa-Honouliuli-Ewa Beach) said the Obama fuss has raised questions about public and private records and says it would be in the state’s interest to have open public record of births.

‘It would be important for relatives and even neighbors,’ Espero said.”

http://www.starbulletin.com/news/20090728_us_ho…

That's a GREAT idea! Hey, how about we let anyone see our S.S. #'s, our employment history, our medical and criminal records, our religious affiliations, how we've voted in all past elections, both local, state, and federal, what charities we contribute to, if we're cut or uncut, what our favorite foods are and if we loved our mommy or not.

geeze louize!

What Obama is hiding is that he was born a dual-citizen at best & his Kenyan father was biracial(part Arab which is caucazoid). The age of majority in the U.S. in 1961 was 21yr & his mother had to be at least 19 to grant natural-born status(she was 18). Too bad he gave up any U.S. citizenship when he was adopted by his flakey mother's 2nd husband & became Indonesian Barry Soetoro. Grandma & Grandpa Dunham in Hawaii were eventually saddled with the little reject and made lemonade. Then he apparently attended three colleges in the U.S as a foreign student (or do you think he is just hiding poor grades?). Don't you wonder who payed for his college? They were not the kind of schools most people can afford.

Immigration Lawyers…

[...]just below, are some totally unrelated sites to ours, however, they are definitely worth checking out[...]…

[...] GOP Congressional Candidate: Obama Should Answer 'Legitimacy … Jul 22, 2009 … His campaign let Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post take a look at it. Florida Christian … [...]