Tulsa Newspaper Slams Jim Inhofe on ‘Birthers’

Well, it's getting out into the drive-by media now.

From David Hahn, "Publisher, StatePaper.com " August 5, 2009.

Publisher: Obama Should Produce Original Birth Certificate

At StatePaper.com, we know by making this statement we will be instantly tagged as "racist," "birther," or other pejorative terms by those who defend the President of the United States. We often defend the President and the job he is doing and are regularly lambasted for being "too liberal" or an "Obama lover" by some of our most prolific critics.

But, here is the issue:

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of our country. Article II of the Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen. Without reciting them here, there appears to be some serious questions raised about whether President Obama was born in the United States or Kenya. We have not checked sources, but there are reports that some witnessed his birth in Kenya.

The President's campaign staff and then his administration have released and placed on the internet a "Certificate of Live Birth." We do not dispute the validity or correctness of that document as others have tried to do, suggesting the use of computers to alter seals and names. By releasing this document the President agrees that the claims about his status as a natural born citizen is an open, important, public issue.

But, this "Certificate of Live Birth" is simply not the best evidence that the President and his administration could offer to lay to rest any doubt about his status as a natural born citizen.

Barack Obama is a lawyer and a graduate of Harvard Law School. All law students study the body of law we call "Evidence." One of the core tenets of American law is the "best evidence rule" which requires the production of original, or certified copies, of original document to prove a fact. Abstracts and summaries are not original documents.

The President has offered an abstract (Certificate) of his birth, but not an original birth certificate which would be the best evidence of his birth. We need the best evidence so that it can do what the best evidence is meant to do; dispel the doubts about a fact. We need to see the Birth Certificate. That's the one that is often handwritten and signed by the doctor.

Lawyers and legal thinkers will, obviously, argue the finer points of the "Best Evidence Rule" and its applicability to this matter. But, that misses the point. The notion of "Best Evidence" is solidly-grounded in law. This is an important public matter and it seems now that the President has started down the path of offering some evidence (Certificate of Live Birth), he should offer the "best evidence" (Original Birth Certificate) which is the source document for his birth. The document behind the document which has been released. This is what is needed now in the court of public knowledge.

The fact in question here is the constitutional qualification of the President of the United States to hold office. With a simple nod, the President could offer the American people the best evidence, the source document(s), as he learned about at Harvard, and dispel those who question his birth as a natural born citizen. His failure to provide this best evidence, when it could be so easily done, raises only more questions, which fuels an ugly public debate.

And now we've got a "Liberal" Nebraska newspaper advising Barry to cough up his birth certificate.

If he can. Anybody ready to hear our TelePrompTer-in-Chief taking the Fifth?

Another edging-off-the-side euphgeek post brought up:

"Wow, so you take the word of someone you don't even know, who builds evidence around a pre-determined conclusion just because you like his "coherence."

"I, on the other hand, demand solid evidence before believing any conspiracy theories. That explains why I don't side with the Palin birthers, the 9/11 truthers, the Area 51 nutjobs or the CIA-killed-Kennedy kooks.

"And my calling you out for the hypocrite you are is not opinion, just fact (i.e., you do something yourself that you criticize others for doing). So sorry to disappoint you there."



I no more "take the word" of Fredrick (at http://www.colony14.net/id41.html ) than I'd take the word of, say, world-renowned cardiologist Eric Topol on a research program in which he's participating simply on the basis that if Topol's name is among the authors it must somehow be reliable.

I look to the content, including format, coherence, attention to detail, lack of self-contradiction within the body of the work, the evidence of methodical progress from point to point, the willingness to support assertions with readily accessed references (an honest of his willingness to be found wrong should he be wrong) and even roughly to qualify the reliability of the evidence secured for each conclusion reached. Fredrick has done a better job of it than anyone else I've thus far read.

You, geekie, no more "demand solid evidence" on the issue of your Messiah's supposed "natural born" citizen status than any other frantic, sweating, "PLEASE make this go away!" Obamaphile on these Web pages. In fact, what you're aching for is cessation of any demand for "solid evidence" of any kind, for the positive proposition which requires proof is "Barry (the sonofabitch) was born in Honolulu instead of his native Kenya."

As literally millions of American citizens have stated, he's getting past the point at which - even if he does cough up a doozy of a counterfeit "birth certificate" showing that he first sucked air and piddled on an obstetrician somewhere in Honolulu - who the hell is going to believe it?

As literally millions of American citizens have stated, he's getting past the point at which - even if he does cough up a doozy of a counterfeit "birth certificate" showing that he first sucked air and piddled on an obstetrician somewhere in Honolulu - who the hell is going to believe it?

No one expects crazy ass birthers to accept reality. They are forever locked in their deranged state, and nothing will knock them out of it. Not unlike pretty much every other nutball conspiracy theorist (and as a demented Paulbot, I'm sure you subscribe to most nutter theories).

Oh, I just love reality, invertebrate. The reality is that Barry Soetoro's extremely expensive (upwards of the proverbial million bucks in legal expenses) effort to procedurally quash rather than to substantively adjudicate the question of his "natural born" citizen status reeks to high heaven of criminal intent and political vulnerability.

Where there's smoke, spineless one, that's where you go to toast your marshmallows.

Wanna make 'Smores and sing "Kumb-Bye-Ya" 'round the campfire, bug-boy?

Oh, I just love reality, invertebrate.

All evidence to the contrary.

The reality is that Barry Soetoro's extremely expensive (upwards of the proverbial million bucks in legal expenses)

You can invent figures all you want, but that doesn't make them true. Why not just say he's spent a billion dollars, or a quadrillion? It's just as true.

effort to procedurally quash rather than to substantively adjudicate the question of his "natural born" citizen status reeks to high heaven of criminal intent and political vulnerability.

As much as waving away pesky houseflies is indicative of a vast conspiracy to cover up one's secret plan to eliminate manure from the planet.

Where there's smoke, spineless one, that's where you go to toast your marshmallows.

Conspiracy theorist nutbags see smoke everywhere. It's a wonder they can walk around without bumping into things. Oh yeah, most cannot.

Hey, who has to invent, little arthropod?

Gawd, but there's just so much filth in the background of your Cook County "poverty pimp" Messiah, ain't there?

Get the picture of Barry Soetoro running through a golf course, straight down the fairway, while the folks in the spectators' galleries are chucking hand grenades at him?

Bam! Boom! Almost got him that time! Lead him with the next one, willya? Ya think he's gonna make it as far as the green? Who cares? We can blow his ass off there, too, can't we?

Hey, who has to invent, little arthropod?

You, for one. Constantly.

I demand solid evidence of the birfer claim that Obama was born outside of the U.S. So far you have not shown me believable evidence that he wasn't. "Millions of people" demanding something is not evidence, either. There are also millions who believe we faked the moon landing, that alien abductions happen, that the CIA killed President Kennedy and that praying to a man who supposedly lived and died 2,000 years ago will get them eternal bliss when they die.

But at least you're right about one thing -- that even if he does show his birth certificate, this isn't going to go away. So what incentive does he have to do so? Even if a forensic document examiner were to give it the "thumbs up" in a court of law, it could always be claimed that he was paid to lie and if he's ever found out, he would be pardoned by President Biden. So you see, appeasing lunatics gets him exactly nowhere. Remember how well appeasing Hitler went?

Chortle! Who gives a flying fuck what you "demand," you silly little sack of shit? You are a private citizen (er, you aren't an "undocumented," are you, geekie?). I'm a private citizen. Barry Soetoro - the miserable sonofabitch - is, on the other hand, a tax-consuming "public citizen" on the gub'mint payroll.

I am under no obligation to do what you want, putzele, 'cause I stopped being a "public servant" more than thirty years ago. Your Mombasa Messiah, on the other hand, is under a plain "Stand and deliver!" requirement when the source of his delegated sovereignty - us common "civilians" - demand of him that he show cause as to how he is lawfully qualified to squat in the Oval Office and swing a wrecking ball repeatedly at the U.S. economy.

The nicest thing about this "birther" issue is the light it casts upon every secret, sordid, carefully concealed aspect of your Marxist Messiah's personal past history, helping to fling big, honkin' rocks into the meatgrinder through which he's trying to shove this nation and its people before we've got time to react and resist.

Barry's sure one slick con artist, geekie. But there seems to be a limit on the size of the crowd upon which even the slickest bunco man can run the sort of "long con" he's trying to pull.

You said it -- who gives a flying fuck what a few private citizens demand? Therefore, there's nothing that you can do or say -- short of giving proof positive that Obama was not born in the U.S. -- that will force him to show his birth certificate to the general public. You're welcome to quote whatever law you think says otherwise, but until you do the constant refrain will be:

Who gives a flying fuck what you demand?

Certainly not Barry Soetoro. And therein likes opportunity, dickwad. Y'see, even the people who voted for him because they were just sick of the Republicans now have to acknowledge that their "most transparent" of Presidents is really more secretive, opaque, shifty, and manifestly criminal even than had Nixon been.

Great, ain't it? The longer this noise continues, the more it becomes plain that Barry Soetoro doesn't give a flying fuck for what the citizens demand of him, the less sympathetic a figure he becomes, and the more resistance will rise against him.

And by forcing discussion of this issue in fora such as these, geekie, you and your co-religionists are helping it along marvelously.

Thanks, geek! If you weren't out there under that rock of yours, I would've had to invent you.

You can fantasize about that all you want, but normal people do not agree with you. They, like me, all think you're a bunch of racist idiots who are filing frivolous lawsuits in a failed attempt to overturn an election because you're just a bunch of sore losers. And why should he give a flying fuck what a bunch of kooks demand of him? If he did, he'd have to do nothing all day but respond to these people.

And yes, I am forcing discussion of this issue in order to shine a light on it. Once people hear about it, they rightly dismiss it as the crackpottery it is and the birfers are cast in an even worse light. See, normal people see you birfers as deranged conspiracy theorist kooks. They don't sympathize with you at all. But by all means, continue thinking the opposite so that this movement can continue to be laughed at by an ever-wider circle of people.

Aw, geekie. And what would you know about "normal"?

And you claim to "think," eh?

Well, that's a new one.

Keep on keeping on, little sacklet of shit. Like I'd said, if you weren't down there bitching so pitifully from beneath your rock, I would've had to invent something like you.

Well, regardless of whether you believe you're normal or that you think, you'll still have to come up with some sort of evidence that Obama has any obligation to provide his vital records to the general public. Us people "bitching so pitifully from beneath [our] rock" about such minor inconveniences as the rule of law are pretty annoying, huh?

The parameters of "normal" are established well enough in the usages of clinical investigation, crapulence. For the purposes of a study in clinical psychiatry, I'm kinda way to hellangone above "normal" by virtue of Stanford-Binet scores well above the curve. Kinda like I told the psychologist who wanted me to participate as a respondent in his survey of patients' fears of needles and such (he wanted me to fill out the form because of the surgeries through which I'd gone through on my arm last year).

"Uh, Jack, you know that I've been poking holes in people with sharp objects for nearly forty years now, don'tcha?"

"Yeah, Tuci, but I still want your input in this research project."

"Gonna fall in the upper outliers, Jack," I admonished.

"Just fill out the stupid form, willya?"

And what you're bleating about, geekster, is your understanding that the more the little kid points to your Emperor and yells:

"But his dong's got all those sores all over, and there's snotty stuff dripping out of it!"

...the more you're confronted by the fact that folks are having those "Damn. That's funny..." moments you fellahin dread so much.

Well, "test-taker," I'm glad to see you can fill out the little ovals correctly. But if you're determined to see Obama go to jail, you're going to have to produce something other than invective and your personal test scores. Have you found the law that requires Obama to release his personal vital records to the general public yet?

Nah. I don't have to "produce" anything. Like I said, the burden of proof - and aren't you just crotch-clutching and doing the pee-dance about this, little bladder-bloat? - is on your Mombasa Messiah, and lots and lots of people (especially those who actually work for a living instead of voting for it) are picking up on this and saying publicly:

"Why the fuck doesn't the stupid sonofabitch just cough up his birth certificate? What the hell is he hiding?"

And that's political death for Barry Soetoro.

(( Finish with the world's first nanobot violin, playing "Hearts and Flowers" for the geekster in a register so squeaky that not even dogs can hear it. ))

Of course you have to produce something. You have to produce the law that says that Obama is even required to produce his birth certificate for the general public. If you can produce that, I'll join you in demanding he produce his birth certificate.

If you can't produce this law, then there is nothing he has to produce, no matter how many idiots you can get to say, "Damn that's funny."

You can't find Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, dungheap? Tsk!

Well at least you're trying. Unfortunately for you, it's not good enough. Nowhere in there does it say that the president has to present his birth certificate to the general public. Would you like to try again, or would you just like to continue to insult me in the mistaken belief that will somehow make you right?

Well, "good enough" is a matter of perspective, isn't it, geek?

Don't you remember all those Republicans yelling that the allegations associated with the Watergate break-in weren't "good enough" to run Slippery Dick out of Washington City?

Jeez, these Obamaphiles got nothing even remotely resembling a sense of historical perspective, have they?

"Good enough" is a matter of fact. And the fact is that you can't point to a single law Obama is breaking by not releasing his birth certificate to the general public.

Yeah, sure, shitbag. And up is down, hot is cold, and Barry Soetoro is "transparent."

Say what you want, but you still can't point to a single law Obama is breaking by not showing his birth certificate to the general public.

Mr. Weigel, why he hell should any of your readers care about prevailing opinions among the Red Party crowd in the Congress, or nationally? Do you really think that anyone in this country relies upon Republicans to police the legality of the actions taken by any of their bosom chums in the National Socialist (née "Democrat") faction of our great, fascist, permanently incumbent Boot-On-Your-Neck Party?

Look, just because these faux "conservatives" have schlumped like the spineless specimens they've always been there's no reason for you to declare "Victory!"

You just keep on pleading with the public: "Go away! Please, please, PLEASE go away before you uncork this load of shit in Barry Soetoro's past and all that feculence comes sluicing down the chutes to wash him into federal prison for the rest of his worthless life!"

Hey, you got that proof that not producing any of his vital records to the general public will "wash him into federal prison for the rest of his worthless life" yet? I've been waiting with bated breath for anything such as a Hawaii statute or a federal law. After all, that's what your ultimate goal rests on, right?

Don't need it, geek. Not getting the point, are you?

The sort of courtroom rules-of-evidence proofs required to see your faux noir Fugitive-in-Chief safely out of the White House and into the Big House are not my concern. I'm just another taxpaying "civilian" dismissed with contempt by the "Liberal" aristocrats at whose dung-covered feet you've been grovelling.

All I observe is what's in "open source" information, and from that information the only coherent picture that can possibly be drawn is that Barry Soetoro is about as reekingly dirty as it's possible for a Cook County machine politician to get.

And, geekster, that's dirty!

Doesn't matter what's in a potential prosecutor's hands right now, or what will come to a grand jury to secure an indictment (or a series of indictments) from which Barry will no more be able to evade than he might be able to take a deep breath and leap off the planet's surface to find himself a refuge in the asteroid belt.

Which he might have to do, come to think on it.

Like Nixon and like Bubba before him, Batty's a friggin' crook, and we're gonna get to see him nailed like a shingle. Ain't that nice?



--
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable."

-- H.L. Mencken

Well it certainly is nice for you that you don't need any proof to prematurely assume guilt and anticipate a life prison sentence. But here in the real world that's exactly what judges and prosecuting attorneys need.


By the way, it's interesting that you believe that Obama ever went by the name "Barry Soetoro" when the only proof you have of that is an image on the Internet!

Gawd, geek, how wonderfully obtuse you truly are.

Look, putzele, most doctors make their initial differential diagnoses without any objective proof at all. It's "usual-and-customary," and an absolutely indispensible element in standard-of-care medical management. I've made that clear, but I don't mind repeating it. You're dense; I get it.

Like most people (and emphatically not like thought-blocking cement-headed Messiah-worshipers of your type, geek), doctors invariably work from scant objectively verifiable information picked up almost "by osmosis" - I had one surgical preceptor who could literally sniff the air over an infected wound and tell you the genus and species of the predominant bacterial pathogen, and the goddam cultures proved him right a generous ninety-plus percent of the time - in precisely the sort of "Damn. That's funny..." way I'd mentioned with regard to the skeptical observer's view of the manifestly fraudulent public persona carefully sculpted by your Marxist Mahdi to have "gulled, cuddled, and diddled" the people of this country during his meteoric rise to public prominence and a post of great responsibility and power in which he is presently wreaking massive havoc upon the economy of this nation.

And of course he went by the name "Barry Soetoro." In Indonesia, as a schoolboy, until his adoptive father told his indifferent and uncaring mother: "For the love of Allah, send this little bastard back to live with your parents!"

Given that he'd never taken legal action ever to change his name back to "Barack Hussein Obama II" after the adoption proceedings in Indonesia had changed it to "Barry Soetoro," you gotta grapple with the fact that Barry Soetoro is your Messiah's real legal name.

You may be able to "sniff the air" and be satisfied of Obama's guilt, but unless that suddenly became a reliable means of determining guilt or innocence, a judge will still need proof. Do you have that yet?

I still find it amusing that you have so much faith that Obama ever went by the name "Barry Soetoro" based solely on an image on the Internet. Kind of makes you...what's the word...gullible? Stupid? A hypocrite? How about "all of the above?"

Well, geek - and just what the hell kind of geek are you supposed to be, anyway? surely not a "techno" geek - the fact that a "sniff the air" approach picks up a definite reek of criminality all around your Mombasa Messiah is enough to justify highly increased intensity in all attention focused upon him, both as a person and as a politician.

And what I've personally gotten of his characteristic - as a person and as a politician - give me more than sufficient cause to distrust him in every possible way. There are too many deliberately carved holes in his history, too many self-contradictions in his recorded statements, too many outright lies of qualities which cannot be denied or dismissed just because other National Socialist or Republican politicians also lie.

Nothing stinks this badly - as badly as Barry Seotoro stinks - without immense corruption under the seemingly benign surface,

And you wanna talk "image on the Internet," geekster? When all you have of any possible documentary proof of your Fraudulence-in-Chief's qualification to have run even in the National Socialist primaries last year is an "image on the Internet"?

Gawd, geek, but give it a break. You're making it entirely too friggin' easy.

Nah, techno music really isn't my thing. And just the fact that a paranoid nutjob such as yourself thinks there's a "definite reek of criminality" still isn't enough proof to even convict Obama of as much as jaywalking. Suppose you show me proof that Obama is hiding anything more about his past than any previous president? Heck, we couldn't even get Dubya to release his combat records!

And yes, I'd love to talk "image on the Internet" because you criticize everyone for believing the image of Obama's COLB on the Internet while the only proof you have of Obama ever going by the name "Barry Soetoro" is an image on the Internet. That makes you a hypocrite of the highest degree.

Neither are you versed in either clinical psychology or pathology, are you, geekie? Don't mistake for paranoia what is (as I've previously admonished) a properly acute situational awareness.

Just because you go about with your own head wedged up your ass, please don't expect others to join you in your willful ignorance.

Besides, if you were offered proof more than sufficiently positive to get your Messiah dragged off the surface of the reflecting pool and bundled off into a federal marshals' van, his chains a-jingling, you'd be screaming "Not my beloved Barry! Not our immortal Führer! No, he's innocent, I tell you!"

I mean, geekster, you got the socialist True Believer syndrome bad.

And, no, the "image on the internet" of his name being Barry Soetoro is mere corroboration of his adoption by Lolo Soetoro, as opposed to the ghostly "image on the internet" of what looks ludicrously like a cobbled-together bit of graphic invention that doesn't even reflect the kinds of information employed in completing a birth record in 1961 America.

Coming up with new excuses for your paranoia, are you? Anyway, I guess we'll never know what would happen if I was offered proof, because you birfers will never offer anything more than suspicion and the misreading of our nation's laws.

And the "image on the Internet" of Obama's name being Barry Soetoro is no corroboration of anything, since no proof has ever come out that he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. So you do indeed believe his name was Barry Soetoro based solely on an image on the Internet and hearsay.

Okay. So turn your Commodore 64's Web browser to http://www.colony14.net/id41.html, load the page, and use the "Edit"/"Search" function to find the first instance of "1966–1970."

You'll see his adoption discussed there, with eight supporting references (6, 14, 172, 289, 324, 329, 801, 2270) that can be looked up as click-able URLs at http://www.colony14.net/id136.html for your convenience.

And you believe he ever changed his name back to "Barack Hussein Obama II" after his step-dad and sleeping-around mother sloughed him off on the Dunham household in Honolulu?

Oh, I have no doubt that your evidence-built-around-a-conclusion blog has plenty of "discussions" on things that may or may not have happened. And yet it still boils down to you believing certain images on the Internet while totally dismissing others. Any way you try to tap dance around it, you're a giant hypocrite.

Not my blog. I don't have one. It's Fredrick's, whoever in hell he is. But the damned page reads like something that might've been drafted for peer review. How the hell many reference is he pulling from? Over 3,000? Yeesh!

I'm used to prying information out of patients, which is - as you should know, geek - intrinsically unreliable, though the process of eliciting symptoms and history is vital to establishing diagnoses. Despite the "soft" qualities of so much of Fredrick's research, the coherence is remarkable, even more so considering how he takes care to stipulate where the information he's working from may be shaky, and therefore the conclusions to which he arrives in these areas must be taken on a "Trust, but verify" basis.

That's how you put together a SOAP note on a patient's chart, geek.

And from a wonderfuly, gaudy hypocrite (acting out the falsehood that your Cook County ACORN fugitive from justice has provided anything resembling valid bona fides of his "natural born" status), I take your opinion (snigger!) for the less-than-nothing it's worth.

Wow, so you take the word of someone you don't even know, who builds evidence around a pre-determined conclusion just because you like his "coherence."

I, on the other hand, demand solid evidence before believing any conspiracy theories. That explains why I don't side with the Palin birthers, the 9/11 truthers, the Area 51 nutjobs or the CIA-killed-Kennedy kooks.

And my calling you out for the hypocrite you are is not opinion, just fact (i.e., you do something yourself that you criticize others for doing). So sorry to disappoint you there.

Like Weigel has done before, the Tulsa World editorial is lying. Maybe we should check and see if they're part of the Soros/Rockefeller gravy train too.

Oh, okay, you racist lunatic!

The only one lying is you, crazy ass birther.