Main Menu

Arizona governor vetos birther bill, a “bridge too far”

Gov. Brewer

The Tuscon Sentinel reports that Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona has vetoed HB 2177, the so-called “birther bill” that would require special forms of birth certificates be submitted by presidential candidates, specifically the type birthers have been demanding of President Obama since he posted his Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth on his campaign web site in 2008.

Brewer said:

As a former Secretary of State, I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to arbitrary or politically-motivated decisions…. In addition, I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for President of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their “early baptismal or circumcision certificates” among other records to the Arizona Secretary of State. This is a bridge too far.

The bill’s sponsor, Carl Seel, said in an earlier interview that he believed the votes were there to override a Governor’s veto, since every Republican in the heavily Republican majority legislature supports the bill. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Update: Here is the text of the letter Governor Brewer sent to the legislature.

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0418birther-bill-veto.pdf

Read more:

, , , ,

140 Responses to Arizona governor vetos birther bill, a “bridge too far”

  1. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 12:06 am #

    It will be interesting to see if Turdblossom’s faction of the Republican party can peel away enough votes to sustain the veto – in any case, I’m expecting the veto override to shortly become the birthers’ next ‘Great White Hope’…

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 19, 2011 at 1:01 am #

    The first comment at the Tucson Sentinel was:

    I’ve heard it rumored that the governor is a RINO. I didn’t believe it until now.

    I think Brewer is a Republican; it’s the Tea Party/Birther folks who are RINO. The closest thing to the Tea Party is the Dixiecrats.

  3. avatar
    FUTTHESHUCKUP April 19, 2011 at 1:07 am #

    They are parasites on the GOP body politic, Doc, because they have no other host.

  4. avatar
    richCares April 19, 2011 at 1:10 am #

    the birthers actually believed that this law would keep Obama off the ballott, now they call Brewer a traitor. What sad pathetic lives the birthers lead. I wished she would have signed it so as it would not give an OMG birther moment..

  5. avatar
    aarrgghh April 19, 2011 at 1:40 am #

    hmm … this freeper’s name seems strangely familiar:

    I want to vomit! Who would have thought that Jan Brewer was nothing but a weak Janet Napolitano wannabe. What the hell is wrong with this country?”

    17 posted on April 18, 2011 9:25:04 PM EDT by RobertClark (On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.)

    breathe, bob … breathe …

  6. avatar
    Fred April 19, 2011 at 1:40 am #

    Slartibartfast:
    It will be interesting to see if Turdblossom’s faction of the Republican party can peel away enough votes to sustain the veto – in any case, I’m expecting the veto override to shortly become the birthers’ next Great White Hope’…

    Key word being “White”

  7. avatar
    aarrgghh April 19, 2011 at 2:43 am #

    FUTTHESHUCKUP:
    They are parasites on the GOP body politic, Doc, because they have no other host.

    the gop’s predicament is only the latest retelling of an ancient story that i’ve borrowed three times already, by way of isaac asimov:

    “there is an old fable,” said hardin, “as old perhaps as humanity, for the oldest records containing it are merely copies of other records still older, that might interest you. it runs as follows:

    “a republican horse having a democratic wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of permanent minority status. being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. whereupon he approached a birther, and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the birther. the man accepted the partnership at once and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if his new partner would only co-operate by placing his greater speed at his disposal. the horse was willing, and allowed the birther to place bridle and saddle upon him. the birther mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him.

    “the horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the birther, and said: ‘now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.’

    “whereupon the birfer laughed loudly and replied, ‘the hell you say. giddy-ap, dobbin,’ and applied the spurs with a will.”

  8. avatar
    brygenon April 19, 2011 at 3:13 am #

    From James King at the Phoenix New Times:

    “As for the state’s esteemed legislators, they just achieved a seemingly impossible task: making Jan Brewer look like the sane one.”
    http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/04/jan_brewer_vetoes_humiliating.php

  9. avatar
    DP April 19, 2011 at 3:54 am #

    I think this tells you all you need to know about the Republican establishment’s opinion of the “help” being offered by the birthers,

  10. avatar
    US Citizen April 19, 2011 at 4:19 am #

    “I want to vomit! Who would have thought that Jan Brewer was nothing but a weak Janet Napolitano wannabe.”

    And who would have thought that Obama actually was born in Hawaii and actually excelled at Harvard and actually won the presidency and actually didn’t harvest your guns, nor put you in Fema camps, nor was a Muslim, Marxist, Socialist, nor didn’t spend $2mil hiding his records or….. I mean… WHO would have thought?

    Us, Bob. A roughly 60 million sane Americans. That’s who.

  11. avatar
    nemocapn April 19, 2011 at 8:40 am #

    Jan Brewer surprised me. I guess Time Magazine was right when they said she was more of a fiscal conservative than a social one. The standing clause in the birther bill was a big hole in the government pocket. I’m so disappointed. I was looking forward to Pawlenty having his birth certificate turned down because it was the “short form.” I was looking forward to the outrage of Arizonians once they realized that any of their citizens born after 1997 wouldn’t be able to present a “long form” under any circumstances. Now I’ll have to look for entertainment elsewhere.

  12. avatar
    Vince Treacy April 19, 2011 at 8:42 am #

    A very interesting link posted in the comments over at Josh Marshall’s TPM::

    http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/04/16/20110416arizona-birth-certificate-bill-long-form.html#ixzz1Jw75siSo

    AZ has not issued a long form since 1996, so the bill would keep all Arizonan’s who have ordered their birht certificates since then off the ballot.

    The override vote will be very ineresting.

  13. avatar
    Stanislaw April 19, 2011 at 8:48 am #

    nemocapn:
    Jan Brewer surprised me.I guess Time Magazine was right when they said she was more of a fiscal conservative than a social one.The standing clause in the birther bill was a big hole in the government pocket.I’m so disappointed.I was looking forward to Pawlenty having his birth certificate turned down because it was the “short form.”I was looking forward to the outrage of Arizonians once they realized that any of their citizens born after 1997 wouldn’t be able to present a “long form” under any circumstances.Now I’ll have to look for entertainment elsewhere.

    Not necessarily…it is possible that the bill could be passed if the Arizona GOP has enough votes to override the Governor’s veto. Even if that doesn’t happen, we all know that the birthers are way too stupid to quit running into the proverbial brick wall. We’ll have entertainment to last us until 2013 at the least.

  14. avatar
    nemocapn April 19, 2011 at 9:03 am #

    Stanislaw: Not necessarily…it is possible that the bill could be passed if the Arizona GOP has enough votes to override the Governor’s veto. Even if that doesn’t happen, we all know that the birthers are way too stupid to quit running into the proverbial brick wall. We’ll have entertainment to last us until 2013 at the least.

    It does sound like they may have enough votes to override a veto, so I haven’t given up hope completely.

  15. avatar
    The Magic M April 19, 2011 at 9:16 am #

    > We’ll have entertainment to last us until 2013 at the least.

    At the very least, but only provided Obama is not elected for a second term. In the latter case, we’ll have the birthers around until 2017 at least.

  16. avatar
    Vince Treacy April 19, 2011 at 9:39 am #

    Corrrection: Born in AZ since 1996.

  17. avatar
    aarrgghh April 19, 2011 at 9:55 am #

    via freeperville, birfer logic parodies itself:

    “Here is Brewer’s largest problem. Fron Wiki Brewer was “Born in California”
    that alone makes her suspect.”

  18. avatar
    Tarrant April 19, 2011 at 10:20 am #

    The response from the birthers is one I did not expect but one that is utterly predictable – since Brewer was the Secretary of State that certified Obama for the ballot, her veto is simply an attempt to cover her ass for the “mistake” (or treason, depending on if they think she knew or simply trusted his statement) of putting him there in the first place.

    Congratulations, Jan. You’re now part of the conspiracy.

  19. avatar
    Sef April 19, 2011 at 10:37 am #

    There is a comment of Orly’s site that the AZ House is closing session today, so there may not be an override chance. Certainly not a chance to fix the bill to make it Constitutional.

  20. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 11:00 am #

    Slartibartfast: It will be interesting to see if Turdblossom’s faction of the Republican party can peel away enough votes to sustain the veto – in any case, I’m expecting the veto override to shortly become the birthers’ next Great White Hope’…

    Turdblossom?

    I’m not familiar with the composition of the Arizona state legislature; is “Turdblossom” an actual person’s name or a deragtory nickname?

  21. avatar
    Stanislaw April 19, 2011 at 11:12 am #

    Thrifty: Turdblossom?

    I’m not familiar with the composition of the Arizona state legislature; is “Turdblossom” an actual person’s name or a deragtory nickname?

    It’s George W. Bush’s nickname for Karl Rove.

  22. avatar
    Joey April 19, 2011 at 11:15 am #

    Vince Treacy:
    Corrrection: Born in AZ since 1996.

    So no 16 year olds from Arizona would be running for president in 2012! 😉

  23. avatar
    Vince Treacy April 19, 2011 at 11:29 am #

    Won’t be able to run in 2932, unless bill veto stands, or they can come up with two forms of secorndary evidence.

  24. avatar
    Vince Treacy April 19, 2011 at 11:30 am #

    2032. Gee, 9 is right next to 0 on the top of the keyboard. Who knew?

  25. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 11:44 am #

    Bobby Jindal decides to wade into the stupid and declare that he would pass a birther bill in his state:

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/04/arizona-birther-bill-obama-bobby-jindal-louisiana-/1?loc=interstitialskip

  26. avatar
    Lupin April 19, 2011 at 11:49 am #

    G: Bobby Jindal decides to wade into the stupid and declare that he would pass a birther bill in his state:

    Time for another irony meter; the last one just exploded.

  27. avatar
    Sef April 19, 2011 at 12:04 pm #

    Lupin: Time for another irony meter; the last one just exploded.

    In addition to changing the battery in your smoke detector when you change to/from DST it’s probably a good idea to change your irony meter. If it hasn’t already exploded, it’s probably worn out.

  28. avatar
    Adam April 19, 2011 at 12:09 pm #

    Finally, a hopeful sign the rubes don’t totally dominate my party.

  29. avatar
    bjphysics April 19, 2011 at 12:16 pm #

    Border States – Point of Clarification Please

    I thought I read on this blog (can’t remember if it was in an article or comments section) that because of birth fraud (midwives falsifying birth testimony) in states bordering Mexico (possibly others also) the State Department required “long form” birth documents to do a more detailed assessment of citizenship claims for passport purposes. Am I mis-remembering?

    Now I’m reading (here and at http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/are-long-form-birth-certificates-an-endangered-species/) that Arizona does not provide these more detailed types of birth documents.

    Somebody clear this up please.

  30. avatar
    bjphysics April 19, 2011 at 12:19 pm #

    Border States – Point of Clarification Please ( on edit)

    Forget to mention that I believe this claim ONLY applied to specific states on (and maybe near) the Mexican border.

    Somebody clear this up please.

  31. avatar
    Joey April 19, 2011 at 12:21 pm #

    From today’s Arizona Republic (Phoenix) newspaper coverage of the Governor Brewer veto: “House Speaker Kirk Adams shook his head wearily when asked Monday evening if lawmakers would attempt to override the veto. “No,” he said. He added that legislative researchers found that the last time a governor’s veto was overridden was 50 years ago.

    The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix, said pursuing an override would be as much about defying the governor as it would be supporting the bill’s intent.

    “Overrides are a real difficult monster,” said Seel, who called the governor’s decision to veto the measure “unfortunate.”

    Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/04/19/20110419xgr-birthveto0419.html#ixzz1JzDhEkEt

  32. avatar
    DP April 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm #

    Tarrant:
    The response from the birthers is one I did not expect but one that is utterly predictable – since Brewer was the Secretary of State that certified Obama for the ballot, her veto is simply an attempt to cover her ass for the “mistake” (or treason, depending on if they think she knew or simply trusted his statement) of putting him there in the first place.

    Congratulations, Jan. You’re now part of the conspiracy.

    Sigh. They haven’t been keeping up with the messages on their secret decoder rings, have they?

    The whole birther argument became so convoluted long ago that everyone already has to be “in on it.”

  33. avatar
    WLW April 19, 2011 at 12:33 pm #

    Sorry to crash the love feast here, but I think Gov. Brewer’s veto is a tragedy. “Due Diligence” was not done in the veting of Obama’s cred’s as a “Natural born” citizen. More investigation needs to be done because Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well! We just don’t have any information.

    For a president to call for transparency, and is a plank for his presidential operations, this man has shown no transparency at all! Amazingly, hypocritical.

  34. avatar
    richCares April 19, 2011 at 12:39 pm #

    “Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well! We just don’t have any information”
    .
    was allowed after 1982 but required location of foriegn birth to be on COLB, Obama’s clearly states Honolulu, Hawaii.
    .
    why do birthers keep stating debunked talking points, do they have Altzheimer’s?

  35. avatar
    Wile E. April 19, 2011 at 12:42 pm #

    WLW:
    More investigation needs to be done because Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well!

    Please show me an example of Hawai’i giving out a birth certificate that says someone was born in Hawai’i….when in fact they were born elsewhere.

    I’ve been asking for proof of this from several people for quite some time. Maybe you will be the first?

  36. avatar
    Suranis April 19, 2011 at 12:42 pm #

    WLW:
    Sorry to crash the love feast here, but I think Gov. Brewer’s veto is a tragedy. “Due Diligence” was not done in the veting of Obama’s cred’s as a “Natural born” citizen. More investigation needs to be done because Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well!

    Show one. Because, with the sole exception of Sun Yet Sen, which was done with the active pressure of the mighty British Empire on the then country of Hawaii 110 years ago, I have not seen one single birth cert given to someone who was born out of state that said they were born in Hawai’i

    You always demand proof. Show us some proof for a change.

    <blockwuote{We just don’t have any information.

    We had more information and misinformation on Obama than any presidential candidate in history. And we even saw his birth cert. John McCain actively refused to release his. And spent about as much money hiding his birth cert as Obama did.

  37. avatar
    DP April 19, 2011 at 12:43 pm #

    WLW:
    Sorry to crash the love feast here, but I think Gov. Brewer’s veto is a tragedy. “Due Diligence” was not done in the veting of Obama’s cred’s as a “Natural born” citizen. More investigation needs to be done because Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well! We just don’t have any information.

    For a president to call for transparency, and is a plank for his presidential operations, this man has shown no transparency at all! Amazingly, hypocritical.

    Sorry to point out blatantly obvious facts that could be determined by anyone actually interested in facts, but lots of states give out birth certificates to people born out of country. It’s a courtesy to adoptees and immigrants so they don’t have to go back to some other country every time they need a birth certificate. But outside of birther fantasy land, states don’t knowingly issue fraudulent documents. Such birth certificates identify the actual place of birth as substantiated by the documentation required for such certificates to be issues.

  38. avatar
    Suranis April 19, 2011 at 12:44 pm #

    WLW:
    Sorry to crash the love feast here, but I think Gov. Brewer’s veto is a tragedy. “Due Diligence” was not done in the veting of Obama’s cred’s as a “Natural born” citizen. More investigation needs to be done because Hawaii gave out certificates for people born out of country as well!

    Show one. Because, with the sole exception of Sun Yet Sen, which was done with the active pressure of the mighty British Empire on the then country of Hawaii 110 years ago, I have not seen one single birth cert given to someone who was born out of state that said they were born in Hawai’i

    You always demand proof. Show us some proof for a change.

    We just don’t have any information.

    We had more information and misinformation on Obama than any presidential candidate in history. And we even saw his birth cert. John McCain actively refused to release his. And spent about as much money hiding his birth cert as Obama did.

    Fixed typos. Sorry.

  39. avatar
    richCares April 19, 2011 at 12:47 pm #

    from VitalCheck:
    BIRTH CERTIFICAT SHORT 1990 to presentA certified birth certificate that can typically be used for travel, passport, proof of citizenship, social security, driver’s license, school registration, personal identification and other legal purposes. The Birth Certificate – Short is available for events that occurred within the State of Arizona from 1990 to present.First Copy: 10.00 Additional Copies: 10.00
    .
    BIRTH CERTIFICATE LONG prior to 1990A certified birth certificate that can typically be used for travel, passport, proof of citizenship, social security, driver’s license, school registration, personal identification and other legal purposes. The Birth Certificate – Long is available for events that occurred within the State of Arizona from 1903 to 1989.First Copy: 10.00 Additional Copies: 10.00
    http://www.vitalchek.com
    so this Arizona law does not accept Arizona Birth Certificates , what a brilliant move. Only a birther could support such a law.

  40. avatar
    Greg April 19, 2011 at 12:50 pm #

    WLW: Sorry to crash the love feast here, but I think Gov. Brewer’s veto is a tragedy. “Due Diligence” was not done in the veting of Obama’s cred’s as a “Natural born” citizen.

    Gotta love the drive-by birthers, who can’t even spell.

    “Love feast?”

    “Veting?”

    Honestly, if you’re going to go trolling with flame-bait, bring along a spell-checker!

  41. avatar
    WLW April 19, 2011 at 12:54 pm #

    The man’s father was a Kenyan. The child of two Mexican illegals born in America, becomes a citizen, but that child is not “natural born”. The intent of the FFofA was that the Presidential office had to be held by a “natural born” citizen and not a foreigner or a child of a foreigner.

    Fact: his father is a Kenyan, at least holding a Britsh passport. Not an American citizen.

    There is a legitimate question of his status.

    “Due Diligence” was never done by any state employee or government institution. Our law failed, our institutions failed, our officials failed.

    Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask?

    You know you ask me for all sorts of proof. But I have not seen any proof of live birth signed by a doctor. I have mine. Where’s Obama’s?

  42. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 1:04 pm #

    WLW: Fact: his father is a Kenyan, at least holding a Britsh passport. Not an American citizen.
    There is a legitimate question of his status.

    Fact: This is irrelevant.

    Fact: This is a publicly known truth, which Obama admits to, and which the powers that be are fully aware of.

    Fact: Despite fact number two, the election was still certified and Obama was sworn in as president.

    Question: In light of these facts, if the citizenship status of Barack Obama’s father was ever relevant, why was Barack Obama inaugurated?

    Turning it around…..

    There are legitimate questions about George W. Bush’s status. He has the same
    first and last name as his father.

    There are legitimate questions about George H. W. Bush’s status. He had a vacation home in Maine.

    There are legitimate questions about Ronald Reagan’s status. He was a professional actor for many years.

    There are legitimate questions about Gerald Ford’s status. He was never elected to the office of President or Vice President.

    There are legitimate questions about Richard Nixon’s status. The nickname “Dick” that he is sometimes referred to by is also a slang term for penis.

    There are legitimate questions about Lyndon Johnson’s status. His first name is Lyndon.

    I could come up with non-sequitirs about all 44 presidents, but I think you get the point.

  43. avatar
    Greg April 19, 2011 at 1:06 pm #

    WLW: The man’s father was a Kenyan.

    Are you just figuring this out now?

    Because Obama published a book in 1995 called Dreams from my Father in which he described how his father was from Kenya. It was on the New York Times Bestseller list.

    I seem to recall that Obama mentioned his father in his “Red America/Blue America” speech in the 2004 Democratic National Convention – watched by tens of millions of Americans.

    Every biography of Obama ever written has mentioned his father’s Kenyan ancestry. Hillary’s campaign discussed how to raise the issue of “not American enough” based on dad’s Kenyan citizenship.

    During the election there was probably no single fact better known to voters than that Obama was black, and that his father was from Kenya.

    69 million people voted for the black man whose father was from Kenya. Fewer people voted for the other guy. But, you know what? Nobody noticed what you think is obvious, that a foreign father disqualifies one from running for the presidency! Not until Leo Donofrio invented this theory out of whole cloth! No one had heard of Vattel before Donofrio fished him from back files of international law professors. Not even Berg – a full-fledged birther and the first to file suit – had heard of this nonsense theory and he still doesn’t embrace it.

    Your BS theory about Obama’s dad being a disqualifier s just that – BS. And it was rejected by the voters! They could easily have said that Obama wasn’t enough of an American to be President, just like Hillary’s campaign wanted. They didn’t. Obama was American enough to convince more people to vote for him than have EVER VOTED FOR SOMEONE IN AMERICA BEFORE!

  44. avatar
    Dave April 19, 2011 at 1:08 pm #

    It really is amazing how repetitive this all gets. It’s just a constant recycling of stuff that was debunked years ago.

    Look, WLW, the President’s father was never a citizen. It’s a fact, everybody knows it, you don’t need any more documentation to prove it. It’s proven. So if that makes him ineligible, please stop asking for more documentation. Get the GOP House to go ahead with the impeachment hearings. OK?

    Let us know how that turns out.

  45. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 1:09 pm #

    I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.

    I was discussing this bill on another forum. One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”

    I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.

    The other guy then said “I stand corrected. I didn’t know about that.”

    It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

  46. avatar
    Scientist April 19, 2011 at 1:10 pm #

    WLW: The child of two Mexican illegals born in America, becomes a citizen, but that child is not “natural born”.

    It depends if it was a C-section or not.

    WLW: Fact: his father is a Kenyan, at least holding a Britsh passport. Not an American citizen.

    i would like to see a document that establishes that. Is there a “Certificate of Non-Citizenship”. So far the only evidence regarding whteher the President’s father was not a US citizen comes from the President. And you don’t believe him, apparently.

    WLW: The intent of the FFofA was that the Presidential office had to be held by a “natural born” citizen and not a foreigner or a child of a foreigner.

    When did they tell you about their “intent”? Can you read minds? I am thinking of a number; what is it?

    WLW: Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask?

    Demanding is easy. I demand: a billion dollars, to be 25 again and a pony.

  47. avatar
    Greg April 19, 2011 at 1:10 pm #

    WLW: But I have not seen any proof of live birth signed by a doctor.

    Let’s run some options:

    1. Birth certificate with doctor’s signature and no state seal
    2. Birth certificate with no doctor’s signature and a state seal

    Guess which one is admissible in court? Yeah, number 2.

    According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, the State Seal serves to authenticate the document and also qualify it as an exception to hearsay.

    Number 1, by contrast, needs some other form of authentication and some other method of evading the rule against hearsay.

  48. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 1:10 pm #

    WLW:
    The man’s father was a Kenyan. The child of two Mexican illegals born in America, becomes a citizen, but that child is not “natural born”.

    How could the founders have made such a distinction when there was no such thing as an ‘illegal alien’?

    The intent of the FFofA was that the Presidential office had to be held by a “natural born” citizen and not a foreigner or a child of a foreigner.

    Unless the child of a foreigner was a natural born citizen like President Obama… (who was also the child of an American – do you think the founders wanted to deny the birthright of children born to Americans on US soil?)

    Fact: his father is a Kenyan, at least holding a Britsh passport. Not an American citizen.

    So what?

    There is a legitimate question of his status.

    No, there isn’t…

    “Due Diligence” was never done by any state employee or government institution. Our law failed, our institutions failed, our officials failed.

    Due diligence was done, at the very least, by the Clinton and McCain campaigns – i.e. via the adversarial system that our founders set up to vet candidates…

    Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask?

    You can ask, but your sole recourse when the answer is ‘no’ is to not vote for President Obama in 2012.

    You know you ask me for all sorts of proof. But I have not seen any proof of live birth signed by a doctor. I have mine. Where’s Obama’s?

    The original is in the possession of the Hawai’i Department of Health, just like that of every other person born in Hawai’i – officials have confirmed this and President Obama can prove his natural born citizenship to any legal standard in any US court.

  49. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 1:11 pm #

    WLW: The man’s father was a Kenyan. The child of two Mexican illegals born in America, becomes a citizen, but that child is not “natural born”. The intent of the FFofA was that the Presidential office had to be held by a “natural born” citizen and not a foreigner or a child of a foreigner. Fact: his father is a Kenyan, at least holding a Britsh passport. Not an American citizen. There is a legitimate question of his status. “Due Diligence” was never done by any state employee or government institution. Our law failed, our institutions failed, our officials failed. Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask? You know you ask me for all sorts of proof. But I have not seen any proof of live birth signed by a doctor. I have mine. Where’s Obama’s?

    FAIL. An “achor baby” is NBC and could run for president here once they attain age 35. Their parents might be illegal, but they are not. That is why that issue has been a source of “frustration” to some for decades. If anything, that entire sore point argument has been proof of US laws granting birthright citizenship and that this whole “citizen parents” requirement nonsense has been made up out of whole cloth by you birther nuts, specifically to target Obama.

    If you are born on US soil, you are NBC, unless your parents fall under the defined category of diplomats, ambassadors, etc.

    So to recap, even the children of 2 illegal alien parents are NBC if they are BORN in the US. The only way you can change that is to further amend the Constitution. Good luck with that.

    There are no legitimate questions remaining on Obama’s birth place. The COLB is the official HI BC and has been for a decade. Our laws are being followed just fine.

    The only ones with problems are you delusional bigots who live in fantasy land.

  50. avatar
    Greg April 19, 2011 at 1:12 pm #

    Scientist: Demanding is easy. I demand: a billion dollars, to be 25 again and a pony.

    With this much sh*t, there’s bound to be a pony in here somewhere!

  51. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 1:13 pm #

    I must reiterate that this rot about “president needs two citizen parents” pisses me off more than the usual birther meme of demanding verifications of verifications and other pissant little meaningless data. Not one has answered my repeated question about why the election was certified if Obama’s PUBLICLY KNOWN non-citizen father was a disqualifier.

  52. avatar
    Daniel April 19, 2011 at 1:15 pm #

    Scientist: I demand: a billion dollars, to be 25 again and a pony.

    You want to be a pony?

  53. avatar
    Suranis April 19, 2011 at 1:17 pm #

    Thrifty:
    I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.

    I was discussing this bill on another forum.One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”

    I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.

    The other guy then said “I stand corrected.I didn’t know about that.”

    It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

    I have to say, kudos to that guy.

  54. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 1:18 pm #

    As to the whole “birther bills” in general, I keep seeing reports about 12 states pursuing this…

    That seems to be outdated info and lazy reporting, as a number of these have already died for this legislative session.

    Other than today’s news of Bobby Jindal in support of such a law and reports of efforts to add a birther bill to his state (LA), that is the only new one I’ve heard that might crop up.

    Beyond that, these are the only other states I’m aware of where “birther bill” stuff is still active in that state’s legislative process:

    AZ, MO, NE, OK, TX, CT

    So, that is only 6 states left…possibly 7 if LA is added. The rest are all dead and failed issues.

  55. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 1:20 pm #

    Daniel: Scientist: I demand: a billion dollars, to be 25 again and a pony.

    You want to be a pony?

    25 is REALLY old for a pony…

  56. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 1:22 pm #

    G:
    As to the whole “birther bills” in general, I keep seeing reports about 12 states pursuing this…

    That seems to be outdated info and lazy reporting, as a number of these have already died for this legislative session.

    Other than today’s news of Bobby Jindal in support of such a law and reports of efforts to add a birther bill to his state (LA), that is the only new one I’ve heard that might crop up.

    Beyond that, these are the only other states I’m aware of where “birther bill” stuff is still active in that state’s legislative process:

    AZ, MO, NE, OK, TX, CT

    So, that is only 6 states left…possibly 7 if LA is added.The rest are all dead and failedissues.

    I hope Governor Jindal gets the opportunity to sign a birther bill – the resulting schism in birtherstan would be hilarious…

  57. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 1:22 pm #

    Daniel: You want to be a pony?

    See, this is why you have to be careful with genies.

  58. avatar
    y_p_w April 19, 2011 at 1:24 pm #

    WLW:
    Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask?

    You know you ask me for all sorts of proof. But I have not seen any proof of live birth signed by a doctor. I have mine. Where’s Obama’s?

    Not all original signed document birth certificates are signed by a doctor. In California, the certifier doesn’t have to be an attendant or have even witnessed the birth. It’s legal for a hospital administrator to certify births in many states, including California and (now) Hawaii. The Hawaii “Danae” form that Dr C has posted isn’t signed by a doctor.

    I mean – what does one do if the attending physician delivers the baby, keels over from a heart attack, and dies before being able to sign off?

  59. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 1:27 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I hope Governor Jindal gets the opportunity to sign a birther bill – the resulting schism in birtherstan would be hilarious…

    The irony there is definitely off the charts…

  60. avatar
    Scientist April 19, 2011 at 1:48 pm #

    Thrifty: I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.
    I was discussing this bill on another forum. One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”
    I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.
    The other guy then said “I stand corrected. I didn’t know about that.”
    It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

    Does anyone know how many hits the COLB has gotten since it went up? Other than that, it’s been shown on cable news (tiny audiences) and some web sites that don’t exactly have ginormous audiences. i’d be willing to bet that 95% of voters haven’t seen actually seen it. Imagine if at campaign tiime Obama just showed the COLB and his passport on camera with a closeup so everyone could see the details on the documents. I would think among those who are not hardcore birthers that would be quite devastating to his opponent (at least. if they were attemptiinng to use the issue). They would look like complete fools sputtering abbout long vs short. I can assure you the 95% neither know nor care about the distinction. Many of them will have gotten forms for their children in the last 10 years to get SSNs and will know that Obama’s form looks just like what they got.

  61. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 1:48 pm #

    WLW: Is it so hard to demand to see a doctor’s signature who delivered him? Is that so hard to ask?

    Oh, it’s easy to ask or demand anything.

    It would be harmful to release that information though. This doctor would be either dead or elderly.

    Abercrombie, Lingle, Fukino, and Onaka all swore up and down that the evidence pointing to Obama’s birth in Hawaii was legitimate. In response, birthers have spent close to three years dragging their names through the mud, parsing and disecting their every word to make clear statements mean something they don’t. See, for example, NC1’s bizarre obsession with the phrase “written down”.

    So somehow, despite the way the last four major witnesses in the birther soap opera have been treated, we’re supposed to believe that an old man would be treated any differently?

    That is absurd. Any attempt to appease conspiracy theorists is absurd, because conspiracy theory is never based on the information we *do* have, but rather the information we *don’t* have. The information we *don’t* have is limitless, because it is not constrained by the rules of reason that dictate that it must also be relevant. You get the name of the doctor, you can then ask for Kapiolani to verify that he was there that day. Or ask for a verification of the doctor’s medical license. Or say “Yeah his name is on the certificate, but what verification do we have that he actually delivered the baby rather than just signed a piece of paper.” And you could run down this rabbit hole forever and ever, seeking verifications of verifications, one after the other, like a victim of a 419 scam always so sure that THIS TIME is the last time. Then in the end, if you reach the bottom and the birther admits that Obama was born in Hawaii, they still have the Vattel card.

  62. avatar
    Daniel April 19, 2011 at 1:49 pm #

    Oily is calling for the recall of Brewer already. No surprise.

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=20774

    There’s a picture of Jan Brewer there with epithets like “traitor” scrawled across it.

    Birthers are nothing if not predictable

  63. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 1:58 pm #

    Scientist: Does anyone know how many hits the COLB has gotten since it went up?Other than that, it’s been shown on cable news (tiny audiences) and some web sites that don’t exactly have ginormous audiences.i’d be willing to bet that 95% of voters haven’t seen actually seen it.Imagine if at campaign tiime Obama just showed the COLB and his passport on camera with a closeup so everyone could see the details on the documents.I would think among those who are not hardcore birthers that would be quite devastating to his opponent (at least. if they were attemptiinng to use the issue).They would look like complete foolssputtering abbout long vs short.I can assure you the 95% neither know nor care about the distinction.Many of them will have gotten formsfor their children in the last 10 years to get SSNs and will know that Obama’s form looks just like what they got.

    The tragic irony of the birthers is that they are fundamentally incapable of believing that this analysis is accurate… (as the evidence shows that it is).

  64. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 2:05 pm #

    Thrifty: Then in the end, if you reach the bottom and the birther admits that Obama was born in Hawaii, they still have the Vattel card.

    Just turn the brither’s tactics back on them – if someone focuses on the BC, point out that they are implicitly denying that the Vattel issue is valid and vice versa. Not that it will do any good – birthers are the living embodiment of the adage, ‘you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink’.

  65. avatar
    Scientist April 19, 2011 at 2:05 pm #

    Slartibartfast: The tragic irony of the birthers is that they are fundamentally incapable of believing that this analysis is accurate… (as the evidence shows that it is).

    i’m not concerned about the birthers. We all know not one of them would ever vote for Obama under any circumstances (yes, I fear the quest for the pro-Obama birther has come up empty). But I wonder how many of those who are “doubters” have actually even seen the COLB.. I bet most haven’t. After all, “Bob ClarK” upposedly voted for McCain because he “released his birth certificate” and only found out a few days ago on this site that he didn’t. I bet there are millions out there who actually believe Obama hasn’t released his birth certificate and I’ll also bet that almost all of them would be perfectly satisfied by the COLB,

  66. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 2:08 pm #

    Daniel:
    Oily is calling for the recall of Brewer already. No surprise.

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=20774

    There’s a picture of Jan Brewer there with epithets like “traitor” scrawled across it.

    Birthers are nothing if not predictable

    A recall of Governor Brewer would be hysterical – either she would survive the recall election (another birhter epic fail) or she would be defeated (most likely by a Democrat [another birther epic fail]).

  67. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 2:13 pm #

    Scientist: i’m not concerned about the birthers.We all know not one of them would ever vote for Obama under any circumstances (yes, I fear the quest for the pro-Obama birther has come up empty [Say it ain’t so!]).But I wonder how many of those who are “doubters” have actually even seen the COLB..I bet most haven’t.After all, “Bob ClarK” upposedly voted for McCain because he “released his birth certificate” and only found out a few days ago on this site that he didn’t.I bet there are millions out there who actually believe Obama hasn’t released his birth certificate and I’ll also bet that almost all of them would be perfectly satisfied by the COLB,

    I’m not sure if anything can save this great Republic from the twin perils of low-information voters and misinformation voters… (and the corporatist politicians who exploit both groups).

  68. avatar
    Wile E. April 19, 2011 at 2:31 pm #

    Thrifty:
    I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.

    I was discussing this bill on another forum.One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”

    I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.

    The other guy then said “I stand corrected.I didn’t know about that.”

    It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

    On Friday night, I had a similar experience but with a completely different reaction.

    I was having a drink after work at a bar with my wife and a couple of college kids that work for us. A loud drunk brought up Obama’s BC for some reason and of course he stated that “Obama has never shown it!” One of the college kids whips out his smart-phone and replied, ” Yeah, he has. I saved a copy of it right here on my phone. Ya wanna see it?”. The drunken birther took a quick look at my friend’s phone and started mumbling something about Factcheck.org. and then he loudly replied, “Look! Do you want the FACTS….or do you want the TRUTH?!?” We weren’t sure how to respond to that one, but we kinda looked at each other and then back at the drunk and said almost in unison…”Yes?”

    Needless to say…no resolution was found that evening between the opposing factions.

  69. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 2:43 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I’m not sure if anything can save this great Republic from the twin perils of low-information voters and misinformation voters… (and the corporatist politicians who exploit both groups).

    Agreed. (sadly).

    Wile E.: Needless to say…no resolution was found that evening between the opposing factions.

    We’ve learned here from experience that the desperate need for self-confirmation bias from the bigoted haters has put them beyond reach of any rational or sane approach.

    They are a lost cause. Fortunately, their inability to accept reality leads to their constant failure and often their own self-destruction. We need to remain vigilent against their cancer until they eventually self-immolate and collapse as a movement all on their own.

  70. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 3:21 pm #

    I think there is a decent number of “birthers-lite” out there; people like in the exchange I had on Saturday who believe there are questions, but are still honest enough to admit they’re wrong when show the evidence. I know there was a poll somewhat recently showing that a small majority of likely Republican primary voters have questions or doubts about Obama’s status as a natural-born citizen. While obviously some are the hardcore, will-never-be-convinced style we see around here, I optimisitcally think that most are just ignorant. The birthers-lite picked up the word about the Obama eligibility “controversey” because it’s so well known, like catching a cold in January.

    I kinda get where this comes from. Take another popular conspiracy theory: the Kennedy assassination. I never had a lot of interest in the Kennedy assassination, but I spent so many years hearing that conspiracy theories existed (without knowing the details), that I just assumed there was a conspiracy. It wasn’t until I actually took a little time to look into it (fairly recently) that I realized it was bunk.

  71. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 3:58 pm #

    Thrifty: I think there is a decent number of “birthers-lite” out there; people like in the exchange I had on Saturday who believe there are questions, but are still honest enough to admit they’re wrong when show the evidence. I know there was a poll somewhat recently showing that a small majority of likely Republican primary voters have questions or doubts about Obama’s status as a natural-born citizen. While obviously some are the hardcore, will-never-be-convinced style we see around here, I optimisitcally think that most are just ignorant. The birthers-lite picked up the word about the Obama eligibility “controversey” because it’s so well known, like catching a cold in January.I kinda get where this comes from. Take another popular conspiracy theory: the Kennedy assassination. I never had a lot of interest in the Kennedy assassination, but I spent so many years hearing that conspiracy theories existed (without knowing the details), that I just assumed there was a conspiracy. It wasn’t until I actually took a little time to look into it (fairly recently) that I realized it was bunk.

    Part of the reason why this site is so important, as is our responses and dialogue, is because we all “hope” that any of these “unsure” or “birther-lite” as you call them can come here and get educated on the truth.

    Hopefully, that is what is represented in some of the web stats that Dr. C has been looking at – the mildly curious or confused who take a quick moment to check up on something they heard on the internet.

    The majority of traffic or new eyeballs here are unlikely to need to post. Their time is best spent quickly reading to find what they are looking for and then moving on with their lives.

    Sadly, I don’t know when the last time we’ve had an actual “sincerely curious person” post here – It seems like just a bunch of die-hard birthers who are only Concern Trolling and insincere…

  72. avatar
    Izzybella April 19, 2011 at 4:14 pm #

    Thrifty: I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.I was discussing this bill on another forum. One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.The other guy then said “I stand corrected. I didn’t know about that.”It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

    I got through to a birther when he was going on and on about the 2 parent theory by reminding him that neither of his parents had 2 citizens as parents, He was dumbfounded that his argument meant that his parents, who never once set foot out of the USA and were what he called “patriots”, were not NBC by the standards he wanted to apply to Obama.

  73. avatar
    Steve April 19, 2011 at 4:23 pm #

    Thrifty: I had a somewhat heartwarming experience on Saturday.I was discussing this bill on another forum. One guy piped up and said “This would all be over with if President Obama just showed his birth certificate.”I replied “He did, about 3 years ago.” and linked to the COLB on Factcheck.The other guy then said “I stand corrected. I didn’t know about that.”It certainly wasn’t the reaction I expected.

    I wasn’t so lucky. On another forum, a guy claimed that the birth certificate issue was not settled and he showed a link to the P & E and another one that cited Polarik’s work.
    I brought up Factcheck and he said that it could not be trusted because of the Annenbergs’ connections with Obama. I countered that the Annenberg Foundation and the the Annenberg Challenge were separate entities and he didn’t buy it.

  74. avatar
    Thrifty April 19, 2011 at 4:40 pm #

    Interesting letter, but has Jan Brewer confirmed that she wrote it? I hope the media are brave enough to ask the tough questions!

  75. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 4:41 pm #

    Steve: I wasn’t so lucky. On another forum, a guy claimed that the birth certificate issue was not settled and he showed a link to the P & E and another one that cited Polarik’s work.
    I brought up Factcheck and he said that it could not be trusted because of the Annenbergs’ connections with Obama. I countered that the Annenberg Foundation and the the Annenberg Challenge were separate entities and he didn’t buy it.

    I think that in that case you’ve got to show that ‘Polarik’ and the P&E are unreliable…

  76. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 4:45 pm #

    Izzybella: I got through to a birther when he was going on and on about the 2 parent theory by reminding him that neither of his parents had 2 citizens as parents,He was dumbfounded that his argument meant that his parents, who never once set foot out of the USA and were what he called “patriots”, were not NBC by the standards he wanted to apply to Obama.

    I would guess that that is one of the best routes to convincing birthers that they are wrong – show them that the logical implications of their assertions contradict what they believe to be true (I think that very few birthers could stand this level of cognitive dissonance…).

  77. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 4:50 pm #

    G: The majority of traffic or new eyeballs here are unlikely to need to post. Their time is best spent quickly reading to find what they are looking for and then moving on with their lives.

    Sadly, I don’t know when the last time we’ve had an actual “sincerely curious person” post here

    This isn’t sad at all – we’re giving the reasonable people the opportunity to move on with their lives confident that President Obama is legitimate – most people SHOULDN’T give this issue a second thought. Of course only the ones who are irrationally convinced that President Obama is the synthesis of all evil are going to post…

  78. avatar
    Robert Clark April 19, 2011 at 4:55 pm #

    Greg: Let’s run some options:
    1. Birth certificate with doctor’s signature and no state seal
    2. Birth certificate with no doctor’s signature and a state seal
    Guess which one is admissible in court? Yeah, number 2.
    According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, the State Seal serves to authenticate the document and also qualify it as an exception to hearsay.
    Number 1, by contrast, needs some other form of authentication and some other method of evading the rule against hearsay.

    The point is if you get it from the state it gets the state seal, if not the registrar’s direct signature.

    Bob

  79. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 4:59 pm #

    Robert Clark: The point is if you get it from the state it gets the state seal, if not the registrar’s direct signature.

    Bob

    No, the point is that it’s a non-sequitor…

  80. avatar
    US Citizen April 19, 2011 at 5:21 pm #

    As some of you know, I’m suffering from some medical problems.
    I’ve seen many doctors.
    One thing I’ve constantly encountered is the fear of medical professionals towards HIPAA laws.
    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipaa

    For example, I traveled 40 miles to see one doctor who ordered a blood test and xrays.
    I gave the blood to the lab, took the xrays and called the doctor afterward to ask for the results.
    Surprisingly, they wouldn’t provide ANY info to me over the phone, citing HIPAA laws.
    They said I HAD to come in, in person.
    I told them that I signed a waiver in their own office allowing me, my caregiver and other doctors to see my information, but no go.
    They wouldn’t allow it at all.
    I had to travel another 80 miles (40 miles each way) just to see my own blood test results and xray.

    This is where many birthers fail. They believe the president is hiding his birth certificate or other records, but in all truth, federal law prohibits anyone from obtaining someone else’s health information.
    They also fail with the belief that somehow one can pay a lawyer to hide such records.
    Somehow they believe that these records pop up automatically over time and Obama is continually paying lawyers to smash them back down.
    It’s always “Why has he paid X millions of dollars to keep his records hidden?”
    When you ask how one pays money to keep records hidden or why can they not obtain their best friend’s health or school records… even with their friend’s permission… it’s always silence.
    None have even tried calling a lawyer to ask them to try hiding their own records just to see what the lawyer would say or do.
    It’s all so ridiculous.
    But the fact is, I’ve never seen so many medical professionals fear HIPAA privacy laws even on tiny matters such as a blood test or xray.

  81. avatar
    bjphysics April 19, 2011 at 5:34 pm #

    Robert Clark: The point is if you get it from the state it gets the state seal, if not the registrar’s direct signature.Bob

    Bob,

    Are you stating that a birth record document (COB/COLB/BC/whatever) contains EITHER a raised state seal OR a registrars signature but NOT BOTH?

    BJ

  82. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 5:34 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I would guess that that is one of the best routes to convincing birthers that they are wrong – show them that the logical implications of their assertions contradict what they believe to be true (I think that very few birthers could stand this level of cognitive dissonance…).

    Then again, you are requiring them to spend the time to actually think about what comes out of their mouth and then what it means…

    …that is too much effort for them. They are completely ignorant to their constant hypocritical statements and their own constant cognitive dissonance.

    That is simply too deep of thought for them. They just “gut feel” and move on to the next incomphrehnsible and unrealistic bumper sticker slogan in the time it takes them to blink. There is no reflection or looking back. Real comphrehension is beyond them.

  83. avatar
    G April 19, 2011 at 5:35 pm #

    Slartibartfast: This isn’t sad at all – we’re giving the reasonable people the opportunity to move on with their lives confident that President Obama is legitimate – most people SHOULDN’T give this issue a second thought. Of course only the ones who are irrationally convinced that President Obama is the synthesis of all evil are going to post…

    Good points.

  84. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm #

    G: Then again, you are requiring them to spend the time to actually think about what comes out of their mouth and then what it means…

    …that is too much effort for them.They are completely ignorant to their constant hypocritical statements and their own constant cognitive dissonance.

    That is simply too deep of thought for them.They just “gut feel” and move on to the next incomphrehnsible and unrealistic bumper sticker slogan in the time it takes them to blink.There is no reflection or looking back.Real comphrehension is beyond them.

    I think it’s a matter of making a strong enough connection. If one perceives oneself as rational and wants to be perceived by others as rational, then they are vulnerable to a logical argument which shows their reasoning to be irrational. However, the inability to understand a logical argument is an airtight defense…

  85. avatar
    Keith April 19, 2011 at 6:30 pm #

    Greg: Let’s run some options:

    1. Birth certificate with doctor’s signature and no state seal
    2. Birth certificate with no doctor’s signature and a state seal

    Greg:

    In setting out your scenario’s you have made a grievous error.

    Scenario number 1 IS NOT a birth certificate. It is a document of uncertain provenance that contains a report of unverified birth event information.

    Scenario number 2 IS a birth certificate. It is a document that has been certified to contain a report of verified birth event information.

    This is, of course, the criteria that Robert should be using in attempting to answer your question.

    But you should have used the word “document” instead of “Birth Certificate” because only one is a Birth Certificate. I think this causes a whole lot of confusion, with people calling document that are not certified ‘certificates’ and somehow getting the idea that these uncertified documents are worth more than certified documents.

    (You know it really is a drag having to bold all the fnords so the birthers can see them. I wish they would learn how to read – or we could get an reasonalbe editor on the blog)

  86. avatar
    Keith April 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm #

    G: If anything, that entire sore point argument has been proof of US laws granting birthright citizenship and that this whole “citizen parents” requirement nonsense has been made up out of whole cloth by you birther nuts, specifically to target Obama.

    Or also as an attempt to ‘soften up’ opinion for an all out attack on the anchor baby citizenship status.

  87. avatar
    Keith April 19, 2011 at 6:41 pm #

    Keith: Scenario number 2 IS a birth certificate. It is a document that has been certified to contain a report of verified birth event information.

    Assuming it has all the other certifying marks, of course.

    Keith: or we could get an reasonalbe editor on the blog

    I know, this is a blog, not a forum. We are lucky Doc lets us run off at the keyboard as much as he does. I’m just wingeing.

  88. avatar
    US Citizen April 19, 2011 at 7:35 pm #

    The same people who tout how much they love the Constitution, fail to believe in separation of church and state, no religious tests, etc and say we’re a Christian country, all Muslims are evil, etc.

    I mean, it’s written in a document that’s hundreds of years old, available everywhere and clearly states what it does.
    But they still attempt to say it doesn’t say what it does and does say what it doesn’t.
    It’s like trying to describe the color red to a blind person.
    Logic just won’t work if they haven’t the faculties necessary to begin with.

    Most are just never going to understand or accept anyone that’s different than themselves.
    They view people as Bush said: either being with us or against us.

  89. avatar
    James M April 19, 2011 at 10:01 pm #

    US Citizen:
    One thing I’ve constantly encountered is the fear of medical professionals towards HIPAA laws.

    It’s in large part just fear. But many institutions, in the name of compliance, will create policies that are more strict than the actual law. This is fairly common, not just with HIPAA but with many regulated industries.

    The way it works, generally, is that institutional policies and forms are produced in consultation with federal regulators. Once approved, these internal polices essentially become law, and the institution’s adherence to the policy is routinely audited for compliance.

    This is very much how things are done in my profession, with FAA compliance. It’s not as if the FAA regulations are some closed set of specific rules. Far from it — the regulations while voluminous are also fairly broad, and in order to receive certification, a company or service provider must create its own set of policies which meet the approval of the regulatory body (a VERY expensive and time consuming undertaking!) and then be subjected to ongoing audits (which, even if you are 100% in compliance, can be quite stressful experiences.)

  90. avatar
    Robert Clark April 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm #

    bjphysics: Bob,Are you stating that a birth record document (COB/COLB/BC/whatever) contains EITHER a raised state seal OR a registrars signature but NOT BOTH?BJ

    No, I’m suggesting that the records with the apostille are rare enough that they might get the registers own handwrittien signature. As I recall they also get the Lt. Governor’s signature and perhaps another.

    Bob

  91. avatar
    gorefan April 19, 2011 at 10:30 pm #

    Sen. McCain has endorsed Gov. Brewer’s veto.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-arizona-birther-bill-mccain-20110419,0,3381524.story?track=rss

  92. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 19, 2011 at 11:22 pm #

    Wow, I never imagined I would be thanking Gov. Brewer for ANYTHING. This is like a bolt from the blue.

  93. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 19, 2011 at 11:23 pm #

    Oh, Robert?

    ““I want to vomit! Who would have thought that Jan Brewer was nothing but a weak Janet Napolitano wannabe. What the hell is wrong with this country?”

    17 posted on April 18, 2011 9:25:04 PM EDT by RobertClark”

    Is this you?

  94. avatar
    Tomtech April 19, 2011 at 11:33 pm #

    I am having big problems with the Google Doc. I have never seen this before. It keeps trying to reload and fails.

  95. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 20, 2011 at 12:05 am #

    James M: The way it works, generally, is that institutional policies and forms are produced in consultation with federal regulators. Once approved, these internal polices essentially become law, and the institution’s adherence to the policy is routinely audited for compliance.

    I have seen HIPAA consultants put forward extreme interpretations of the law, presumably to scare institutions into hiring them.

  96. avatar
    James M April 20, 2011 at 12:53 am #

    Robert Clark: No, I’m suggesting that the records with the apostille are rare enough that they might get the registers own handwrittien signature. As I recall they also get the Lt. Governor’s signature and perhaps another.

    Bob

    Well, Bob, if you ever have occasion to get one of those, I guess you can feel honored.
    But what does your “apostille” have to do with the subject at hand? I don’t understand how any facts about you have any bearing on the eligibility of any Presidential candidate.

    You are pretending this is relevant, but it makes no sense.

  97. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 12:59 am #

    J. Edward Tremlett: Oh, Robert?““I want to vomit! Who would have thought that Jan Brewer was nothing but a weak Janet Napolitano wannabe. What the hell is wrong with this country?”17 posted on April 18, 2011 9:25:04 PM EDT by RobertClark”Is this you?

    Not me. I don’ tend to hyperbole.She has a right to her decision, as the governor. But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?
    Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?

    Bob

  98. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 1:00 am #

    gorefan: Sen. McCain has endorsed Gov. Brewer’s veto.http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-arizona-birther-bill-mccain-20110419,0,3381524.story?track=rss

    McCain might want to run again.

    Bob

  99. avatar
    gorefan April 20, 2011 at 1:35 am #

    Robert Clark: McCain might want to run again.

    No, he’s making way for Jindal. And for some “anchor baby”, who is currently serving in Afganistan.

  100. avatar
    sfjeff April 20, 2011 at 2:42 am #

    Robert Clark: Not me. I don’ tend to hyperbole.She has a right to her decision, as the governor. But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?Bob

    Well isn’t that the purpose of birth certificates?

    I am not saying that Birth certificates are necessary or required, but the whole point of birth certificates is to have an official record of place and time of birth.

    But what would be an independent verification that we can all be satisfied with?

    After watching Birthers, I think that is a fool’s chase, even though in theory I agree with it.

    There isn’t even a need for legislation- any civic minded group could start up a campaign to have Presidential and VP candidates voluntarily provide evidence of their eligibility- by the way I would say that the residency proof states are asking for is laughable compared to what they want for place of birth- and have some ex-FBI and ex-Secret Service officers on the panel.

    But even if such a panel convened today and looked at Obama’s evidence and proclaimed that he was certainly eligible, the hard core birthers would just find a reason to dismiss the finding.

  101. avatar
    The Magic M April 20, 2011 at 5:11 am #

    > Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?

    Well, you obviously didn’t care about that until that “single unelected person” made a decision you do not like.

    What would you have said if she had not vetoed the law and us “Obots” had started babbling about an “unelected person”? Probably something along the lines of “oh how the Obots are scared and running amok now”.

  102. avatar
    Lupin April 20, 2011 at 5:17 am #

    Robert Clark: Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?

    You already do. It’s called a birth certificate and it was verified by the proper authorities from Hawaii. Anything else springs from your own deluded, irrational mind.

  103. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 5:57 am #

    The Magic M: > Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?Well, you obviously didn’t care about that until that “single unelected person” made a decision you do not like.What would you have said if she had not vetoed the law and us “Obots” had started babbling about an “unelected person”? Probably something along the lines of “oh how the Obots are scared and running amok now”.

    The overwhelmingly important difference is that it would not be a single person in a CLOSED non-public way. ALL the information would be shared among ALL the 50 states so that there would be no indication of anything untoward happening.

    Bob

  104. avatar
    G April 20, 2011 at 8:06 am #

    Robert Clark: Not me. I don’ tend to hyperbole.She has a right to her decision, as the governor. But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?Bob

    Who is this unelected person?

    Are you referring to the AZ Governor – Jan Brewer?

    She was the former AZ SOS and when Gov Janet Napolitano was appointed to Obama’s cabinet, Brewer became Gov by their state laws of succession.

    Then n the fall 2010 elections, Jan Brewer was on the ballot and won the Governor’s office in that race. So I don’t know what you are referring to. She’s an elected official and in the 1st year of that new elected term.

  105. avatar
    Suranis April 20, 2011 at 8:19 am #

    Robert Clark: But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected.

    That was her reason for vetoing that peace of ass bill? that if gave sole authority to determine eligibility. And that it was a stupid bill that caused nothing but problems and gained Arizona nothing

  106. avatar
    Scientist April 20, 2011 at 8:24 am #

    Robert Clark: But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?
    Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?

    So phony Bob you are proposing that registration of births be taken away from the states and given to the Federal government? Because as long as states are sovereign they will have different formats for their documents.

    If you want the feds to add their stamp of approval to the process then there is a simple way to do that:

    1. Show a US passport. That guarantees the federal government considers the person a citizen.
    2. For Pres/VP place of birth in passport must be within the US. That means the federal government considers them born in the US.
    3. For those whose passport shows them born outside the US, add in a requirement for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad or some equivalent proof.

    Phony Bob, please answer this question: Why do you need to pretend a reason to dislike and vote against Obama? No reason is needed. You are free to dislike him and vote against him for no reason at all.

  107. avatar
    The Magic M April 20, 2011 at 10:11 am #

    > that it would not be a single person in a CLOSED non-public way.

    No because still the SOS makes the final decision on his own discretion:

    “IF THE CANDIDATE AND NATIONAL POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEE FOR THAT COMMITTEE SUBMIT AND SWEAR TO THE DOCUMENTS PRESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION, BUT THE SECRETARY OF STATE BELIEVES THAT THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE CANDIDATE DOES NOT MEET
    THE CITIZENSHIP, AGE AND RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS, THE SECRETARY OFSTATE SHALL NOT PLACE THAT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE’S NAME ON THE BALLOT IN THIS STATE”

    > ALL the information would be shared among ALL the 50 states so that there would be no indication of anything untoward happening

    Still every SOS would have his own way of finding his decision. Why would he have to pay heed to anything the other states do?

  108. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 11:42 am #

    G: Who is this unelected person?
    Are you referring to the AZ Governor – Jan Brewer?
    She was the former AZ SOS and when Gov Janet Napolitano was appointed to Obama’s cabinet, Brewer became Gov by their state laws of succession.
    Then n the fall 2010 elections, Jan Brewer was on the ballot and won the Governor’s office in that race.So I don’t know what you are referring to.She’s an elected official and in the 1st year of that new elected term.

    No, I’m referring to Fukino in Hawaii.

    Bob

  109. avatar
    Daniel April 20, 2011 at 11:50 am #

    Robert Clark: No, I’m referring to Fukino in Hawaii.

    Bob

    That makes your delusion more clear then, Thank you.

  110. avatar
    The Magic M April 20, 2011 at 12:08 pm #

    > No, I’m referring to Fukino in Hawaii.

    Then what the #?*~+ do you mean with your rant

    “But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?”

    Who is “under the control of Hawaii”? Who is “under the control of Dr Fukino”? Who has “all that power”?

    You do realize that Dr Fukino, when she still had “all that power”, was not acting as a single individual but as a representative of the state. Are you really that delusional to claim that if she had been lying, the state would not correct that?

    I mean, that argument basically works the same for everything and everyone working for the government. So the guy who hands you your driver’s license has “all that power” to give driver’s license to people who shouldn’t have them. So, by your reasoning, no-one should give any credibility to a driver’s license because the person issuing them could have been lying.

    I wonder how you get through everyday life if you really question everything and everyone.

    Besides, your “argument” only works if you assume that for some strange reason the Hawaiian DoH would support such a lie in its entirety (the “everyone is part of the big conspiracy” idiocy) or, for another strange reason, would try to cover up any lie proffered by any representative even if they knew it was a lie and did not agree with it (the “everyone is covering their ‘homies” back” conspiracy idiocy).

    But in no way does a single individual have “all the power” to lie without being corrected by its government employer.

  111. avatar
    Scientist April 20, 2011 at 12:12 pm #

    Hey, Phony Bobby: Answer the question. I”ll repeat it for you:

    Why do you need to pretend a reason to dislike and vote against Obama? No reason is needed. You are free to dislike him and vote against him for no reason at all

  112. avatar
    Scientist April 20, 2011 at 12:14 pm #

    Robert Clark: But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?

    The final say on Presidential eligiibility lies with Congress. Last I checked, they are elected.

  113. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 12:19 pm #

    The Magic M:
    > No, I’m referring to Fukino in Hawaii.

    Then what the #?*~+ do you mean with your rant

    You do realize that Dr Fukino, when she still had “all that power”, was not acting as a single individual but as a representative of the state. Are you really that delusional to claim that if she had been lying, the state would not correct that?

    But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.

    Bob

  114. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 12:24 pm #

    Scientist:
    Hey, Phony Bobby:Answer the question.I”ll repeat it for you:
    Why do you need to pretend a reason to dislike and vote against Obama? No reason is needed. You are free to dislike him and vote against him for no reason at all

    I never pretended to be a fan. However, a big part of why I didn’t support him is that I thought he was too connected to the corrupt and convicted politicians in Chicago. I believed he would easily engage in corruption himself, if he did not already in Chicago.
    That’s part of the reason it would not surprise me if something untoward is behind his not wanting to release the original long form birth certificate.

    Bob

  115. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 12:24 pm #

    Robert Clark: Not me. I don’ tend to hyperbole.She has a right to her decision, as the governor. But we need to be aware that where are now is that we are under the control of a single state and a single official of that state, who happens to be unelected. Do we want to give all that power to a single unelected person?Shouldn’t we have independent verification that we all can be satisfied with nationally?Bob

    Don’t like it, amend the Constitution. States are required to honor the documents of other states. Every state has established their own methods of keeping records and certifying those records. Your whine about “that unelected” official was appointed by an elected official. She is working under the instructions of the executive branch of that state. And guess what? The other 49 states operate in the same way, and each of those other states are equally “under the control of a single state and a single official in that state” who probably is also unelected.

    You want “independent verification that we all can be satisified with nationally,” then amend the Constitution, and don’t even think about whining about “states rights” ever again on any topic.

  116. avatar
    Daniel April 20, 2011 at 12:33 pm #

    Robert Clark: But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.

    Bob

    So let me get this straight… no really, just give me a minute to quit laughing…

    Ok, so what you are suggesting is an independent panel to verify the authenticity of the ID of every person, every time they present a HI BC, for any reason.

    And who do you suppose is going to pay for this new bureaucracy needed to support the additional investigation of the hundreds of millions of times that a citizen of HI uses their BC?

    Especially since each BC is already verified, by the state, no less.

    You don’t really spend a lot of time thinking through the consequences of your delusions…. do you…

  117. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    Robert Clark: But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.Bob

    Why waste the resources? The documents are kept in the normal course of business. No reason has been given to doubt them. What’s there to check?

  118. avatar
    Scientist April 20, 2011 at 12:41 pm #

    Robert Clark: I never pretended to be a fan. However, a big part of why I didn’t support him is that I thought he was too connected to the corrupt and convicted politicians in Chicago. I believed he would easily engage in corruption himself, if he did not already in Chicago.

    OK. I actually thought that was the best critique leveled against Obama during the campaign. However, everything that went on with Rezko and Blago has been thoroughly investigated by the most highly-regarded US attorney in the country, a Republican appointed by Bush, Patrick Fitzgerald. He found absolutely nothing against Obama. Now we have Darrell Issa, who claims Obama is corrupt. So far, he has brought forward exactly nothing,

    As a scientist, I have to be prepared to see my favored hypothesis overturned by facts. You ought to reconsider years. After more than 2 years in office, I have honestly not seen a whiff of scandal. Not one Obama appointee has been forced out over allegations of wrongdoing. Virtually every other recent Adminsitration had already had quite a few instances of those by this point. It’s actually rather boring how clean things have been.

    So, the facts suggest you are wrong. And the facts on the birth certificate say you’re wrong. Yet you cling to your hypothesis, impervious to the facts.

    Phony Bobby. Wrong, wrong, wrong

  119. avatar
    sfjeff April 20, 2011 at 12:43 pm #

    Robert Clark: But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.Bob

    Are you seriously suggesting that every state in the Union organize a special committee to review birth certificates issued to political candidates? That every state in the Union pass a special law allowing otherwise unauthorized persons access to review political candidates vital records? Just to ensure that a routine verification of birth records is correct?

    By the way- Dr. Fukino was not the only person who reviewed the original birth certificate- the Registrar of Vital Records also reviewed it, and the same records could be reviewed by the current interim Director of Health if he or she chose to do so.

    I have asked you this before Bob- do you think Dr. Fukino lied or not?

    Because this is still the only question- if Dr. Fukino is not lieing then there is no Birther issue.

    If you do think she is lieing- why? And how did she manage to coopt the Registrar of Vital Records, and any future Directors of Health?

  120. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 12:46 pm #

    Robert Clark: I never pretended to be a fan. However, a big part of why I didn’t support him is that I thought he was too connected to the corrupt and convicted politicians in Chicago. I believed he would easily engage in corruption himself, if he did not already in Chicago.
    That’s part of the reason it would not surprise me if something untoward is behind his not wanting to release the original long form birth certificate.
    Bob

    Except his birth certificate isn’t in Chicago, it’s in Hawaii, and at the time of the election, was under the control of a Republican governor, who is really the one standing in the way of its release. And besides all that, your paranoia and biases are not a basis to turn the administrative state on its head.

  121. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) April 20, 2011 at 1:15 pm #

    Robert Clark: I never pretended to be a fan. However, a big part of why I didn’t support him is that I thought he was too connected to the corrupt and convicted politicians in Chicago. I believed he would easily engage in corruption himself, if he did not already in Chicago.That’s part of the reason it would not surprise me if something untoward is behind his not wanting to release the original long form birth certificate.Bob

    Wow phony Bob just reveals himself again. Tell me Bob do you think of Sean Connery in the Untouchables when you think of Chicago? It sounds like you watch way too many movies if this is the best escuse you can come up with. It’s not even an excuse but a vague general stereotype on the city of Chicago. When Rod Blogojevich tried to trade Obama’s senate seat for favors Obama told him to pound sand. Blogojevich was whining about how Obama didn’t play ball with him. If anything Obama came out of Chicago clean. So are Texas politics sooo corrupt that President Bush never wanted Connecticut to release his long form birth certificate?

  122. avatar
    Majority Will April 20, 2011 at 2:11 pm #

    sfjeff: And how did she manage to coopt the Registrar of Vital Records, and any future Directors of Health?

    Because Brain Damage Bobby must have hallucinated that “Chiyome” is Hawaiian for “Chicago”.

    That’s what a closed minded bigot might fabricate in his poorly lit, paranoid fantasy world.

  123. avatar
    The Magic M April 20, 2011 at 2:12 pm #

    > But nobody else checks it.

    So you think Dr Fukino was the only one who had access to these records? (Highly unlikely since there is no confidentiality in place anywhere in the government that limits access to certain data to one single person.) And other people working at the DoH who also have access to these records would not report to Dr Fukino’s superior if she were making false public statements? And Dr Fukino’s superior would cover up such false public statements because… why exactly?

    You see, this all only makes sense if you’re banging the “big conspiracy” drum. And as soon as you do that, you can’t stop. You can’t say “but we need independent verification” as, by definition, if that verification is not to your satisfaction, you’ll just count the independent verifiers among the conspirators.

    That is exactly why “it’s all a conspiracy” is not working in a sane world. As soon as you start believing that, no level of checks and balances will ever be enough. Who would you believe? The pope? Jesus? And who vetted Jesus? Who independently verified he was God’s son? And who vetted God?

  124. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 2:50 pm #

    Daniel: So let me get this straight… no really, just give me a minute to quit laughing…

    Ok, so what you are suggesting is an independent panel to verify the authenticity of the ID of every person, every time they present a HI BC, for any reason.

    It’s just for the Presidential elections for something as important as upholding the Constitution.

    Bob

  125. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 2:55 pm #

    Majority Will: sfjeff: And how did she manage to coopt the Registrar of Vital Records, and any future Directors of Health?

    One of those directors of health was forced to resign by the same governor who appointed him Abercrombie, who now refuses to say why.
    Guys, it’s real simple just release the thing.

    Bob

  126. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 2:56 pm #

    Majority Will: Because Brain Damage Bobby must have hallucinated that “Chiyome”is Hawaiian for “Chicago”.

    That’s what a closed minded bigot might fabricate in his poorly lit, paranoid fantasy world.

    Don’t get upset. Slartibartfast affirms we are helping Obama.

    Bob

  127. avatar
    Robert Clark April 20, 2011 at 2:59 pm #

    JoZeppy: Why waste the resources?The documents are kept in the normal course of business.No reason has been given to doubt them.What’s there to check?

    Then why should Obama want to keep them hidden.

    Bob

  128. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 20, 2011 at 3:05 pm #

    Robert Clark: Then why should Obama want to keep them hidden.

    Bob

    What evidence do you have the President Obama wants to keep anything hidden? – his behavior has been to make his birth circumstances public in a way that has no previous presidential precedent. Saying that the president is hiding something when he is being substantially more transparent than his predecessors is one of the things that makes birthers like you scum.

  129. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) April 20, 2011 at 3:10 pm #

    Robert Clark: It’s just for the Presidential elections for something as important as upholding the Constitution.Bob

    The constitution was upheld. What exactly was done differently in 2008 that wasn’t done in previous elections?

  130. avatar
    Thrifty April 20, 2011 at 3:24 pm #

    Robert Clark: But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.

    They should implement that in bars and nightclubs. After you order a drink, the bartender asks to see your ID. After you present your driver’s license, the bartender hands it over to the bouncer, who then calls the DMV to make sure they issued you that driver’s license and insist that they fax a receipt of you applying for it.

  131. avatar
    Scientist April 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm #

    Robert Clark: It’s just for the Presidential elections for something as important as upholding the Constitution

    The Constitution requires all Reps and Senators to be citizens. Since almost all of them are claiming citizenship by birth you would have to examine their records as well. And all state reps have to be citizens. Probably all county and town officials too. State Constitutions matter too.

    This seems like a great way to waste taxpayer dollars. So much better than spending it on schools and hospitals and roads and curing diseases. And if they did this over the next 10 elections, how many people who were posing as citizens do you think they would uncover? After all there really aren’t that many cases of people who acquire citizenship fraudulently. The cases I have heard of are uneducated folks working menial jobs. hardly the type to run for office certaiinly not likely too win. The well-off, educated types are either legitimately born here, or, if immigrants, able to get citizenship legally.

  132. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 3:44 pm #

    Robert Clark: Then why should Obama want to keep them hidden.Bob

    Who’s keeping anything hidden? He stuck the one thing the State of Hawaii gives out on the internet, and has moved on to more important things. It’s the birthers that are wasting everyone’s time.

  133. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm #

    Robert Clark: It’s just for the Presidential elections for something as important as upholding the Constitution.Bob

    Give me a break. Birthers don’t give two sh!ts about the Constitution. Otherwise they wouldn’t be cr@pping on the full faith and credit clause, pushing a violation of the 10th Amendment (your national board to review legally issued and certified state documents). And let’s not forget trying to overturn a legally elected President based on innuendo, lies, and fabricated documents.

    Please…..the birthers would be content with an Iranian system, as long as they were in control of picking the candidates. The Constitution is merely an excuse for their wholly unAmerican activity.

  134. avatar
    JoZeppy April 20, 2011 at 3:51 pm #

    Robert Clark: One of those directors of health was forced to resign by the same governor who appointed him Abercrombie, who now refuses to say why.Guys, it’s real simple just release the thing.Bob

    Why can’t you just accept that you’re not important enough to demand anything? You guys are a joke. The President openly mocks you. It’s really just that simple. You and your demands to “just release the thing” is the subject matter of jokes, by the President, on national TV. Does that sound like your demands are being taken remotely seriously?

  135. avatar
    G April 20, 2011 at 6:10 pm #

    Robert Clark: One of those directors of health was forced to resign by the same governor who appointed him Abercrombie, who now refuses to say why.Guys, it’s real simple just release the thing.Bob

    “Forced to resign”???

    Do you have any PROOF of that? I think not.

    You like to just talk out your @ss and make bold accusations against others, don’t you?

    You do realize that when an administration changes parties at the top, many of the top appointed positions from the previous political administration often resign as well, don’t you? Pretty standard turnover stuff….

  136. avatar
    G April 20, 2011 at 6:14 pm #

    Robert Clark: Then why should Obama want to keep them hidden.Bob

    Only in the paranoid delusional fantasy land of Birthers does the combination of a state NO LONGER providing such forms and an administration merely ignoring silly and unreasable requests from fringe haters translate into “hidden”.

    You birthers tend to turn the mundane and standard into twisted fictional conspiracies and create whole new mythical contexts for words all the time… What a sad joke you folks are!

  137. avatar
    G April 20, 2011 at 6:16 pm #

    Scientist: So, the facts suggest you are wrong. And the facts on the birth certificate say you’re wrong. Yet you cling to your hypothesis, impervious to the facts.
    Phony Bobby. Wrong, wrong, wrong

    He’s already told us the real answer – because he’s a PUMA and still can’t accept HRC’s loss… there may be more to it than that, but that’s pretty much where he’s really coming from.

  138. avatar
    Suranis April 20, 2011 at 6:24 pm #

    Are they still crying over Hillery? That was 3 years ago! Hillery herself has moved on. Get over it.

  139. avatar
    Joey April 20, 2011 at 6:29 pm #

    Robert Clark: But nobody else checks it. The former republican governor just repeats what Fukino told her; she never looked at it. Why not have an independent committee look at it? It would not be made “public” in that instance.

    Bob

    There are 535 members of Congress. Not one of them has called for a congressional investigation and called for the issuance of a congressional subpoena for Obama’s birth records. If this is a serious constitutional issue (it’s not), why hasn’t ANY member of Congress called for a special congressional committee to investigate?
    Watergate warranted a special investigative committee; Iran-Contra warranted a special investigative committee; Whitewater warranted a special investigative committee; and the Valerie Plame-CIA Leads-Scooter Libby affair warranted a special congressional investigative committee. Why not the eligibility of the president as a natural born citizen?

  140. avatar
    G April 20, 2011 at 6:45 pm #

    Suranis: Are they still crying over Hillery? That was 3 years ago! Hillery herself has moved on. Get over it.

    Believe it or not, there are stil several sad little PUMA blog sites around (I think NoQuarter and PUMAPac and a few others still exist).

    There’s quite a few that keep clinging to the delusion that their “Dear Hillary” is going to run in 2012, despite HRC’s clear statements to the contrary. They keep clinging to the delusion that her and her husband are really secretly working against Obama, despite how much this contrasts with reality. Heck, I’m sure some of them still cling to the delusion that she’s going to send them more “coded” messages in orange pantsuits…

    They were claiming for a time that they would create their own PUMA agenda and run some PUMA candidates in 2012 elections too… not sure if they’ve given that fools errand up yet or not.