Main Menu

Atlanta Post calls for Trump boycott

Trump responds to boycott

Selam Aster, writing in the Atlanta Post, calls for black Americans to boycott Donald Trump. Aster asks:

…why does Black America have to support him while he attacks not only our President but also attacks common sense and decency?

Aster then details how to boycott Trump:

  • Don’t watch The Apprentice
  • Don’t stay at Trump hotels or resorts
  • Don’t play golf at his resorts

I’m proud to say that I’ve been boycotting Donald Trump my whole life.

86 Responses to Atlanta Post calls for Trump boycott

  1. avatar
    Black Lion April 9, 2011 at 11:20 am #

    Report: WND ‘Patched In’ To Trump’s Birther Meeting, ‘Privy To What Was Going On’
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    With Donald Trump going full birther, it’s no surprise that WorldNetDaily would want to get in on some of that action. Now we have apparent proof that it is working with Trump.

    The right-wing website The Post and Email contains a report from an anonymous “citizen reporter” about what happened inside a meeting Trump had with tea party activists and an Arizona state representative who sponsored an “eligibility” bill in the state that highlights WND’s involvement:

    Trump gave them a little over 30 minutes. WorldNetDaily had been patched in somehow and apparently had been privy to what was going on. Also, there were a lot of media outside in the hallway, but none was allowed into the meeting. The only people in the meeting were Trump, (Michael D.) Cohen, and the three people from Arizona.

    Between this and its creation of an affidavit for birther and former Hawaii election temp Tim Adams to sign, it seems WND isn’t content reporting the news; it’s working behind the scenes to invent birther news to report. That’s not the role of a “news” organization.

    The Post and Email also includes another account from a meeting participant rehashing the claims the participants fed to Trump:

    The discussion trend allowed me to ask Mr. Trump right after he was speaking about the Kenyan grandmother, whether he knew about the Kenyan Assemblyman, (James Orengo) who stated on their Assembly floor so that it is documented that Obama was a son of their soil. He apparently did not know of that and asked me to send him the documentation. Anyone who has it readily available is welcome to send it to me so that I can forward it. Even more importantly, I also had the opportunity when we were discussing whether a real long form birth certificate actually exists to do two things. I mentioned Tim Adams, the Hawaiian election clerk and recent affadavit and ALSO asked whether he, Trump, was going to take the issue beyond the birth certificate and place of birth to the question of NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP. He asked me to explain precisely what that was and I then got to recite the precise clause from Article II, Section I and explain what the founders meant by it; and where they got the concept from, that being Vattel. He said that he liked the way I was explaining it and gave me another “homework” assignment to send him more information about it. Also, at some point in the discussion, the false social security number belonging to someone from Connecticut born in 1890 came up and so they are aware of that situation to some extent – maybe not all the way to the FOIA actions and suits filed vs. the Social Security Administration by Orly Taitz. Time did not allow getting into the issue to that full extent. ANYONE WHO WANTS TO HELP ME WITH THESE HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENTS, PLEASE DO, I WELCOME IT.

    Much of this twaddle has been promoted by WND, and much of it has been discredited, in particular the stuff about Obama’s grandmother, which originated from translation problems in an interview the grandmother had with a rabidly anti-Obama minister.

    The participant also noted that the meeting was shortened “because Mr. Trump took a call from Newsmax during the meeting.” We’ve already noted how Newsmax has apparently partnered with Trump to promote his would-be presidential campaign and is feeding him its prelimiary polling results on him.

    http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/index.blog/2149237/report-wnd-patched-in-to-trumps-birther-meeting-privy-to-what-was-going-on/

  2. avatar
    Lue Blacknell April 9, 2011 at 12:32 pm #

    trump is the most arrogant, self-serving & overbearing s.o.b. there is. The news anchors act as though they are afraid of him- such as: vierra, chuck todd, savannah g. & some of the view. The one person that will go “toe to toe” w/him-is probably Lawrence O’Donnell-but he probably will not go on his show. Now joe s. is kissing trump’s butt-cause he think he might make him his VP-they both are delusional.

  3. avatar
    katahdin April 9, 2011 at 1:21 pm #

    gorefan:
    Gail Collins gets a rise out of Trump

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/09/opinion/09collins.html?src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/opinion/lweb08trump.html?src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

    It’s interesting that he attacks the writing talent of Gail Collins, but the letter attacking her is written at about an 8th grade level.

  4. avatar
    Dave April 9, 2011 at 1:45 pm #

    What I don’t understand is why this boycott should be restricted to black Americans.

  5. avatar
    richCares April 9, 2011 at 2:04 pm #

    from FogBow:
    When we contacted Trump’s organization, Michael Cohen, his political aide, referred us to Jerome R. Corsi
    .
    so Trumps investigator is is Corsi, WoW, many LOL’s

  6. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 9, 2011 at 2:29 pm #

    richCares: from FogBow:When we contacted Trump’s organization, Michael Cohen, his political aide, referred us to Jerome R. Corsi.so Trumps investigator is is Corsi, WoW, many LOL’s

    It’s like the incredulous leading the insane!

  7. avatar
    Obsolete April 9, 2011 at 5:25 pm #

    If Trump were honest he would give a 30 minute meeting with a debunker (like our own Doc C or Foggy/Loren).
    But we already know he is not honest.

    I can’t believe his whiny letter to the NYT- it will live forever as a monument of enormous ego-driven stupidity. He should have known better than to make those claims. He can never explain this away.

  8. avatar
    sfjeff April 9, 2011 at 6:49 pm #

    I will admit to my shame that we were watching Celebrity Apprentice- mostly because my wife wanted to see David Cassidy and Marlee Matlin. Like watching a train wreck, hard to avert my eyes, but never again.

    Why would I watch a show produced by someone who is so open stupid or dishonest?

  9. avatar
    Joey April 9, 2011 at 6:52 pm #

    New from factcheck.org, “Donald, you’re fired.”
    http://factcheck.org/2011/04/donald-youre-fired/

  10. avatar
    nc1 April 9, 2011 at 6:56 pm #

    Abercrombie’s words emboldened Trump to challenge Obama. If Abercrombie did not run his mouth – Obama would have more hiding space.

    How sweet it would be for Obama supporters if pResident could produce the long form birth certificate and rub it on Trump’s nose. No such luck for you.

    I hope Trump’s actions will encourage state legislators to pass laws asking for submission of the original birth certificate as a proof of birth in the USA for all future presidential candidates.

  11. avatar
    Joey April 9, 2011 at 6:56 pm #

    From the St. Petersburg Times’ “Politifact” investigative unit:
    “Politifact’s Guide To Obama’s Birth Certificate”
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

  12. avatar
    Black Lion April 9, 2011 at 7:00 pm #

    Open Letter to Donald Trump: Beware the Birther Trap

    Dear Mr. Trump,

    I’ve been watching over the past few weeks your descent into Birtherism, first with mild amusement, and, more recently, with simple pity.

    How, I wondered, could a man who has made and lost and made millions be so darn gullible? What satanic form of ambition could cause the mind of an ostensibly intelligent person to just shut down and parrot talking points, the way yours seems to be doing in your more recent television interviews?

    Could the lure of the presidency be so strong that an otherwise sane individual – and shrewd self-marketer – would exhibit the symptoms of insanity on national television?

    I don’t know, but I feel compelled to write you, to perhaps try to wake you from your Birther somnolence before you completely devalue the Trump brand.

    Now, I’m sure your handlers have schooled you in primary politics, as it relates to the Republican Party. And I’m sure they’ve told you that these days, you have to appeal to the red-meat Right-wing to be assured of any kind of success in a primary fight. So flirting with the Birthers, from that standpoint, makes perfect sense.

    But I fear that you’re taking the short view on this, in effect, selling yourself short. Because even if you decide to run and then, by some chance, manage to win the Republican nomination, your opponent, President Obama, is going to have more than a year’s worth of your Birther sound bites to use against you. And believe me, everything you say in support of this nut job movement will chip away at your credibility among those in the reality based world.

    So I hope you’ll take what I have to say in the spirit in which it is given.

    In watching your appearances, and in having followed the Birther movement – from the sidelines and recently in a more public role – for about a year or so, I’ve noticed that all of the arguments you have so far proffered are, shall I say, road kill.

    Everything you’ve brought up to this date has been thoroughly debunked. That’s right. Not one claim you’ve made is original, and every single one of them has been proven false.

    Let’s start with the foundational claim that President Obama has not shown his birth certificate, and the Certificate of Live Birth doesn’t count.

    That’s just not true. The COLB is the official birth document that holders use for any number of legal reasons. And it has been checked and proven to be authentic.

    Not to mention that Hawaiian officials have, despite claims to the contrary, vouched not only for the COLB’s authenticity, but for the fact that the president was, in fact, born in Hawaii.

    You also claim that the president is a mystery, that no one knows who he is. I’ve covered that in a previous post, but let me just recap and say, no, that’s not true. Many articles have been published featuring people who remember him as a child and a young adult. The proof is there, Mr. Trump. All you have to do is reach out and touch it.

    You also repeat the old claim that the president has spent $2 million “hiding” his birth certificate. That claim has never been proven. In fact, I’ve seen statements saying the number is closer to $3 million, but never any facts to support it. The Obama campaign has had legal bills that are normally associated with a campaign rundown, but so has the McCain campaign, with records showing a similar outlay of money.

    There’s not one shred of evidence – and people screaming that it’s so is not evidence, no matter how loud or how often they scream it – that the president has spent one dime “hiding” his birth certificate. In fact, he’s not hiding it at all; it was released three years ago.

    You’ve also expressed skepticism about the two birth announcements that appeared in Honolulu-area newspapers days after the president’s birth. You refer to them as “ads,” and wonder how poor people could afford such things and why they would do it. Mr. Trump, those were ordinary birth announcements placed in the papers at no charge to the parents by the Hawaii Department of Health. That was standard practice, regardless of your claim that you’d never seen such an announcement. Denying their existence or their ubiquity makes you look foolish and out of touch with common Americans.

    I’ve also heard you repeat the claim that President Obama’s grandmother – actually, his step-grandmother, but why would you want to get bogged down in details – stated that he was born in Kenya.

    Another statement that has been proven to be a lie. That tape has been around for a couple of years. See, if just one of the people you have “looking into this,” as you told Meredith Vieira, would have looked at the tape made by Ron McRae – the entire tape, past the part he wants us all to stop at – they’d be able to tell you not to repeat that fabrication because she goes on to insist that the president was born in Hawaii. McRae tries to press her into saying he was born in Kenya, but she’s adamant that he was not.

    We in the debunking world like to call that a “Birther fail.”

    And the book you make passing reference to, the one by proven liar Jerome Corsi, will be another collection of refuted accusations with very little proof behind them.

    Now, Mr. Trump, I can tell by your statements that you’re only superficially aware of what the Birthers believe; you’ve stopped at the top layer, the citizenship issue. Clearly, neither you nor your aides have done any fact-checking on this, either by reading journals such as this or the pre-eminent Birther debunking site, The Fogbow. I suggest you do.

    Because if you do your due diligence, you’ll find that there are several more layers to explore, layers that are not pretty and will not reflect well on a potential presidential candidate.

    There’s the overt racism of people such as Dr. Kate Vandemoer, who continually refers to the president as an “affirmative action” president, or Sharon Rondeau at The Post & Email – with whom one of your aides apparently spoke – who has published a caricature of the president dancing, with the word “jig” attached to it. (That caricature was removed a week or so after I pointed it out.) You do know what “jig” means in relation to a black person, right? I’m sure you do.

    Not to mention the over-the-top promulgation of sedition practiced by people such as Orly Taitz, Rondeau, Vandemoer and Walter Fitzpatrick, a disgraced former Navy officer who sees a corrupt official around every corner. These individuals either write seditious material or publish and promote it, either in main articles, editorials or in the heavily moderated comments they allow on their sites.

    These people and others actively campaign for the arrest and execution of the president, Mr. Trump. The methods vary, but the most popular are firing squad and hanging. They hate this country, sir, and make a mockery of the Constitution they profess to revere.

    Now honestly, is this the kind of group with which you want to be connected? Are these the type of people you want carrying “Trump for President” placards across America, representing you?

    And let’s not forget the truly crazy, the people who believe that the president is an alien, or a reptilian shape-shifter. I am not joking, both of those ideas were posited at no less than The Post & Email, the online publication to which your aide has given credibility and, by extension, your imprimatur of respectability.

    Do you really believe the president and his wife are reptiles?

    This is the pool into which you’ve have apparently plunged, headfirst and whole-heartedly. These are the people you are defending when you decry the use of the term “Birther.” These are now your people.

    Is this what the Trump brand has come to? Is this how you want the Trump presidential candidacy defined? By racists, seditionists and outright insane people?

    Mr. Trump, I think you have to step back, take a deep breath and ask yourself, is it worth it? Is it worth pandering to the worst among us, in the hopes that it takes you a step closer to Big Prize?

    Just remember that once you get the stink of Birther on you, no disinfectant can remove it. No bleach can “out” the stain it will leave on your reputation.

    Once you cross that threshold, whether you win or lose, nothing can save you from a “Birther fail.”

    Keep the faith.

    http://turningthescale.net/?p=392

  13. avatar
    Joey April 9, 2011 at 7:16 pm #

    nc1:
    Abercrombie’s words emboldened Trump to challenge Obama.If Abercrombie did not run his mouth – Obama would have more hiding space.

    How sweet it would be for Obama supporters if pResident could produce the long form birth certificate and rub it on Trump’s nose. No such luck for you.

    I hope Trump’s actions will encourage state legislators to pass laws asking for submission of the original birth certificate as a proof of birth in the USA for all future presidential candidates.

    As an Obama supporter I say, “patience, grasshopper!”
    A year and a half before the next election is not smart political timing for the release of any long form birth certificate. I want the President to save it for an “October surprise” in 2012.
    Right now I am just fine with Obama using the birth certificate issue as a wedge to divide conservatives (Rush Limbaugh being the latest anti-birther as of Thursday) and the President is giving any and all potential 2012 Republican/Independent opponents enough rope to hang themselves.
    Besides, who knows if there isn’t a deal between Obama and Trump for Trump to run as a third party candidate and split the anti-Obama vote to give Obama the presidency.
    Time will tell. Keep tuned to this station! 🙂
    State eligibility law requirements give Obama the perfect opportunity to have a brand new “long form” certificate printed up at the direction of his former Hawaii campaign manager, Neil Abercrombie.

  14. avatar
    Joey April 9, 2011 at 7:26 pm #

    In “dissing” Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh compares Barack Obama to Jesus of Nazareth
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NmcSowSfTk

  15. avatar
    nc1 April 9, 2011 at 7:39 pm #

    Joey: As an Obama supporter I say, “patience, grasshopper!”
    A year and a half before the next election is not smart political timing for the release ofany long form birth certificate. I want the President to save it for an “October surprise” in 2012.
    Right now I am just fine with Obama using the birth certificate issue as a wedge to divide conservatives (Rush Limbaugh being the latest anti-birther as of Thursday) and the President is giving any and all potential 2012 Republican/Independent opponents enough rope to hang themselves.
    Besides, who knows if there isn’t a deal between Obama and Trump for Trump to run as a third party candidate and split the anti-Obama vote to give Obama the presidency.
    Time will tell. Keep tuned to this station!
    State eligibility law requirements give Obama the perfect opportunity to have a brand new “long form” certificate printed up at the direction of his former Hawaii campaign manager, Neil Abercrombie.

    Why would they need to manufacture a new long form document? If the official birthplace story were true Obama’s original birth certificate (Nordyke type) is already in the archive, is it not?

  16. avatar
    richCares April 9, 2011 at 8:06 pm #

    Why would they need to manufacture a new long form document? If the official birthplace story were true Obama’s original birth certificate (Nordyke type) is already in the archive, is it not?
    .
    sarcasm goes over the head of lord birtherdom!

  17. avatar
    G April 9, 2011 at 8:09 pm #

    nc1: Why would they need to manufacture a new long form document? If the official birthplace story were true Obama’s original birth certificate (Nordyke type) is already in the archive, is it not?

    For the record, I disagree with Joey too, but for a completely different reason. All this talk of “long forms” is completely irrelevant.

    All that matters and all that any candidacy law can legally require is that an official state form be produced that adheres to providing the minimum required fields defined at the federal level for birth certificates.

    The official form for the state of HI has been the COLB for the past decade. That form provides all the required info. By FFAC, no state can make laws that would not accept the HI COLB. No other form is necessary and any need or talk of “long forms” is just a red-herring argument that is completely meaningless and irrelevant to the bottom line issue.

  18. avatar
    Joey April 9, 2011 at 8:15 pm #

    nc1: Why would they need to manufacture a new long form document? If the official birthplace story were true Obama’s original birth certificate (Nordyke type) is already in the archive, is it not?

    It’s looking like different states will be requiring different pieces of information to be on a “long form” birth certificate in order to qualify for a state’s ballot. That will require states to alter some of their original documents in order to be in compliance with various states’ new ballot eligibility laws.
    Not every potential president candidate (of any party or independent) will have a “Nordyke” style birth record conveniently handy. Some will be needing a new document printed up to verify the original data.
    As has been pointed out here before, Dwight Eisenhower received his first ever birth certificate when he was 62 years old due to being an unrecorded home birth.
    Original documents get lost; they age to unreadability, and they get destroyed in home fires, et cetera.
    There may even be states who have destroyed the original documents when they digitized their data. Hawaii is not one of those, but there well may be others.
    All that being said, my bet is that a certified copy of a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth will ulitimately suffice after court challenges before the 2012 presidential election. There is no additional information on a “long form” that is constitutionally relevant to Article II, Section 1 eligibililty. All you need from a birth document is place of birth and date of birth confirmed.

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 9, 2011 at 8:36 pm #

    katahdin: gorefan:
    Gail Collins gets a rise out of Trump

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/09/opinion/09collins.html?src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/opinion/lweb08trump.html?src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

    It’s interesting that he attacks the writing talent of Gail Collins, but the letter attacking her is written at about an 8th grade level.

    I think FactCheck.org pretty much demolished this Trump letter in its article today, Donald, Your Fired!

  20. avatar
    nc1 April 9, 2011 at 9:58 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I think FactCheck.org pretty much demolished this Trump letter in its article today, Donald, Your Fired!

    FactCheck ignores the proper verification of COLB document.

    Call me when they respond to two questions I submitted on their web site:
    Have they verified that Hawaii DoH issued a copy of birth certificate to Obama on June 6, 2007?

    Have they verified that registration number 10641 belongs to Obama – they could ask for birth index data using Obama’s name and that registration number.

    We also know that images shown on their web site were taken at different times of the day (one was taken at nighttime) yet the image data shows less than two minutes difference – how do they explain that discrepancy?

  21. avatar
    dunstvangeet April 9, 2011 at 10:15 pm #

    nc1, you do realize that the COLB, as it is now, with no more “verification” would be accepted into any court of law in the nation, don’t you? Read FRE 902(1). The seal and the signature on the back is what authenticates the COLB. Unless you have specific evidence that it was forged (and no, “but his number is out of chronological sequence” is not specific evidence that it was forged), you will get absolutely nowhere.

    As far as your supposed “time” argument, it’s easy. Internal Lighting.

  22. avatar
    Bovril April 9, 2011 at 10:29 pm #

    Nancy, just what PRECISELY would satisfy you as to the President passing Constitutional muster..?

    Exactly, precisely, articulated.

    Forget the rest of your nonsensical cack, what is it that will be required to make you shut up and sod off?

  23. avatar
    richCares April 10, 2011 at 12:28 am #

    Obama has to be born elswhere, how else can he the usrper, the commie, the muslim, though it’s a very silly position that he was born elsewere, nc1 has to believe it, her hate won’t allow facts in(or is it beleave)

  24. avatar
    Suranis April 10, 2011 at 1:40 am #

    nc1: We also know that images shown on their web site were taken at different times of the day (one was taken at nighttime) yet the image data shows less than two minutes difference – how do they explain that discrepancy?

    I’ve already explained that to you, and you ignored my explanation and are still paddling your nonsense. Shutter speeds and they turned off the light in that office. If you put that evidence in court it would be demolished.

    Ignorance is no excuse if its willful.

  25. avatar
    gorefan April 10, 2011 at 3:04 am #

    nc1: We also know that images shown on their web site were taken at different times of the day (one was taken at nighttime) yet the image data shows less than two minutes difference – how do they explain that discrepancy?

    No you are wrong again, one was taken with the blinds open and one was taken with the blinds closed.

  26. avatar
    nc1 April 10, 2011 at 12:14 pm #

    gorefan: No you are wrong again, one was taken with the blinds open and one was taken with the blinds closed.

    Had blinds been closed it would not be possible to see window reflections of indoor lights. The fact that we can see those reflections proves that blinds were not closed.

    It is painfully obvious that it was a night time outside when the picture was taken.

  27. avatar
    Suranis April 10, 2011 at 12:28 pm #

    nc1: Had blinds been closed it would not be possible to see window reflections of indoor lights.The fact that we can see those reflections proves that blinds were not closed.

    It is painfully obvious that it was a night time outside when the picture was taken.

    WRONG!

    All that would matter is the (1)opacity of the glass on the outside window (2) the opacity of the class in the office they were taking the picture (3) the amount of light reflecting off the Birth certificate as opposed to the light that was coming in from outside the office.

    For (1) you have to remember that lights alwasy reflect off glass, you just normally dont see them becasue the light coming in drowns out the light from the glass. If the window is darkened (not unusual in office buildings as it makes the inside cooler) you will see the reflections of the lights just fine.

    for (2) you will remember that Any opacity in the glass will darken whats coming in

    And for (3) if the camera was focusing on the bright light off the BC it would reduce the shutter speed of the camera. That makes EVERYTHING darker, and the computer in the camera will adjust shutter speed to the brightest thing it can see, in this case the illuminated BC. So it will adjust to make that tolerable and everything else will fade into blackness.

    This means that if the BC is brighter than daylight daylight will fade into blackness.

    Seriously why the hell would they bother running back at night to shoot one unremarkable picture of the BC. when they already had full shots of it?They bulled the blinds and shone a light on it to show there was no plastic film on the BC. End of conspiracy.

  28. avatar
    Majority Will April 10, 2011 at 12:55 pm #

    Suranis: WRONG!

    All that would matter is the (1)opacity of the glass on the outside window (2) the opacity of the class in the office they were taking the picture (3) the amount of light reflecting off the Birth certificate as opposed to the light that was coming in from outside the office.

    For (1) you have to remember that lights alwasy reflect off glass, you just normally dont see them becasue the light coming in drowns out the light from the glass. If the window is darkened (not unusual in office buildings as it makes the inside cooler) you will see the reflections of the lights just fine.

    for (2) you will remember that Any opacity in the glass will darken whats coming in

    And for (3) if the camera was focusing on the bright light off the BC it would reduce the shutter speed of the camera. That makes EVERYTHING darker, and the computer in the camera will adjust shutter speed to the brightest thing it can see, in this case the illuminated BC. So it will adjust to make that tolerable and everything else will fade into blackness.

    This means that if the BC is brighter than daylight daylight will fade into blackness.

    Seriously why the hell would they bother running back at night to shoot one unremarkable picture of the BC. when they already had full shots of it?They bulled the blinds and shone a light on it to show there was no plastic film on the BC. End of conspiracy.

    YHBT.

  29. avatar
    nc1 April 10, 2011 at 12:59 pm #

    Suranis: WRONG!

    All that would matter is the (1)opacity of the glass on the outside window (2) the opacity of the class in the office they were taking the picture (3) the amount of light reflecting off the Birth certificate as opposed to the light that was coming in from outside the office.

    For (1) you have to remember that lights alwasy reflect off glass, you just normally dont see them becasue the light coming in drowns out the light from the glass. If the window is darkened (not unusual in office buildings as it makes the inside cooler) you will see the reflections of the lights just fine.

    for (2) you will remember that Any opacity in the glass will darken whats coming in

    And for (3) if the camera was focusing on the bright light off the BC it would reduce the shutter speed of the camera. That makes EVERYTHING darker, and the computer in the camera will adjust shutter speed to the brightest thing it can see, in this case the illuminated BC. So it will adjust to make that tolerable and everything else will fade into blackness.

    This means that if the BC is brighter than daylight daylight will fade into blackness.

    Seriously why the hell would they bother running back at night to shoot one unremarkable picture of the BC. when they already had full shots of it?They bulled the blinds and shone a light on it to show there was no plastic film on the BC. End of conspiracy.

    1. In your previous post you claimed that they turned off the light in the office – however, multiple lights are visible in the picture #3. Remember, you are not talking to blind people.

    2. “daylight will fade into blackness”

    Perfect description of the process happening in you head.

  30. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 10, 2011 at 1:27 pm #

    nancy, nothing you’re arguing means anything.

  31. avatar
    Suranis April 10, 2011 at 1:57 pm #

    nc1: 1. In your previous post you claimed that they turned off the light in the office – however, multiple lights are visible in the picture #3.Remember, you are not talking to blind people.

    2.“daylight will fade into blackness”

    Perfect description of the process happening in you head.

    Yes, they did turn off the light, in the office. The lights in the offices outside the room through the window remained on.

    And since you can barely see the lights and the room outside even though there are clearly people working, that means the entire picture was darkened and the light coming from outside was darker than the light coming off the paper. Unless you are saying people were working in the dark, with light reflecting off the window, To be honest though I thought that was a corridor leaving the room when I saw it.

    I know Polarik wants to remove this picture in particular as it blows his whole plastic film theory out of the water, but its genuine.

    Oh and you can see the seal in the shadow when you look at it full size so that’s there too

  32. avatar
    Joey April 10, 2011 at 2:05 pm #

    BIG NEWS:
    Dr. Chiyome Fukino speaks and puts birthers in their place!
    She’ll be attacked and ridiculed but at least she’s on the record, again, and again, and again.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42519951

  33. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 10, 2011 at 3:12 pm #

    Joey:
    BIG NEWS:
    Dr. Chiyome Fukino speaks and puts birthers in their place!
    She’ll be attacked and ridiculed but at least she’s on the record, again, and again, and again.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42519951

    Any comment nc1? Dr. Fukino confirmed that a copy of the COLB was released to the Obama campaign in 2007 and that the ‘written down’ thing has a doctor’s name on it. This once again proves that you were either lying or ignorant…

  34. avatar
    nc1 April 10, 2011 at 5:11 pm #

    Slartibartfast: Any comment nc1?Dr. Fukino confirmed that a copy of the COLB was released to the Obama campaign in 2007 and that the written down’ thing has a doctor’s name on it.This once again proves that you were either lying or ignorant…

    Dr Fukino confirmed that COLB was the standard form that would be sent upon request for copy of birth certificate.

    She was not quoted as confirming that a copy was actually sent to Obama. That is what Obama campaign claims.

    It would be interesting to find out the name of the doctor listed in the official birth certificate and the date when the birth was registered.

    Abercrombie’s written down comment is inconsistent with the official birthplace story – Kapiolani Hospital. There is a good possibility that document Dr. Fukino described is a home birth registration. That would make the registration number more plausible when compared to Nordyke numbers.

    The question remains – why would they need to claim the Kapiolani as birthplace? Something does not add up.

  35. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 10, 2011 at 5:20 pm #

    nc1:

    [quixotic attempt to parse something so as to invert the meaning deleted]

    Something does not add up.

    As long as we assume that the birthers are dishonest bigots trying to lynch the first black president everything adds up perfectly…

  36. avatar
    Sef April 10, 2011 at 5:37 pm #

    nc1: There is a good possibility that document Dr. Fukino described is a home birth registration.

    All possibilities are “good”. Some are less good than others. Some are even infinitesimal.

  37. avatar
    Bovril April 10, 2011 at 7:03 pm #

    Still waiting for a response Nancy…

    Nancy, just what PRECISELY would satisfy you as to the President passing Constitutional muster..?

    Exactly, precisely, articulated.

    Forget the rest of your nonsensical cack, what is it that will be required to make you shut up and sod off?

  38. avatar
    Keith April 10, 2011 at 9:06 pm #

    nc1: She was not quoted as confirming that a copy was actually sent to Obama.

    So are you alleging that it was actually sent to Tony Blair who then passed it on to the Obama Campaign’s webmaster?

  39. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 12:02 am #

    nc1: She was not quoted as confirming that a copy was actually sent to Obama. That is what Obama campaign claims.

    You are in hopeless denial. Maybe you skipped over this from the article:

    Her second point — one she made repeatedly in the interview — is that the shorter, computer generated “certification of live birth” that was obtained by the Obama campaign in 2007 and has since been publicly released is the standard document that anybody requesting their birth certificate from the state of Hawaii would receive from the health department.

    The document was distributed to the Obama campaign in 2007 after Obama, at the request of a campaign official, personally signed a Hawaii birth certificate request form downloaded on the Internet , according to a former campaign official who asked for anonymity. (Obama was “testy” when asked to sign the form but did so anyway to put the issue to rest, the former campaign official said. The White House has dismissed all questions about the president’s birth as “fictional nonsense.”)

    The certification that the campaign received back —which shows that Obama was born in Honolulu at 7:24 p.m. on Aug. 4, 1961 — was based on the content of the original document in state files, Fukino said.

    “What he got, everybody got,” said Fukino. “He put out exactly what everybody gets when they ask for a birth certificate.”

    nc1: It would be interesting to find out the name of the doctor listed in the official birth certificate and the date when the birth was registered.

    While it might be “interesting”, there is absolutely NO reason that you are entitled to that information. Nor is it relevant to the only thing that matters in terms of NBC – born in HONOLULU, HI and confirmed that he’s over 35, which the COLB is quite clear proof of by telling us that he was born on August 4, 1961 and even gives us the exact time: 7:24pm. In fact, that is the ONLY date/time info that is relevant.

    nc1: Abercrombie’s written down comment is inconsistent with the official birthplace story – Kapiolani Hospital. There is a good possibility that document Dr. Fukino described is a home birth registration. That would make the registration number more plausible when compared to Nordyke numbers.

    No it isn’t. You keep repeating these various lies, but all your explanations have been nonsense and don’t match up with any of Abercrombie’s actual statements on the matter, nor provide any credible connection to home birth registration, nor are they plausible scenarios in comparing the Nordyke numbers. You are simply wrong and delusional. Please also explain why a “home birth” would be listed so specifically as happening at 7:24 pm. I’d expect to see hospitals record the actual minute. Face it, no matter what BS you try twisting and spewing, none of it adds up to supporting your made-up “home birth scenario” nor does any of the evidence contradict a hospital birth. All of which is a meaningless red-herring argument when it comes down to it, as there is NO requirement for someone to be born in a hospital to be NBC anways. So as always, your titlting at windmills. And irrelevant ones at that.

    nc1: The question remains – why would they need to claim the Kapiolani as birthplace? Something does not add up.

    The only thing that doesn’t add up is how your brain functions. You seem to see conspiracies and gaps admidst the merely mundane and ordinary.

  40. avatar
    Joey April 11, 2011 at 12:44 am #

    G: You are in hopeless denial.Maybe you skipped over this from the article:

    While it might be “interesting”, there is absolutely NO reason that you are entitled to that information.Nor is it relevant to the only thing that matters in terms of NBC – born in HONOLULU, HI and confirmed that he’s over 35, which the COLB is quite clear proof of by telling us that he was born on August 4, 1961 and even gives us the exact time: 7:24pm.In fact, that is the ONLY date/time info that is relevant.

    No it isn’t.You keep repeating these various lies, but all your explanations have been nonsense and don’t match up with any of Abercrombie’s actual statements on the matter, nor provide any credible connection to home birth registration, nor are they plausible scenarios in comparing the Nordyke numbers.You are simply wrong and delusional.Please also explain why a “home birth” would be listed so specifically as happening at 7:24 pm.I’d expect to see hospitals record the actual minute.Face it, no matter what BS you try twisting and spewing, none of it adds up to supporting your made-up “home birth scenario” nor does any of the evidence contradict a hospital birth.All of which is a meaningless red-herring argument when it comes down to it, as there is NO requirement for someone to be born in a hospital to be NBC anways.So as always, your titlting at windmills.And irrelevant ones at that.

    The only thing that doesn’t add up is how your brain functions.You seem to see conspiracies and gaps admidst the merely mundane and ordinary.

    And why would a REPUBLICAN Governor who campaigned for John McCain and delivered one of Sarah Palin’s endorsement speeches at the Republican National Convention name KAPI’OLANI Hospital in Honolulu, Hawai’i as Barack Hussein Obama II’s birthplace if that wasn’t what was listed on the birth certificate? The Governor (who plans to run for the US Senate) knew that Obama’s birth records might be released under a subpoena at some point in time, or Obama might choose to release his copy of his original birth certificate. Why would Governor Lingle risk ruining her future political career as a Republican to benefit a liberal Democrat? It just doesn’t make sense.

  41. avatar
    nc1 April 11, 2011 at 12:52 am #

    G: You are in hopeless denial.Maybe you skipped over this from the article:

    While it might be “interesting”, there is absolutely NO reason that you are entitled to that information.Nor is it relevant to the only thing that matters in terms of NBC – born in HONOLULU, HI and confirmed that he’s over 35, which the COLB is quite clear proof of by telling us that he was born on August 4, 1961 and even gives us the exact time: 7:24pm.In fact, that is the ONLY date/time info that is relevant.

    No it isn’t.You keep repeating these various lies, but all your explanations have been nonsense and don’t match up with any of Abercrombie’s actual statements on the matter, nor provide any credible connection to home birth registration, nor are they plausible scenarios in comparing the Nordyke numbers.You are simply wrong and delusional.Please also explain why a “home birth” would be listed so specifically as happening at 7:24 pm.I’d expect to see hospitals record the actual minute.Face it, no matter what BS you try twisting and spewing, none of it adds up to supporting your made-up “home birth scenario” nor does any of the evidence contradict a hospital birth.All of which is a meaningless red-herring argument when it comes down to it, as there is NO requirement for someone to be born in a hospital to be NBC anways.So as always, your titlting at windmills.And irrelevant ones at that.

    The only thing that doesn’t add up is how your brain functions.You seem to see conspiracies and gaps admidst the merely mundane and ordinary.

    =============================================================
    You missed the part of the article where they claim that Obama’s campaign was concerned about citizenship issue and Obama being testy about signing the form.

    Isikoff got the timeline wrong – none of those things happened in 2007. That scenario would be plausible in Spring 2008.

    However the date on the COLB says June 6, 2007. If Obama obtained the COLB from Hawaii DoH in 2007 why would he need a copy in 2008, only to present the version from 2007 to the public.

    You see, lies told in Isikoff’s article do not add up.

  42. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 11, 2011 at 12:55 am #

    nc1: You see, lies told in Isikoff’s article do not add up.

    Nor do the lies you’ve told nc1 – and they are far more serious…

  43. avatar
    nc1 April 11, 2011 at 1:07 am #

    Joey: And why would a REPUBLICAN Governor who campaigned for John McCain and delivered one of Sarah Palin’s endorsement speeches at the Republican National Convention name KAPI’OLANI Hospital in Honolulu, Hawai’i as Barack Hussein Obama II’s birthplace if that wasn’t what was listed on the birth certificate? The Governor (who plans to run for the US Senate) knew that Obama’s birth records might be released under a subpoena at some point in time, or Obama might choose to release his copy of his original birth certificate. Why would Governor Lingle risk ruining her future political career as a Republican to benefit a liberal Democrat? It just doesn’t make sense.

    It would be nice if we had a few good investigative journalists left in this country – prehaps one of them would ask former gov. Lingle about her statements.

    It is easy to prove that Lingle’s statement about DoH issuing press-release confirming Obama’s birth in the Kapiolani hospital is false.

    Dr. Fukino never mentioned it. Even in the latest interview she did not say it.
    How could she contradict Abercrombie?

  44. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 1:21 am #

    Joey: And why would a REPUBLICAN Governor who campaigned for John McCain and delivered one of Sarah Palin’s endorsement speeches at the Republican National Convention name KAPI’OLANI Hospital in Honolulu, Hawai’i as Barack Hussein Obama II’s birthplace if that wasn’t what was listed on the birth certificate? The Governor (who plans to run for the US Senate) knew that Obama’s birth records might be released under a subpoena at some point in time, or Obama might choose to release his copy of his original birth certificate. Why would Governor Lingle risk ruining her future political career as a Republican to benefit a liberal Democrat? It just doesn’t make sense.

    Exactly!

    In fact, Fukino pretty much said exactly the same thing in that recent interview:

    “It is real, and no amount of saying it is not, is going to change that,” Fukino said. Moreover, she added, her boss at the time, Lingle — who was backing John McCain for president — would presumably have to be in on any cover up since Fukino made her public comment at the governor’s office’s request. “Why would a Republican governor — who was stumping for the other guy — hold out on a big secret?” she asked.

  45. avatar
    gorefan April 11, 2011 at 1:24 am #

    nc1: It is easy to prove that Lingle’s statement about DoH issuing press-release confirming Obama’s birth in the Kapiolani hospital is false.

    It must be terrible to have your world slowly collapsing on you. Are you starting to realize that the President is likely to be re-elected?

    Think about that for a second.

    According to birther polls most Americans believe the President was not born in the US. If he gets re-elected it will mean that voters didn’t care. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  46. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 1:45 am #

    nc1: You missed the part of the article where they claim that Obama’s campaign was concerned about citizenship issue and Obama being testy about signing the form.

    1. There is NO citizenship issue mentioned in the article. You are making that up and seeing things that aren’t stated.
    2. I didn’t MISS anything of what you are talking about. ALL of what you are trying to get at is contained within the section I quoted. The only difference is you are focusing on the words that I didn’t bold. But there are still there. You must have reading comprehension problems. So this time, I’ll paste the EXACT same section and bold the words you are now focusing on instead:

    The document was distributed to the Obama campaign in 2007 after Obama, at the request of a campaign official, personally signed a Hawaii birth certificate request form downloaded on the Internet, according to a former campaign official who asked for anonymity. (Obama was “testy” when asked to sign the form but did so anyway to put the issue to rest, the former campaign official said. The White House has dismissed all questions about the president’s birth as “fictional nonsense.”)

    There. That is the ONLY reference to “testy” in the article and there is NO reference at all to citizenship. Your problem with the rest again is reading comprehension here…as evident by the rest of your statement:

    nc1:
    Isikoff got the timeline wrong – none of those things happened in 2007. That scenario would be plausible in Spring 2008.However the date on the COLB says June 6, 2007. If Obama obtained the COLB from Hawaii DoH in 2007 why would he need a copy in 2008, only to present the version from 2007 to the public.You see, lies told in Isikoff’s article do not add up.

    *sigh* Your paranoid delusional mind and poor reading comprehension ability makes you see “lies” where there are none.

    Although you can rightly quibble that Isikoff could have written his two sentences within the ellipses (what I bolded above) in a much better and clearer fashion to show that they are two completely independent points which address issues at separate points in the timeline of events, you cannot call what he said a lie.

    You *almost* grasped this concept… as you were starting to go down the right path to realize that the FIRST sentence deals with the COLB requested in 2007 and that the SECOND one DOES NOT.

    The second sentence skips forward in time to make a general statement holistically covering the White House’s overall response to birther questions it has been faced with. OBVIOUSLY Obama wasn’t in the White House until late January 2009… So this sentence is dealing with events that occurred AFTER he became President and are not otherwise connected at all to his campaign’s initial request of the COLB in 2007.

    So, although I agree it was a poor concatenation of two separate points by placing those two sentences next to each other, any rational thinking person with basic reading comprehension should be able to figure that out on their own as soon as they read it.

    Where you come up with a copy in 2008…well that is something you’ve come up with on your own and there is NOTHING in the article referencing one.

    As usual, you are extremely confused and don’t know what you’re talking about.

    I believe you mean that in 2008, he scanned and posted his 2007 COLB to the internet and provided it to FactCheck to physically examine.

    There is NO 2008 copy of his BC. That is merely when the 2007 one was made public.

  47. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 1:53 am #

    nc1: It would be nice if we had a few good investigative journalists left in this country – prehaps one of them would ask former gov. Lingle about her statements.

    We DO have investigative journalists. Hence the interview with Lingle we’ve been discussing today. You just don’t happen to like hearing the truth of what she has to say. Hence all the other articles debunking all the birther nonsense that have been reported on. Hence the detailed and well cited info at Snopes & FactCheck & PolitiFact.

    nc1:
    It is easy to prove that Lingle’s statement about DoH issuing press-release confirming Obama’s birth in the Kapiolani hospital is false.

    Really? False???? So far you’ve utterly FAILED to prove any of that. All you’ve shown is that your reading comprehension is poor and that your take on things is completely warped and detached from this reality.

    nc1:
    Dr. Fukino never mentioned it. Even in the latest interview she did not say it.
    How could she contradict Abercrombie

    As usual, you make no sense here. But then again, you have some weird interpretation of statements and events that doesn’t match up with the real record at all.

  48. avatar
    nc1 April 11, 2011 at 3:01 am #

    gorefan: It must be terrible to have your world slowly collapsing on you.Are you starting to realize that the President is likely to be re-elected?

    Think about that for a second.

    According to birther polls most Americans believe the President was not born in the US.If he gets re-elected it will mean that voters didn’t care. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Please show me the link to the DoH press-release stating that Obama was born in the Kapiolani Hospital.

  49. avatar
    nc1 April 11, 2011 at 3:28 am #

    G: 1.There is NO citizenship issue mentioned in the article.You are making that up and seeing things that aren’t stated.
    2.I didn’t MISS anything of what you are talking about.ALL of what you are trying to get at is contained within the section I quoted.The only difference is you are focusing on the words that I didn’t bold.But there are still there.You must have reading comprehension problems.So this time, I’ll paste the EXACT same section and bold the words you are now focusing on instead:

    There.That is the ONLY reference to “testy” in the article and there is NO reference at all to citizenship.Your problem with the rest again is reading comprehension here…as evident by the rest of your statement:

    *sigh*Your paranoid delusional mind and poor reading comprehension ability makes you see “lies” where there are none.

    Although you can rightly quibble that Isikoff could have written his two sentences within the ellipses (what I bolded above) in a much better and clearer fashion to show that they are two completely independent points which address issues at separate points in the timeline of events, you cannot call what he said a lie.

    You *almost* grasped this concept… as you were starting to go down the right path to realize that the FIRST sentence deals with the COLB requested in 2007 and that the SECOND one DOES NOT.

    The second sentence skips forward in time to make a general statement holistically covering the White House’s overall response to birther questions it has been faced with.OBVIOUSLY Obama wasn’t in the White House until late January 2009… So this sentence is dealing with events that occurred AFTER he became President and are not otherwise connected at all to his campaign’s initial request of the COLB in 2007.

    So, although I agree it was a poor concatenation of two separate points by placing those two sentences next to each other, any rational thinking person with basic reading comprehension should be able to figure that out on their own as soon as they read it.

    Where you come up with a copy in 2008…well that is something you’ve come up with on your own and there is NOTHING in the article referencing one.

    As usual, you are extremely confused and don’t know what you’re talking about.

    I believe you mean that in 2008, he scanned and posted his 2007 COLB to the internet and provided it to FactCheck to physically examine.

    There is NO 2008 copy of his BC.That is merely when the 2007 one was made public.

    =============================================================
    1. You are correct I have incorrectly quoted the article and mentioned citizenship instead of birthplace.

    However the point still stands – in 2007 there was neither birthplace nor citizenship issue that Obama’s campaign had to “put to rest”.

    Therefore, Isikoff’s quote of unknown campaign official could not talk about request for COLB in 2007 but the one which could have been made in 2008 when questions started to surface.

    If there was no request for COLB in 2008 than the unknown official lied to Isikoff about circumstances in 2007 that preceeded the request for COLB.

    Either way you slice it, the statement in the article is false.

    To avoid misunderstanding – my comment is about the following excerpt from the article:
    “The document was distributed to the Obama campaign in 2007 after Obama, at the request of a campaign official, personally signed a Hawaii birth certificate request form downloaded on the Internet, according to a former campaign official who asked for anonymity. (Obama was “testy” when asked to sign the form but did so anyway to put the issue to rest, the former campaign official said. “

  50. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 11, 2011 at 3:47 am #

    nc1: =============================================================
    [worthless crap deleted]

    After all of the lies you’ve told here, why should anyone even bother responding to you?

  51. avatar
    Expelliarmus April 11, 2011 at 4:23 am #

    nc1: in 2007 there was neither birthplace nor citizenship issue that Obama’s campaign had to “put to rest”.

    Obama announced his candidacy for President on February 10, 2007.

    In 2007 his campaign staff knew that (a) only a natural born citizen over the age of 35 can be President, and (b) that Obama would have to be on the ballot in multiple state primaries if he wanted to secure the nomination. Therefore, it made sense to gather whatever documentation might be needed to establish Obama’s qualifications to run.

    They were not waiting for someone to ask– they were simply getting the information they would need in case it was needed at any point.

  52. avatar
    The Magic M April 11, 2011 at 4:28 am #

    > to put the issue to rest

    Yes, the middle name issue, not the birfer issue.

  53. avatar
    The Magic M April 11, 2011 at 4:37 am #

    > Please show me the link to the DoH press-release stating that Obama was born in the Kapiolani Hospital.

    Keep your goalposts steady, dude! The DoH stated he was born in Hawaii. It doesn’t matter legally if he was born in Kapiolani or not.
    Next you’re claiming the DoH didn’t say which wing of Kapiolani he was born in and what colour the walls had.

    > All of which is a meaningless red-herring argument when it comes down to it, as there is NO requirement for someone to be born in a hospital to be NBC anways.

    Yes, but you have to understand how the birfer mind works.
    First, they believe that if they can prove a home birth, they have “caught Obama lying” which, in their parallel universe, would be enough to make him ineligible (ironic, huh? A politician lying…).
    Second, they are convinced that any presidential candidate must prove beyond reasonable doubt, maybe even beyond any illogical doubt, to be an NBC. A home birth would not pass that extreme test as it relies on the testimony of people who could simply be lying.

    I’m just amazed no birfer has come up with “the CIA flew baby Obama from Mombasa to Hawaii in one of their stealth planes” yet…

  54. avatar
    obsolete April 11, 2011 at 4:49 am #

    Slartibartfast: After all of the lies you’ve told here, why should anyone even bother responding to you?

    Dr. Fukino already responded today to nc1, and now nc1 haz a sad.

  55. avatar
    Expelliarmus April 11, 2011 at 5:33 am #

    The Magic M: Next you’re claiming the DoH didn’t say which wing of Kapiolani he was born in and what colour the walls had.

    Well, Trump wants to know the room number and the amount of the bill.

  56. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) April 11, 2011 at 11:29 am #

    The Magic M: > Please show me the link to the DoH press-release stating that Obama was born in the Kapiolani Hospital.Keep your goalposts steady, dude! The DoH stated he was born in Hawaii. It doesn’t matter legally if he was born in Kapiolani or not.Next you’re claiming the DoH didn’t say which wing of Kapiolani he was born in and what colour the walls had.> All of which is a meaningless red-herring argument when it comes down to it, as there is NO requirement for someone to be born in a hospital to be NBC anways.Yes, but you have to understand how the birfer mind works.First, they believe that if they can prove a home birth, they have “caught Obama lying” which, in their parallel universe, would be enough to make him ineligible (ironic, huh? A politician lying…).Second, they are convinced that any presidential candidate must prove beyond reasonable doubt, maybe even beyond any illogical doubt, to be an NBC. A home birth would not pass that extreme test as it relies on the testimony of people who could simply be lying.I’m just amazed no birfer has come up with “the CIA flew baby Obama from Mombasa to Hawaii in one of their stealth planes” yet…

    Dont forget Magic M at the same time they were enlisting baby Obama as an operative into the CIA so when he reached the age of 6 he could be an undercover agent in Indonesia!!

  57. avatar
    Majority Will April 11, 2011 at 11:51 am #

    The Magic M: I’m just amazed no birfer has come up with “the CIA flew baby Obama from Mombasa to Hawaii in one of their stealth planes” yet…

    Wasn’t there a ridiculous lie about someone seeing the Dunhams in the middle of the night on a beach in Hawaii signaling a ship offshore and then smuggling in baby Barack and parents? A lonely idiot birther who loved Ludlum and le Carré perhaps.

  58. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 12:50 pm #

    nc1: 1. You are correct I have incorrectly quoted the article and mentioned citizenship instead of birthplace.
    However the point still stands – in 2007 there was neither birthplace nor citizenship issue that Obama’s campaign had to “put to rest”.

    As far as we know, that is correct. I actually agree with that portion of your statement, with the caveat of “as far as we know”.

    nc1:
    Therefore, Isikoff’s quote of unknown campaign official could not talk about request for COLB in 2007 but the one which could have been made in 2008 when questions started to surface.

    Now, here is where your logic breaks down. You’ve made a leap unsupported by the article or the information known.

    The referenced campaign official’s quote appears to reference the EVENT of requesting the COLB in 2007. Therefore, that campaign official must be someone familiar with the circumstances of that EVENT, which took place in 2007. There is NO reference to 2008 whatsoever at all. You are simply drawing imaginary connections and conclusions that don’t exist.

    nc1:
    If there was no request for COLB in 2008 than the unknown official lied to Isikoff about circumstances in 2007 that preceeded the request for COLB.
    Either way you slice it, the statement in the article is false.

    FAIL. You start with making both a false premise and false conclusion and then get upset because the information doesn’t match up. The failure on this is utterly on your lack of reading comprehension.

    nc1:
    To avoid misunderstanding – my comment is about the following excerpt from the article:
    “The document was distributed to the Obama campaign in 2007 after Obama, at the request of a campaign official, personally signed a Hawaii birth certificate request form downloaded on the Internet, according to a former campaign official who asked for anonymity. (Obama was “testy” when asked to sign the form but did so anyway to put the issue to rest, the former campaign official said.

    Well, thank you for providing the full context of the quote you are referencing.

    I’ve bolded the issue at hand about the “testy” comment, as that seems to be the latest hang-up you birthers are worked up over.

    There is simply NO conclusion you can draw for WHY Obama is described as “testy” by this individual in this situation, as NO associated information has been provided to explain the reference to what the “issue” was that needed to be put to rest.

    You are merely trying to fill the void with your own biased speculation and creating connections that simply aren’t there.

    The only thing the reference tells us is that the campaign official considered Obama to be “testy” when asked to sign the form.

    The “issue” could merely be the very act of having to request the documents in the first place. In fact, that is the only event directly linked to the comment reference, so we have no other direct correlation to that 2007 request event in order to speculate further on “why” at this point.

    As far as we know, the weird rumors about his middle name bubbled up into the public domain in early 2008 – well after the 2007 COLB was requested and obtained and BEFORE his campaign scanned and published that document on the internet.

    What personal issues go on behind the scenes of a campaign when it starts up and what internal info they are working off of, we simply don’t know in this situation. It could be anything from Obama having a bad day at the time of the request to simply not agreeing to the need for the campaign to spend money and time requesting new BCs in the first place to some sort of other personal animus of why such a request either bothered or offended him. We simply don’t know and so such speculation is meaningless. Regardless of why, someone being “testy” with a request is completely irrelevant to the NBC issue and the data that the COLB provides. Again, you focus on meaningless “side-show distraction” issues, because there is no valid argument behind Birtherism.

    My wife spent over 13 years earlier in her career working at several BMVs here in Ohio, most of that time as the Asst. Manager. Hearing this story, she commented that it reminded her of all the customers that the BMV office got in on a daily basis and said she’d describe the majority of them as much worse than “testy” – they simply didn’t want to be there. They came in with a negative attitude about the whole process, from providing their information and supporting docs, to taking the eye test, to complaining about the cost (especially the Registrar’s fee). That didn’t mean they were lying or hiding anything – most of the requests are simple license renewals. So there was no great conspiracy or anything suspicious going on…these people simply didn’t like having to do it in the first place.

  59. avatar
    Joey April 11, 2011 at 1:07 pm #

    Expelliarmus: Obama announced his candidacy for President on February 10, 2007.

    In 2007 his campaign staff knew that (a) only a natural born citizen over the age of 35 can be President, and (b) that Obama would have to be on the ballot in multiple state primaries if he wanted to secure the nomination.Therefore, it made sense to gather whatever documentation might be needed to establish Obama’s qualifications to run.

    They were not waiting for someone to ask– they were simply getting the information they would need in case it was needed at any point.

    There is a birther story that Obama was confronted by Alan Keyes about not being a natural born citizen during the Illinois Obama-Keyes US Senate debates of 2004. Some birthers believe that Obama acknowledged that he was not a natural born citizen.
    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-bloggers/2141519/posts

  60. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 1:14 pm #

    Joey: There is a birther story that Obama was confronted by Alan Keyes about not being a natural born citizen during the Illinois Obama-Keyes US Senate debates of 2004. Some birthers believe that Obama acknowledged that he was not a natural born citizen.
    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-bloggers/2141519/posts

    Which is a complete work of fiction. About as credible as the “Whitey Tape”.

    Both of these made up stories claim events that are caught on tape… yet somehow, there is no tape nor transcript nor report that supports their wild tales.

    What you’re dealing with here is classic “ret-conning” of a myth. In order to shore up their newly created fairly tales, they try to re-write history to add “new” events that somehow occurred in the past, in order to give the appearance that their concerns or their movement has somehow been around longer than it really was…

  61. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 11, 2011 at 1:22 pm #

    G: Which is a complete work of fiction.About as credible as the “Whitey Tape”.

    Both of these made up stories claim events that are caught on tape… yet somehow, there is no tape nor transcript nor report that supports their wild tales.

    What you’re dealing with here is classic “ret-conning” of a myth.In order to shore up their newly created fairly tales, they try to re-write history to add “new” events that somehow occurred in the past, in order to give the appearance that their concerns or their movement has somehow been around longer than it really was…

    I’ve seen the video of the debate – Keyes accuses President Obama of not being a natural born citizen and President Obama responds that he is not running for president. This is a case of there being no ‘there’ there rather than a ‘phantom’ video episode (it’s hard to keep track, though… ;-)).

  62. avatar
    jamese777 April 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I’ve seen the video of the debate – Keyes accuses President Obama of not being a natural born citizen and President Obama responds that he is not running for president. This is a case of there being no there’ there rather than a phantom’ video episode (it’s hard to keep track, though… ).

    Exactly, and if gives a perfect reason why Obama was “testy” in 2007 about having to get a birth certificate.
    Birthers parsed his words and deliberately misconstrued what he was saying to Keyes but the fact remains that the natural born citizen issue was on the table via Alan Keyes (who is a plaintiff in a 2008 Obama eligibility lawsuit) THREE YEARS before 2007.

  63. avatar
    Sef April 11, 2011 at 3:43 pm #

    Joey: There is a birther story that Obama was confronted by Alan Keyes about not being a natural born citizen during the Illinois Obama-Keyes US Senate debates of 2004. Some birthers believe that Obama acknowledged that he was not a natural born citizen.
    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-bloggers/2141519/posts

    Did Keyes ever express in ’04 why he had doubts about Obama’s NBC status? Not later things when he filed the lawsuit, but originally.

  64. avatar
    Expelliarmus April 11, 2011 at 3:52 pm #

    G: There is simply NO conclusion you can draw for WHY Obama is described as “testy” by this individual in this situation, as NO associated information has been provided to explain the reference to what the “issue” was that needed to be put to rest.

    First of all, I’d note that we are not debating over a direct quote– we are debating over a journalist’s paraphrasing of claimed statement by from an unidentified “anonymous” source. Journalists get things wrong. In fact, in my entire life, I have a hard time remembering any time when I or any of my family or colleagues was interviewed for a print publication when the journalist didn’t get some detail mixed up or wrong in the retelling. So it is quite possible that the unnamed source discussed 2 separate incidents — the obtaining of the certificate in 2007, and it’s release in 2008 …. and the journalist mixed those things up.

    But assuming accuracy in the journalist’s account, the “issue” could merely be the insistence of some campaign member that Obama provide the bc to the campaign. Perhaps someone had requested that he bring the bc in February & he couldn’t locate a copy, & they kept nagging him, he told them to order a new one and then was mildly frustrated at that time that they kept bugging him. Maybe they gave him the form to sign to order the bc at a time when he was busy with something else and he was just “testy” because he was tired or worried about something entirely different. (I’d note that there was a Democratic candidate’s debate in June 2007, so maybe Obama was “testy” because he was focused on debate prep at the time)

    Or maybe it’s the other way around, maybe Obama was “testy” with the staffer for not having taken care of it already — and the thing that irked him was that he (Obama) had asked the staffer to get the certificate back in February and he learned when he was prepping for the debate that it hadn’t been done yet.

    Or maybe he’s just a “testy” guy behind the scenes. (Run an internet search for “Obama testy” – he was “testy” at a news conference in June 2009, he was “testy” with a CNN reporter in March 2009, he was “testy” on Halloween night in 2008, he was “testy” at a health care summit in February 2010.) Maybe journalists just like to use that word when writing about Obama.

  65. avatar
    JoZeppy April 11, 2011 at 3:58 pm #

    Joey: There is a birther story that Obama was confronted by Alan Keyes about not being a natural born citizen during the Illinois Obama-Keyes US Senate debates of 2004. Some birthers believe that Obama acknowledged that he was not a natural born citizen.http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-bloggers/2141519/posts

    Like most things birther, it’s just another story. Don’t you think it odd that despite dragging the President to court asking he prove himself an NBC he never metions it, either in the press or any of his court filings?

  66. avatar
    JoZeppy April 11, 2011 at 4:02 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I’ve seen the video of the debate – Keyes accuses President Obama of not being a natural born citizen and President Obama responds that he is not running for president. This is a case of there being no there’ there rather than a phantom’ video episode (it’s hard to keep track, though… ).

    Actually you may want to re-watch that video….the exchange never occured. The closested there was to the exchange was when Keyes questioned Obama’s spirituality, and Obama responded something on the lines of he’s running for US Senate, not minister to the US.

  67. avatar
    Sef April 11, 2011 at 4:53 pm #

    JoZeppy: Actually you may want to re-watch that video….the exchange never occured.The closested there was to the exchange was when Keyes questioned Obama’s spirituality, and Obama responded something on the lines of he’s running for US Senate, not minister to the US.

    If this exchange never occurred, I withdraw my earlier question.

  68. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) April 11, 2011 at 4:58 pm #

    Oh good god the Alaskan Cow Patty (no that’s not a sexual term) has decided to finally throw herself into the middle of Donald’s stupidity with some of her own.

    Palin was on Justice With Judge Jeanine on Fox News this weekend and had this to say about Donald:

    “Well, I appreciate that the Donald wants to spend his resources getting to the bottom of something that so interests him and many Americans. You know, more power to him. He’s not just throwin’ stones and, um, from the sidelines — he’s diggin’ in there, he’s paying for researchers to find out why President Obama would have spent two million dollars to not show his birth certificate.”

    There’s a clip of this here: http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/sarah-palin-gets-behind-trumps-birth

  69. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 11, 2011 at 5:49 pm #

    JoZeppy: Actually you may want to re-watch that video….the exchange never occured.The closested there was to the exchange was when Keyes questioned Obama’s spirituality, and Obama responded something on the lines of he’s running for US Senate, not minister to the US.

    Well then, I guess it WAS faked video… (as I did see a video of the exchange – unfortunately it was a couple of years ago and I have no idea where I found it…)

  70. avatar
    Stanislaw April 11, 2011 at 6:18 pm #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross):
    Oh good god the Alaskan Cow Patty (no that’s not a sexual term) has decided to finally throw herself into the middle of Donald’s stupidity with some of her own.

    Palin was on Justice With Judge Jeanine on Fox News this weekend and had this to say about Donald:

    “Well, I appreciate that the Donald wants to spend his resources getting to the bottom of something that so interests him and many Americans. You know, more power to him. He’s not just throwin’ stones and, um, from the sidelines — he’s diggin’ in there, he’s paying for researchers to find out why President Obama would have spent two million dollars to not show his birth certificate.”

    There’s a clip of this here: http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/sarah-palin-gets-behind-trumps-birth

    I wouldn’t worry too much about this. If I know Palin, she’ll be walking this one back by later on this evening because she did the exact same thing the last time that she made a birther-friendly comment.

  71. avatar
    JoZeppy April 11, 2011 at 6:34 pm #

    OBAMA: I don’t need Mr. Keyes lecturing me about Christianity. That’s why I have a pastor. That’s why I have my Bible. That’s why I have my own prayer. And I don’t think that any of you are particularly interested in having Mr. Keyes lecture you about your faith.

    What you’re interested in is solving problems like jobs, and health care, and education. I’m not running to be the minister of Illinois. I’m running to be its United States Senator.

    http://www.keyesarchives.com/transcript.php?id=370

  72. avatar
    G April 11, 2011 at 8:40 pm #

    JoZeppy: OBAMA: I don’t need Mr. Keyes lecturing me about Christianity. That’s why I have a pastor. That’s why I have my Bible. That’s why I have my own prayer. And I don’t think that any of you are particularly interested in having Mr. Keyes lecture you about your faith.What you’re interested in is solving problems like jobs, and health care, and education. I’m not running to be the minister of Illinois. I’m running to be its United States Senator.http://www.keyesarchives.com/transcript.php?id=370

    Thank you for finding that and providing the link.

    I’ve heard that claim of the rumored exchange crop up ever so often in the past too. I even tried to look and find it and never could. Probably because I was looking for the claimed “citizenship” exchange…and if that never ever happened at all, no wonder I couldn’t find it! Because of all the misleading hoopla spun out there, I had no idea the actual exchange was about religion. Always good to learn something new!

  73. avatar
    Jowppy April 11, 2011 at 11:57 pm #

    G: Thank you for finding that and providing the link.I’ve heard that claim of the rumored exchange crop up ever so often in the past too. I even tried to look and find it and never could. Probably because I was looking for the claimed “citizenship” exchange…and if that never ever happened at all, no wonder I couldn’t find it! Because of all the misleading hoopla spun out there, I had no idea the actual exchange was about religion. Always good to learn something new!

    I learned about the “minister of Illinois” from another site, so just passing on the info. The great thing is Keyes has the transcripts to all the debates up on his website. So besides making it so much easier to debunk birthers, can a birther really question an Alan Keyes approved transcript?

  74. avatar
    JoZeppy April 11, 2011 at 11:58 pm #

    G: Thank you for finding that and providing the link.I’ve heard that claim of the rumored exchange crop up ever so often in the past too. I even tried to look and find it and never could. Probably because I was looking for the claimed “citizenship” exchange…and if that never ever happened at all, no wonder I couldn’t find it! Because of all the misleading hoopla spun out there, I had no idea the actual exchange was about religion. Always good to learn something new!

    I learned about the “minister of Illinois” from another site, so just passing on the info. The great thing is Keyes has the transcripts to all the debates up on his website. So besides making it so much easier to debunk birthers, can a birther really question an Alan Keyes approved transcript?

  75. avatar
    Shane April 12, 2011 at 8:22 am #

    Most Blacks can’t afford to play golf or stay in his hotels anyway! So go ahead and boycott all you want idiots!!

  76. avatar
    Keith April 12, 2011 at 10:04 am #

    G: Thank you for finding that and providing the link.

    I’ve heard that claim of the rumored exchange crop up ever so often in the past too.I even tried to look and find it and never could.Probably because I was looking for the claimed “citizenship” exchange…and if that never ever happened at all, no wonder I couldn’t find it!Because of all the misleading hoopla spun out there, I had no idea the actual exchange was about religion.Always good to learn something new!

    That reminds me of a similar anecdote:

    Whenever, therefore, preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put them off with a discourse on the Copernican system, on chemical affinities, on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract, depriving their audience of the kind of service for which they are salaried, and giving them, instead of it, what they did not want, or, if wanted, would rather seek from better sources in that particular art or science. (Thomas Jefferson to Peter Wendover, March 13, 1815; unsent letter)

    There is a discussion of this in the article Politics in the Pulpit : What Would Jefferson Do?

    A quote from the article:

    Jefferson’s dislike for politics in the pulpit probably arose from personal experience. During the 1800 presidential election, several clergymen in New England viciously attacked him during church services, branding Jefferson an infidel and an atheist who would, if elected, order all Bibles gathered up and burned.

    Remind you of anything a little more closer to current events?

  77. avatar
    obsolete April 12, 2011 at 11:30 am #

    Shane:
    Most Blacks can’t afford to play golf or stay in his hotels anyway!So go ahead and boycott all you want idiots!!

    But they can afford to watch his shows on all the free Hi-Def TV’s every African-American was given by Obama/Soros paid for by your tax dollars.

    Oh, wait- I don’t think I was supposed to reveal that…

  78. avatar
    Sef April 12, 2011 at 3:55 pm #

    Shane:
    Most Blacks can’t afford to play golf or stay in his hotels anyway!So go ahead and boycott all you want idiots!!

    You could substitute any race in that statement and it would have the same validity.

  79. avatar
    Suranis April 12, 2011 at 5:47 pm #

    Shane:
    Most AMERICANS can’t afford to play golf or stay in his hotels anyway!So go ahead and boycott all you want idiots!!

    Fixed that for you.

  80. avatar
    nc1 April 13, 2011 at 5:11 am #

    G: …

    Well, thank you for providing the full context of the quote you are referencing.

    I’ve bolded the issue at hand about the “testy” comment, as that seems to be the latest hang-up you birthers are worked up over.

    There is simply NO conclusion you can draw for WHY Obama is described as “testy” by this individual in this situation, as NO associated information has been provided to explain the reference to what the “issue” was that needed to be put to rest.

    You are merely trying to fill the void with your own biased speculation and creating connections that simply aren’t there.

    The only thing the reference tells us is that the campaign official considered Obama to be “testy” when asked to sign the form.

    The “issue” could merely be the very act of having to request the documents in the first place.In fact, that is the only event directly linked to the comment reference, so we have no other direct correlation to that 2007 request event in order to speculate further on “why” at this point.

    As far as we know, the weird rumors about his middle name bubbled up into the public domain in early 2008 – well after the 2007 COLB was requested and obtained and BEFORE his campaign scanned and published that document on the internet.

    It was a lengthy response but you failed to provide an explanation about issue that had to be put to rest in 2007. Middle name and Birthplace came into focus in 2008.

    The article is clear – it describes Obama being testy about signing form for obtaining birth certificate, which had to be ordered to put an issue to rest.

    What would you say to an idea that Obama ordered a non-certified copy of the birth certificate? That would be one explanation of him being testy in 2007 when no other external issue pressed him to request birth certificate?

    Another explanation – the statement by the anonimous official is a lie. There was no such request in 2007. DoH officials would have confirmed the trivial fact of issung a copy of COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007 if it had happened. It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

  81. avatar
    Slartibartfast April 13, 2011 at 5:17 am #

    nc1: Another explanation

    The only explanation necessary is that you are a seditious liar – if we just assume that you are attempting to foment treason against the Constitution and the lawfully elected POTUS then everything makes perfect sense…

  82. avatar
    The Magic M April 13, 2011 at 8:22 am #

    > DoH officials would have confirmed the trivial fact of issung a copy of COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007 if it had happened.

    Why would they “confirm” every silly thing you birfers ask them when they have already confirmed Obama was born in Hawaii and the COLB is legit?

    > It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

    It makes perfect sense the DoH at some point decides it is not going to waste any more taxpayer money on the silly “requests for confirmation” of you and your ilk.

    > There was no such request in 2007.

    But if the 2007 request was a lie, why make it in the first place? It makes no sense claiming the request was in 2007 when in reality it was in 2008, does it? Don’t you even care to make up explanations how your alleged “inconsistencies” fit into the larger picture anymore? Is “I founds me an inkonsiztency but then I ated it” all you can come up with? Is desperation this deep in birtherstan after there’s nothing more to spin about DoH statements – to sane people, that is?

    > It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

    It makes no sense your mom won’t confirm you’re a sane US citizen unless you are neither.

  83. avatar
    nc1 April 13, 2011 at 12:00 pm #

    The Magic M:
    > DoH officials would have confirmed the trivial fact of issung a copy of COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007 if it had happened.

    Why would they “confirm” every silly thing you birfers ask them when they have already confirmed Obama was born in Hawaii and the COLB is legit?

    > It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

    It makes perfect sense the DoH at some point decides it is not going to waste any more taxpayer money on the silly “requests for confirmation” of you and your ilk.

    > There was no such request in 2007.

    But if the 2007 request was a lie, why make it in the first place? It makes no sense claiming the request was in 2007 when in reality it was in 2008, does it? Don’t you even care to make up explanations how your alleged “inconsistencies” fit into the larger picture anymore? Is “I founds me an inkonsiztency but then I ated it” all you can come up with? Is desperation this deep in birtherstan after there’s nothing more to spin about DoH statements – to sane people, that is?

    > It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

    It makes no sense your mom won’t confirm you’re a sane US citizen unless you are neither.

    The date shown on COLB (June 6, 2007) forces Obama supporters to argue that request must have been sent in 2007, even though there was no issue to be put to rest with such a document in 2007.

    Therefore, my conclusion is that the anonimous campaign official lied about such scenario happening in 2007. Too bad that estimeed journalist (Isikoff) did not ask a follow up question about it. Providing cover for Obama is the name of the game in most of the main stream media in the USA.

  84. avatar
    G April 13, 2011 at 12:05 pm #

    nc1: It was a lengthy response but you failed to provide an explanation about issue that had to be put to rest in 2007. Middle name and Birthplace came into focus in 2008.
    The article is clear – it describes Obama being testy about signing form for obtaining birth certificate, which had to be ordered to put an issue to rest.

    I get a kick out of how you blame others when it is YOUR reading comprehension skills that are severely lacking and deficient. As usual, you display that you truly don’t know what you are talking about and have a very difficult time understanding basic concepts.

    You keep confusing the issues and public release in 2008 (NOT MENTIONED AT ALL IN ARTICLE) with the EVENT being discussed, which is merely the obtaining of the COLB in 2007 by the campaign. YOU are the only problem in the equation here…as YOU keep making this mistake all on your own. If you are not smart enough to grasp this, that is your problem.

    I did answer this for you fully…but obviously you are in denial. Well here, Expelliarmus explained it all to you as well:

    Expelliarmus: First of all, I’d note that we are not debating over a direct quote– we are debating over a journalist’s paraphrasing of claimed statement by from an unidentified “anonymous” source. Journalists get things wrong. In fact, in my entire life, I have a hard time remembering any time when I or any of my family or colleagues was interviewed for a print publication when the journalist didn’t get some detail mixed up or wrong in the retelling. So it is quite possible that the unnamed source discussed 2 separate incidents — the obtaining of the certificate in 2007, and it’s release in 2008 …. and the journalist mixed those things up.

    But assuming accuracy in the journalist’s account, the “issue” could merely be the insistence of some campaign member that Obama provide the bc to the campaign. Perhaps someone had requested that he bring the bc in February & he couldn’t locate a copy, & they kept nagging him, he told them to order a new one and then was mildly frustrated at that time that they kept bugging him. Maybe they gave him the form to sign to order the bc at a time when he was busy with something else and he was just “testy” because he was tired or worried about something entirely different. (I’d note that there was a Democratic candidate’s debate in June 2007, so maybe Obama was “testy” because he was focused on debate prep at the time)

    Or maybe it’s the other way around, maybe Obama was “testy” with the staffer for not having taken care of it already — and the thing that irked him was that he (Obama) had asked the staffer to get the certificate back in February and he learned when he was prepping for the debate that it hadn’t been done yet.

    Or maybe he’s just a “testy” guy behind the scenes. (Run an internet search for “Obama testy” – he was “testy” at a news conference in June 2009, he was “testy” with a CNN reporter in March 2009, he was “testy” on Halloween night in 2008, he was “testy” at a health care summit in February 2010.) Maybe journalists just like to use that word when writing about Obama.

    nc1: What would you say to an idea that Obama ordered a non-certified copy of the birth certificate? That would be one explanation of him being testy in 2007 when no other external issue pressed him to request birth certificate?

    NO. The 2007 COLB is a certified copy. That is what they obtained.

    You are trying to make an issue out of a mundane and completely reasonable act of a campaign merely wanting to have formal documents to provide if needed. Standard stuff. That you can’t grasp that and see something “sinister” in all of that is just proof of a failure of your delusional and paranoid mind.

    nc1: Another explanation – the statement by the anonimous official is a lie. There was no such request in 2007. DoH officials would have confirmed the trivial fact of issung a copy of COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007 if it had happened. It makes no sense that DoH refuses to confirm it.

    Well, that wouldn’t be an explanation at all. The COLB clearly states its issuance in 2007. There is no lie here. You are delusional. ALL HI and DOH officials on record have consistently supported and backed up the document with their statements and the FAQ on their website. You are in complete denial and a total liar. Seek help.

  85. avatar
    G April 13, 2011 at 12:13 pm #

    nc1: The date shown on COLB (June 6, 2007) forces Obama supporters to argue that request must have been sent in 2007, even though there was no issue to be put to rest with such a document in 2007.

    Wow. The level of stupid you continue to show is just hard to fathom. How can you be so dense and so wrong all the time and still function?

    The date shown on the COLB is PROOF that it WAS issued in 2007. That is what it is there for… *DUH* There is nothing to argue about on that. That is a clear fact.

    There is NOTHING unusual about a presidential campaign wanting to request official documents to have on hand in case they need them at any point in their filing process with the states. I would consider any campaign that didn’t gather any official documents or papers they think they might need in advance as preparation to be incompetent.

    nc1:
    Therefore, my conclusion is that the anonimous campaign official lied about such scenario happening in 2007. Too bad that estimeed journalist (Isikoff) did not ask a follow up question about it. Providing cover for Obama is the name of the game in most of the main stream media in the USA

    Therefore, as usual your conclusion is bogus and stupid and completely untethered from reality. You can’t merely be a lying troll. Your statements are too inane and incompetent to be merely a con. I can only conclude that you have some pretty severe mental issues and learning disabilities.