Main Menu

Media reacts to Arpaio press conference

The bizarre claims from Arizona that Hawaii is a “national security threat” may be sensational enough to warrant some national press attention, despite any real evidence. Here’s a sampling, and commenters can add others they find in comments. John Woodman gave an interview to ABC 15 in Phoenix this evening and I’ll be looking for that.

According to ABC 15 in Phoenix, Hawaii issued the following statement in response to today’s press conference:

The State of Hawaii has repeatedly confirmed the indisputable evidence of President Obama’s birth in Hawaii. An exhaustive accounting of this is provided on the State Department of Health (DOH) website.

My own article is going to take a while — the title is “Cross examining Mike Zullo.”

Print Friendly

279 Responses to Media reacts to Arpaio press conference

  1. avatar
    justlw July 18, 2012 at 12:00 am #

    The State of Hawaii has repeatedly confirmed the indisputable evidence of President Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

    See? They’re not confirming his birth in Hawaii; they’re confirming the evidence of his birth in Hawaii. This proves… something.

    (As near as I can decode birtherese, this is indeed one of the CCP’s premises from today.)

  2. avatar
    Jerry Collette July 18, 2012 at 12:19 am #

    Doc, I don’t get your opening statement to this article. (I don’t have the exact dates or the name or title of the official who wrote the letter, but) if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim. The apparent loopholes in the law itself, on its face, make it a national security threat, without any other evidence needed.

  3. avatar
    ZixiOfIx July 18, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    Why a phone interview with Verna K. Lee? Why not a video interview?

    Audio is so much easier to manipulate than video.

  4. avatar
    Wolf July 18, 2012 at 12:43 am #

    Jerry, what you mean “Hawaiian birth certificates were easy to get? Yes you are correct, that specific law concerning foreign born children and Hawaiian birth certificates was only passed in 1982. In addition to this, Hawaiian officials have clarified that in the case that a foreign born child is granted an Hawaiian birth certificate, it will clearly state where they were born, it will not state “Hawaii”.

    What part of of this do birthers not understand? It also doesn’t help your claim Jerry if you don’t have a source for it. Maybe you should find that letter and put the evidence where your mouth is.

  5. avatar
    CarlOrcas July 18, 2012 at 12:56 am #

    ZixiOfIx: Why a phone interview with Verna K. Lee? Why not a video interview?

    From what I read (can’t recall right at the moment where) Jerome Corsi called her and posed as a reporter. WorldNetDaily says “investigators” contacted her. If you read their article it’s really not clear what she said and what it means vis a vis the Obama birth certificate.

  6. avatar
    Michael Bauser July 18, 2012 at 12:58 am #

    Wait a minute. Sheriff Joe thinks Obama’s birth certificate is a computer forgery AND that it has hand-written notes about being altered? Say what?

  7. avatar
    JPotter July 18, 2012 at 1:08 am #

    Jerry Collette: The apparent loopholes in the law itself, on its face, make it a national security threat, without any other evidence needed.

    What apparent loophole? Further, let’s say birth certificates were ludicrously easy to get, in every state. Let’s say blank BC forms were literally dispensed as toilet paper in all public restrooms, and appropriate workstations were set up at the washbasins for completing the forms, along with a full set of registrar stamps, state seals, etc. Let’s say the attendants all double as notaries. Now anyone, anywhere can get all the BCs they want! Yay!

    Now how is that a national security threat? Crazy, yes, cause of chaos, sure. But threatening the very existence of the nation? Really? What, you imagine an army of Chinese deep-cover agents armed with Hawaiian BCs? So … what? Foreign powers have no forgery capabilities?

    Christ said, “Ye shall know them by their fruits” not “ye shall know them by their papers”. A latter day wiseman said, “the proof is in the pudding”. A pudding labelled “GREAT pudding!” is not altered by its label.

  8. avatar
    JPotter July 18, 2012 at 1:10 am #

    CarlOrcas: If you read their article it’s really not clear what she said and what it means vis a vis the Obama birth certificate.

    Yep, the odds of ever hearing any audio they may have recorded (did Corsi state she was being recorded?), are between 0% and …. 0%.

  9. avatar
    bogus info July 18, 2012 at 1:11 am #

    I don’t know if you have this or not Dr. C.

    http://www.politijim.com/2012/07/quick-summary-of-sheriff-joe-20.html

    Look forward to your thoughts on this BS.

  10. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 1:16 am #

    I’m loving the birther crowd’s reaction to the media’s reaction.
    Essentially: “WAAAAAAAH! They won’t believe our long disproved lies!!! Oh WOE are we!”

  11. avatar
    Feinne July 18, 2012 at 1:40 am #

    It really says a lot about America that Amurrika’s Tuffest Sheriff is free to spout sedition and slander without consequence beyond proving further that he’s a senile old hate-golem. I’m surprised he had time to give the press conference, though, I mean he has so many child sex crimes to ignore. That has to take up most of his day.

  12. avatar
    Steve July 18, 2012 at 1:53 am #

    bogus info:
    I don’t know if you have this or not Dr. C.

    http://www.politijim.com/2012/07/quick-summary-of-sheriff-joe-20.html

    Look forward to your thoughts on this BS.

    This part made me sick:

    “And then this from the CBS affiliate channel 5.

    Sheriff, your department has nearly 500 cases of child sex crimes that they did not investigate. What do you say to those kids who see you putting all this energy into this.

    This is not only a terrifying reflection on the quality of journalism, but on our country as a whole. And I’ll guarantee you that Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, NRO, Ingraham, and FOXNews won’t say boo about this tomorrow either.

    We don’t just have to take back our country, but we have to take back our media too. And it can start with conservative media by sharing this blog or the WND video.”

  13. avatar
    James M July 18, 2012 at 1:59 am #

    I’ve said it a thousand times. Criminal charges against either Dr. Chiyume Fukino or Alvin T. Anaka, or nothing. The document is a forgery? Then by all means, bring a criminal charge of the crime of forgery. We can identify the forger. Criminal charges or nothing.

  14. avatar
    James M July 18, 2012 at 2:00 am #

    Feinne:
    It really says a lot about America that Amurrika’s Tuffest Sheriff is free to spout sedition and slander without consequence beyond proving further that he’s a senile old hate-golem. I’m surprised he had time to give the press conference, though, I mean he has so many child sex crimes to ignore. That has to take up most of his day.

    Without consequence? He’s standing for re-election while under multiple Federal investigations. I’d say that’s lousy with consequences!

  15. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    Yep. That pretty much sums it up.

    For most of the world, this was just another week kookfest, put on by a bunch of obvious propagandists, signifying nothing and leading only to yawns.

    For the Birthers, just another sputtered “OMG” moment, leading to bitter tears and tantrums. In other words, little different than every day in a Birther’s world…

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    I’m loving the birther crowd’s reaction to the media’s reaction.
    Essentially: “WAAAAAAAH! They won’t believe our long disproved lies!!! Oh WOE are we!”

  16. avatar
    red-diaper baby 1942 July 18, 2012 at 2:13 am #

    I’m very diappointed that the mainstream media (including the New York Times) are reporting this as news (from AP), without comment. In other words, they’re reporting it as though it were news about President Obama, not about Joe Arpaio or the birther movement.
    Previously the Times has more or less ignored birtherism, which I think is a good thing; but if they’re going to report Arpaio’s doings, at least it should be appropriately framed.
    The Huffington Post also reported it more or less as unframed “news”, and many of the Comments so far are appalling.
    On the other hand, perhaps we should take it as a compliment that the right-wing fringe feels comfortable hanging out on liberal websites; I myself would never comment on a right-wing list, for fear that they would track down my email and other personal information and I would start getting death threats (or worse). On the other hand, it usually makes me a bit sick even to read their websites; which is why I’m so grateful to sites like Right Wing Watch and ThinkProgress (as well as the doc) for doing the dirty work for me.

  17. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 2:20 am #

    Obama birth record ‘definitely fraudulent,’ Sheriff Joe Arpaio says

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/17/obama-birth-record-definitely-fraudulent-sheriff-joe-arpaio-says/?test=latestnews#ixzz20x7GvToj

  18. avatar
    CarlOrcas July 18, 2012 at 2:23 am #

    JPotter: Yep, the odds of ever hearing any audio they may have recorded (did Corsi state she was being recorded?), are between 0% and …. 0%

    It could be especially problematic for Corsi depending on where he was when he made and recorded the call since it could be illegal to record the call without her clear consent

  19. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 2:38 am #

    CarlOrcas:

    There are 38 states that permit one party consent. They are:

    Hawaii

    http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.tel.tape.law.html

  20. avatar
    BillTheCat July 18, 2012 at 2:43 am #

    Feinne:
    proving further that he’s a senile old hate-golem.

    lol :)

  21. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 3:46 am #

    what says the White House ? the Obama campaign ?

  22. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 3:54 am #

    I’m looking for that video, that they linked to in the posse – 5-pages .pdf report
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNrkmfuMryQ&feature=youtu.be

    which was supposed to explain the codes and what’s wrong with it

    youtube says the video had been removed

  23. avatar
    Northland10 July 18, 2012 at 6:19 am #

    Jerry Collette: if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim.

    If a Hawaiian Birth Certificate was was easy to obtain by anybody, certainly, the posse would have found many who were born outside of Hawaii and have a Hawaiian BC that shows them born in Hawaii. Where are they? Did they produce one contemporary person? How can there be a national security issues when they have not shown there is an issue at all?

  24. avatar
    bobj July 18, 2012 at 6:25 am #

    foreigner:
    what says the White House ? the Obama campaign ?

    The best place to find the White House response would be the White House website. Of course this ( the WND bookdr…. errrr, Sheriff Joe Press Conference.) is a non event, since nothing new came out. This is merely a rehash of long debunked lies. I urge you to read the articles on this site dealing with the matters brought up by the farce of July 17th.

    but i suspect you are back to throw some weasel worded posts, with no basis in reality.

    If you are not the foreigner who has previously trolled here, I wholeheartedly apologize for the presumption. If you are the same trolling foreigner, please have a thought out point of view. And don’t toss out fantasy theories you “heard” about. Have some substance.

  25. avatar
    misha July 18, 2012 at 8:47 am #

    Sheriff Joe on Trial – Five years after he started “crime suppression” sweeps that terrorized Latino neighborhoods across Maricopa County…Sheriff Joe Arpaio is finally having to explain himself. Not to TV crews in Phoenix or to fawning hosts on Fox News, but before a federal judge.

    Read on: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/opinion/sheriff-joe-on-trial.html

  26. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 9:08 am #

    The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegations

    The White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

  27. avatar
    Reality Check July 18, 2012 at 9:15 am #

    So which one is it? Those are not the same you know.

    foreigner:
    The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegations

    The White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

  28. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 9:17 am #

    Every time the media rightfully ignores one of these pressers, checking on the site “birtherheadlines” is like Christmas morning. So many fun presents to open. Though I must admit, there are far fewer angry rants than I was expecting. Perhaps the larger bulk of them are starting to realize that they are the only ones who believe their lies.

  29. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 9:17 am #

    foreigner: The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegationsThe White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

    Why should they comment since Arpaio has NOT accused the President of anything?

  30. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater July 18, 2012 at 9:24 am #

    foreigner: I’m looking for that video, that they linked to in the posse – 5-pages .pdf reporthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNrkmfuMryQ&feature=youtu.bewhich was supposed to explain the codes and what’s wrong with ityoutube says the video had been removed

    What’s wrong with it? The codes they speak of came from the wrong year which Mark Gillar pulled from a daily pen article that Doc C already called BS on months ago. The codes came from 1968 and not 1961. http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/decoding-the-long-form-part-1/
    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/decoding-the-long-form-part-2/
    In other words Zullo lied about the codes

  31. avatar
    misha July 18, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    foreigner: The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegations – The White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

    I too, would not grace innuendo, libel and slander with a response.

  32. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 9:32 am #

    foreigner: Can you tell me where you believe the President was born, if not in Hawaii? What is your evidence? What was the motivation for his mother to travel there, rather than give birth where she lived and where her husband/the father of the child were,? How did she travel there? I would love very much to hear a coherent story for a birth anywhere other than Hawaii, since I have yet to hear one in >4 years. Maybe you will be the one to come up with this important breakthrough.

  33. avatar
    misha July 18, 2012 at 9:35 am #

    foreigner: The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegations – The White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

    What about the rape and murder Glenn Beck has been accused of? He never denied it. All Glenn Beck has to do is release his criminal record abstract stamped, “Subject has clear record to date,” and this can be over tonight.

    SHOW US YOUR RECORDS BECK!!!
    http://didglennbeckrapeandmurderagirl.blogspot.com/

  34. avatar
    misha July 18, 2012 at 9:38 am #

    foreigner: The Obama campaign declined to comment on Arpaio’s allegations – The White House has not commented on Arpaio’s claims

    I read on the internet that Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are staging “The Aristocrats in Alaska.” Your comments, please.

  35. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 9:38 am #

    Well, if media attention is what FIfe is craving, I’m sure he will get plenty once the DoJ gets a hold of him for all of those complaints he is under investigation for. And I’m sure there will be plenty of amusing sound bites provided by the good sheriff, as he’s being put in the back seat of a police cruiser. Maybe we’ll get lucky and he’ll say a bunch of stuff to get him in even hotter water!

    Though even if all he gets is fired, I’m sure it will be enough to take the wind out of his sails for good. Because, without that badge, he’s just an old man, pointing his arthritic finger menacingly.

  36. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 9:46 am #

    foreigner:
    what says the White House ? the Obama campaign ?

    If someone were to tell a lie about you, which was so far fetched and ridiculous that no one in their right state of mind would believe it, would you bother wasting the time, energy and resources to dignify it with a response?

  37. avatar
    James M July 18, 2012 at 10:04 am #

    Jerry Collette:
    Doc, I don’t get your opening statement to this article. (I don’t have the exact dates or the name or title of the official who wrote the letter, but) if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim. The apparent loopholes in the law itself, on its face, make it a national security threat, without any other evidence needed.

    Are you saying you think President Obama was born in the 1980s?

    Disagreeing with a contemporary State policy over a contemporary issue is one thing, but disagreeing with reality is a different thing.

  38. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 10:06 am #

    James M: Are you saying you think President Obama was born in the 1980s?

    Disagreeing with a contemporary State policy over a contemporary issue is one thing, but disagreeing with reality is a different thing.

    I think to disagree with reality, one must first know what that is. That said, this is a group that once tried to argue that Obama can’t be eligible, because at one point the constitution considered blacks to be 3/5 of a citizen.

  39. avatar
    CarlOrcas July 18, 2012 at 10:20 am #

    donna: There are 38 states that permit one party consent. They are

    Unless he made the call and recorded it from another state. For some reason it sounds like they contacted her after they were gone. We shall see.

  40. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 11:08 am #

    both non-comment messages were found in the online US-press today.
    This appears strange to me. I think here in Europe they would immediately
    say it’s all nonsense. And if not, then the reporters would immediately
    ask them – and if still uncommentfull magazines would write articles about it
    and maybe a parliamentary commision formed to investigate.
    You can’t say it’s nonimportant or not relevant with so much press-coverage
    and so big parts of the population believing it.
    And there was a clear accusation of forgery although they didn’t specify
    who did it, but it directly touches the Obama campaign and the WH.
    So IMO they should comment. And should have done so earlier,
    explained how the pdf was created etc.

    So, is this really so much different in USA ? So that people here
    consider it normal ?

  41. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 11:16 am #

    foreigner: You can’t say it’s nonimportant or not relevant

    It’s nonimportant and not relevant. There you are a liar, because you said I couldn’t say it and I just did.

    Now answer my questions, please; “Can you tell me where you believe the President was born, if not in Hawaii? What is your evidence? What was the motivation for his mother to travel there, rather than give birth where she lived and where her husband/the father of the child were,? How did she travel there? I would love very much to hear a coherent story for a birth anywhere other than Hawaii, since I have yet to hear one in >4 years. Maybe you will be the one to come up with this important breakthrough.

  42. avatar
    bob j July 18, 2012 at 11:17 am #

    foreigner: I think here in Europe they would immediately
    say it’s all nonsense

    Who is they?

    Do better.

  43. avatar
    bob j July 18, 2012 at 11:20 am #

    foreigner: And there was a clear accusation of forgery although they didn’t specify
    who did it, but it directly touches the Obama campaign and the WH

    How?

    A clear accusation towards someone who didn’t do anything wrong?

    Would you be interested in a Jello driveway? I promise, it only looks unstable.

  44. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 11:34 am #

    CarlOrcas : Unless he made the call and recorded it from another state. For some reason it sounds like they contacted her after they were gone. We shall see.

    TRUE but like everything birther ….. no details

    a real investigation would reveal the details …. step 1 we used phone number _ and were located in _ , step 2 we called ph # _, located in _, step 3 laws from both states allow _ ,

    or, in the alternative, we received permission from “verna” that we could record the phone call

    in real investigations, details matter

    in birtherstan, no details means you can fill in your own blanks

    as an aside, verna lives on “malia st” – malia is obama’s daughter’s name – i wonder why the obamas chose the name “malia” – hmmmmm

  45. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 11:38 am #

    I think Obama was likely born in Hawaii (97%)
    they=Obama-campaign,Whitehouse
    or could be “only” a secretary of state,congressman or such
    in a similar situation

    If the accusation proved true, Obama would be uneligible.
    That’s pretty much “touching”.

    Your other examples are different in that they don’t get
    a similar press-coverage and public-opinion forming

  46. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater July 18, 2012 at 11:42 am #

    foreigner: I think Obama was likely born in Hawaii (97%)they=Obama-campaign,Whitehouseor could be “only” a secretary of state,congressman or suchin a similar situationIf the accusation proved true, Obama would be uneligible.That’s pretty much “touching”.Your other examples are different in that they don’t geta similar press-coverage and public-opinion forming

    English… do you speak it? Obama was born in Hawaii if you think it’s likely he was born in Hawaii at 97% that would mean he is eligible to serve as President. Since he’s currently serving as President he is currently eligible.

  47. avatar
    Rickey July 18, 2012 at 11:46 am #

    Hawaii officials have repeatedly confirmed Obama’s citizenship, and state officials did again Tuesday.

    “President Obama was born in Honolulu and his birth certificate is valid,” Joshua A. Wisch, a special assistant to Hawaii’s attorney general, said in a statement. “Regarding the latest allegations from a sheriff in Arizona, they are untrue, misinformed, and misconstrue Hawaii law.”

    Wisch also said that “not only are Hawaii’s vital records some of the best managed, but they also have some of the strongest restrictions on access to prevent identity theft and fraud.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/joe-arpaio-birther-probe-_n_1681428.html

  48. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 12:02 pm #

    foreigner: I think Obama was likely born in Hawaii (97%)

    The standard to license drugs that could kill you or cure you are is >95% confidence of safety and efficacy, so 97% is actually more than sufficient for a President whose powers are quite limited by law, and of whom it’s not clear how, if at all, his birth circumstances would affect his job performance (Foreign born persons could actually be better Presidents for all we know). So what are you worried about?

  49. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 12:11 pm #

    If they haven’t specified anyone who did it, then NO, there is NO “clear accusation of forgery”.

    Just some specious poo-flinging by propagandist malcontents, without any actual teeth or bite to it.

    It is nothing but weak-minded rumour-mongering, nothing more. Tabloid level trash that only appeals to the suscepitbly gullible.

    Real law enforcement investigations pursue prosecutions, not press conferences. You have to be quite daft to be so easily snookered by such an obvious and flimsy sham.

    foreigner: And there was a clear accusation of forgery although they didn’t specify
    who did it, but it directly touches the Obama campaign and the WH.

  50. avatar
    CarlOrcas July 18, 2012 at 12:38 pm #

    donna: in real investigations, details matter

    Indeed. That’s because they’re done by real investigators.

    What we have here is hard to describe. At it’s most basic it is just lunacy.

  51. avatar
    Jamese777 July 18, 2012 at 12:41 pm #

    foreigner:
    both non-comment messages were found in the online US-press today.
    This appears strange to me. I think here in Europe they would immediately
    say it’s all nonsense. And if not, then the reporters would immediately
    ask them – and if still uncommentfull magazines would write articles about it
    and maybe a parliamentary commision formed to investigate.
    You can’t say it’s nonimportant or not relevant with so much press-coverage
    and so big parts of the population believing it.
    And there was a clear accusation of forgery although they didn’t specify
    who did it, but it directly touches the Obama campaign and the WH.
    So IMO they should comment. And should have done so earlier,
    explained how the pdf was created etc.

    So, is this really so much different in USA ? So that people here
    consider it normal ?

    The Press Secretary to the President, Jay Carney holds press briefings every single day. Any member of the White House Press Corps can ask for an official White House response to the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse Press Conference. The press corps might get a “no comment” response to one question but if members of the press corps kept asking questions, Jay Carney would have to respond eventually.
    Les Kinsolving of World Net Daily, the primary source of birther articles, is a member of the White House Press Corps.

  52. avatar
    Seth July 18, 2012 at 12:46 pm #

    If the birth certificate is forged then doesn’t that imply that the “pencil markings” on the birth certificate are also forged? And if the pencil markings are forged then doesn’t that imply that the pencil markings are not valid evidence that the birth certificate is fake?

  53. avatar
    ellen July 18, 2012 at 12:58 pm #

    Someone in the press should ask the Secretary of State of Arizona (Bennett) what he believes. Does he believe Sheriff Joe? Or does he believe the certification of Obama’s place of birth sent to him by the state of Hawaii?

    Bennett is in an interesting bind. He is a conservative and wants the votes of birthers. But he has also accepted Hawaii’s certification that the birth certificate is accurate.

    Is he rational and believes Hawaii? Or does he want to pander to the birthers and so will he now state that he made a mistake in accepting Hawaii’s certification and that he believes Sheriff Joe?

    I’ll bet he decides to be rational, thereby throwing Sheriff Joe under a bus. After all, if the conservative secretary of state of Arizona does not believe the Sheriff, who will?

  54. avatar
    justlw July 18, 2012 at 12:58 pm #

    Rickey: “President Obama was born in Honolulu and his birth certificate is valid,” Joshua A. Wisch, a special assistant to Hawaii’s attorney general, said in a statement.

    I love how Hawaii state officials always use weasel words like “President Obama was born in Honolulu” and “his birth certificate is valid” so that it can be interpreted in different… uh, wait.

  55. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 1:05 pm #

    videos of zullo and woodsman:

    Investigator Mike Zullo talks about Obama birth…

    Author’s research disputes birther battle

    http://www.abc15.com/subindex/video

    on the zullo video, he states that verna was not called while they were in hawaii

  56. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 1:20 pm #

    seems that Woodman was referring to the the certificate
    number while the reporter asked about the “9″ – pencil mark ?!

  57. avatar
    BillTheCat July 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm #

    testing

    Edit: Doc I am unable to post in the Cross-examination of Zullo thread. May want to look into what’s going on in that thread.

  58. avatar
    Paper July 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm #

    To a certain limited extent, yes. More about holding the liar accountable or to expose them, or force them out into the open. But there quickly comes a point where not engaging is the often best policy. Otherwise, it just becomes codependency. And such crapmdiesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, especially when it just keeps being belligerently unresponsively stupid and vile.

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: If someone were to tell a lie about you, which was so far fetched and ridiculous that no one in their right state of mind would believe it, would you bother wasting the time, energy and resources to dignify it with a response?

  59. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 1:39 pm #

    Wrong. In the interview clip, Woodman is specifically talking about the “9″ pencil mark and how that has already been debunked and that Arpaio does not have the 1961 manual for that mark.

    The very mention of that manual is in explicit reference to those pencil marks, as that is where those coding references would be kept.

    foreigner:
    seems that Woodman was referring to the the certificate
    number while the reporter asked about the “9″ – pencil mark ?!

  60. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 1:47 pm #

    OK,right, 1961.not 1955
    but a 1961 guide is online and quoted
    here in another thread.
    It says “other nonwhite”
    the 2nd “9″, I don’t know

    Zullo errors:
    2:25 article by Bennett , “I believe written 10-15 years ago” [was in 1955]
    3:00 “9″ means “information not stated” [other nonwhite]
    3:11 entered onto magnetic tape [punchcards in 1961]

  61. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 2:04 pm #

    shouldn’t they have the baby-weight on the certificate ?
    It is being reported in the statistics tables, so where
    do they have it from ?

  62. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 2:10 pm #

    foreigner: shouldn’t they have the baby-weight on the certificate ?It is being reported in the statistics tables, so wheredo they have it from ?

    There is a second page of birth/medical information forwarded to the DOH from the hospital. The baby’s weight, together with lots of other medical info is on that second page.

  63. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 2:11 pm #

    http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2012/180712_obama_birth.htm

    > The posse was able to obtain the original 1961 coding guide used to fill
    > in the birth certificates at the exact time Obama’s document was filed.

  64. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 2:17 pm #

    wrt. not commenting – imagine:

    Russia:
    > USA attacked and sank one of our ships in the Baltic Sea
    White House:
    > we needn’t comment on any unsubstantiated suspicion
    (although they can easily prove it’s wrong)

    –> worsening of relationship,treaties canceled/suspended,arms race..,
    oops.

  65. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 2:29 pm #

    They say they did, but where is the evidence of that coding guide to back them up?

    As the previous articles cited several times on here by other posters pointed out, both Dr. C and Woodman looked into that very same claim months ago and debunked it. Again, nothing new here in Birtherism, except that Arpaio is now parroting these old claims.

    *yawn*

    foreigner:
    http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2012/180712_obama_birth.htm

    > The posse was able to obtain the original 1961 coding guide used to fill
    > in the birth certificates at the exact time Obama’s document was filed.

  66. avatar
    Majority Will July 18, 2012 at 2:29 pm #

    foreigner:
    wrt. not commenting – imagine:

    Russia:
    > USA attacked and sank one of our ships in the Baltic Sea
    White House:
    > we needn’t comment on any unsubstantiated suspicion (although they can easily prove it’s wrong)

    –> worsening of relationship,treaties canceled/suspended,arms race..,
    oops.

    Your hypothetical example is a false equivalence, pointless and entirely asinine.

  67. avatar
    JPotter July 18, 2012 at 2:30 pm #

    WND is hosting a truncated, “press conference” video.

    It ends before Zullo’s meltdown, and the Q&A.

    Yep, only the spoonfeeding is presented. ;)

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/sheriff-joe-arpaio-press-conference/

  68. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 2:31 pm #

    foreigner: wrt. not commenting – imagine:Russia:> USA attacked and sank one of our ships in the Baltic SeaWhite House:> we needn’t comment on any unsubstantiated suspicion(although they can easily prove it’s wrong)–> worsening of relationship,treaties canceled/suspended,arms race..,oops.

    You are seriously comparing a sinking of a Russian ship to a pencil mark on someone’s birth certificate? Seriously? Seriously?

  69. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 2:31 pm #

    What are you babbling about now?

    Going off on ficticious and irrelevant tangents from your own fevered imagination I see…

    Talk about complete apples and oranges here… *sheesh*

    Sorry there Chicken Little, but the sky is not falling and the world is not ending, so chill out.

    foreigner:
    wrt. not commenting – imagine:

    Russia:
    > USA attacked and sank one of our ships in the Baltic Sea
    White House:
    > we needn’t comment on any unsubstantiated suspicion (although they can easily prove it’s wrong)

    –> worsening of relationship,treaties canceled/suspended,arms race..,
    oops.

  70. avatar
    JPotter July 18, 2012 at 2:33 pm #

    foreigner: oops.

    Oops indeed.

    International military mishaps have serious consequences.

    Loons ranting in the desert do not.

    Try again.

  71. avatar
    MattR July 18, 2012 at 2:38 pm #

    G:
    They say they did, but where is the evidence of that coding guide to back them up?

    As the previous articles cited several times on here by other posters pointed out, both Dr. C and Woodman looked into that very same claim months ago and debunked it.Again, nothing new here in Birtherism, except that Arpaio is now parroting these old claims.

    *yawn*

    Just to add to what you are saying. Here is an actual link to the coding guide from 1961. Race is described on page 6 where it says that ’9′ indicates ‘Other nonwhite’ and not “the number 9 on the coding guide indicates “unknown or not stated.”” as claimed by the article that foreigner linked.

  72. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 2:39 pm #

    Would someone be so kind as to explain the monumental significance of a pencil mark, because I frankly don’t get it. Isn’t the presence of pencil marks actually support that the pdf was made from an actual paper document? Why would a forger constructing a file place such a mark?

  73. avatar
    MattR July 18, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

    G:
    They say they did, but where is the evidence of that coding guide to back them up?

    As the previous articles cited several times on here by other posters pointed out, both Dr. C and Woodman looked into that very same claim months ago and debunked it.Again, nothing new here in Birtherism, except that Arpaio is now parroting these old claims.

    *yawn*

    For those who care, here is the actual coding document

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/FOIA-DHHS-11-00673.pdf

  74. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 2:45 pm #

    foreigner: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2012/180712_obama_birth.htm> The posse was able to obtain the original 1961 coding guide used to fill> in the birth certificates at the exact time Obama’s document was filed.

    Simple….Zullo flat out lied about the 1961 manual. The blow up image which Zullo used was taken from the Natality Tape File for 1968. it can be seen here…

    ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/health_statistics/nchs/Dataset_Documentation/DVS/natality/Nat1968doc.pdf

    You can see the same imperfections in the scan (specifically the marks above and below “part-Hawaiian”).

    Zullo said “The Cold Case Posse obtained information from the 1961 vital statistics instructions manual for births.” He didn’t even leave it vague by saying “1960s.”

    This was no accident. He had to know it was the 1968 manual and he flat out lied pretending it was the 1961 manual.

    Hat tip to Loren at fogbow.

  75. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 2:48 pm #

    Scientist: Would someone be so kind as to explain the monumental significance of a pencil mark, because I frankly don’t get it. Isn’t the presence of pencil marks actually support that the pdf was made from an actual paper document? Why would a forger constructing a file place such a mark?

    Their madcap theory appears to be that the pencil marks were already on the bc used as the template to enter Obama’s details on during the construction of the forgery……and that the forgers then forgot to forge/change the pencil marks to correspond with Obama Sr’s race.

  76. avatar
    Scientist July 18, 2012 at 2:57 pm #

    Judge Mental: Their madcap theory appears to be that the pencil marks were already on the bc used as the template to enter Obama’s details on during the construction of the forgery……and that the forgers then forgot to forge/change the pencil marks to correspond with Obama Sr’s race.

    I’m still missing something. What is the evidence that “9″ is incorrect for Obama Sr? Depending which coding key you use it either means “Other non-white”, which he is, or “Unknown/refused to say”, and he might very well have refused to say (I routinely refuse to answer questions about race). So, the clerk, seeing he was from Africa (it clearly says he was from East Africa) put “African”. No law requires a parent to say what race he/she is.

    I simply don’t see how even the most favorable (to Zullo) reading of this says anything.

  77. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 18, 2012 at 2:59 pm #

    To birthers, every detail, no matter how insignificant to a sane person, is proof that Obama is ineligible. What was on the radio that day? Did anyone in the records department wear mismatched socks? Did someone have a mustache? How many cups of coffee were consumed? Did anyone own a Pomeranian, or have a Cat whose name starts with the letter M? ALL of these things and more are relevant to the birther cause.

  78. avatar
    foreigner July 18, 2012 at 3:01 pm #

    where is that blow up image of the 1961 manual that Zullo used ?
    is it in the video of the press conference from WND ?

  79. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 3:03 pm #

    Awww Nooooooo! Does that last post mean that I can think like a birther? Aaarf aaarf!

  80. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 3:14 pm #

    foreigner: where is that blow up image of the 1961 manual that Zullo used ?is it in the video of the press conference from WND ?

    You can see it in this video…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGqbmWgHMhE

    If you keep trolling without showing some common sense reasonable responses this is last bit of help and benefit of the doubt that will be forthcoming fom me. Clear?

  81. avatar
    Judge Mental July 18, 2012 at 3:17 pm #

    Scientist: I’m still missing something. What is the evidence that “9″ is incorrect for Obama Sr? Depending which coding key you use it either means “Other non-white”, which he is, or “Unknown/refused to say”, and he might very well have refused to say (I routinely refuse to answer questions about race). So, the clerk, seeing he was from Africa (it clearly says he was from East Africa) put “African”. No law requires a parent to say what race he/she is.I simply don’t see how even the most favorable (to Zullo) reading of this says anything.

    You forgot that to get with this you have to leave your brain at the birther hat check desk first.

  82. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny July 18, 2012 at 3:18 pm #

    foreigner: I think here in Europe they would immediately say it’s all nonsense.

    So where in Europe do you live? Because practically everywhere in Europe, the members of the CCCP would now be facing years in jail (or goal) for libel, slander, fraud, abuse of public money and racial discrimination. And only the first two need someone complaining about it. So no reason for a political campaign to intervene.

    I left out lese majeste and treason. And impersonating an officer of the law. De minimis.

  83. avatar
    G July 18, 2012 at 3:23 pm #

    Simple: There isn’t any. Just another desperate and lame excuse by the ODS crowd to pretend there is “suspicioun”, when there is NONE.

    The HI DOH has repeatedly validated the data and stood by it. Nothing trumps that. Certainly not spurrious picking at insignificant nits; which is intended as nothing but a distraction from the obvious truth of the repeatedly confirmed validity and veracity of the documents in the first place.

    Typical conspiracist dodge tactics; nothing more.

    Scientist:
    Would someone be so kind as to explain the monumental significance of a pencil mark, because I frankly don’t get it.Isn’t the presence of pencil marks actually supportthat the pdf was made from an actual paper document?Why would a forger constructing a file place such a mark?

  84. avatar
    richCares July 18, 2012 at 3:43 pm #

    Zulu said there wasn’t an original, so was the 9 put on a PDF, or is Zulu an idiot?

  85. avatar
    Dave B. July 18, 2012 at 5:35 pm #

    richCares:
    Zulu said there wasn’t an original, so was the 9 put on a PDF, or is Zulu an idiot?

    Low hanging fruit, rich. That’s door number 2.

  86. avatar
    Thomas Brown July 18, 2012 at 8:00 pm #

    Judge Mental: Their madcap theory appears to be thatthe pencil marks were already on the bc used as the template to enter Obama’s details on during the construction of the forgery……and that the forgers then forgot to forge/change the pencil marks to correspond with Obama Sr’s race.

    Pencil marks being notoriously tough to erase… (smacks forehead).

  87. avatar
    justlw July 18, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    Thomas Brown: Pencil marks being notoriously tough to erase… (smacks forehead).

    Actually, pencil marks on security paper could be hard to erase, although I expect real forgers got chops.

    But the CCP was more than happy to show a video of the PDF where the operator was merrily shifting the Onaka stamp around — leaving a plainly visible image of that stamp in place — and calling that proof that Team Obama had done all sorts of things.

    So editing the pencil marks should be a breeze, too, right? Proving yet again that in the CCP’s mind, Barack Obama is a chilling combination of Lex Luthor and Curly Howard.

  88. avatar
    misha July 18, 2012 at 9:24 pm #

    justlw: Barack Obama is a chilling combination of Lex Luthor and Curly Howard.

    I am proud to say Larry Fine was from Philadelphia, as was WC Fields.

  89. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 11:19 pm #

    “thank you sheriff joe”

    “if anyone knows how authenticate a 50 year old hawaiian birth certificate, it’s the arizona COUNTY sheriff”

    jon stewart

  90. avatar
    donna July 18, 2012 at 11:46 pm #

    Penzone debuts attack TV ad on Arpaio

    The ad attacks Sheriff Joe Arpaio for his investigation into President Obama’s birth certificate.

    Read more: http://www.abc15.com/subindex/video#ixzz212KSOzCz

  91. avatar
    G July 19, 2012 at 12:09 am #

    Good for Penzone!!!

    donna:
    Penzone debuts attack TV ad on Arpaio

    The ad attacks Sheriff Joe Arpaio for his investigation into President Obama’s birth certificate.

    Read more: http://www.abc15.com/subindex/video#ixzz212KSOzCz

  92. avatar
    JPotter July 19, 2012 at 1:23 am #

    Thomas Brown: Pencil marks being notoriously tough to erase… (smacks forehead).

    Perhaps they are assuming the Anonymous Forger (aka Madame Xerox) started with a scan of a Hawaiian BC. That already had penciled notations.

    …. and they were able to manipulate the type- and handwritten characters with ease, but powerless to remove or ‘correct’ the penciled notations. Ironically, in the birferverse, pencil marks, so easily removed physically, are perfectly indelible once scanned, while ink and toner are indelible in hard copy, but putty digitally. Riiiiight.

  93. avatar
    JPotter July 19, 2012 at 1:30 am #

    donna: Penzone debuts attack TV ad on Arpaio

    Love it! Esp the final bit …. the ad starting the same day the civil rights case kicks off … “That’s no coincidence”. If Arpaio wins re-election, Okieland will have to do something truly frightening to take back the title of Deepest, Dumbest Red. If Arpaio wins, that’s one shockingly duped electroate.

  94. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 4:45 am #

    Paul Pieniezny,

    I’m from Germany, but I think it’s similar in CH,A,France,UK,Italy,NL,DK,…
    CCP-people would not go to jail, but there is a clause that you may have
    to pay for damage that you cause to someone’s business by unsubstantiated
    accusations and lies. I don’t think it would apply to Zullo,Arpaio.
    But the CCP would probably not have got so much press-attention
    if the accusations/fraud-suspicions had not got a higher level
    (the CCP-facts are really thin). Reporters would have better
    researched the issue.Some of them.
    And they would be heard, you can’t just continue without
    addressing and discussing those concerns as the CCP does.
    (OK, you can, but you’d lose credibility)
    Is the whole difference to USA here is based on the legal system ?
    1st amendment and such ?
    The reluctance of WH,OC to comment could also be because they are afraid
    of being incorrectly quoted with what they say. Or because they are afraid
    any comment of them would just draw the attention of the media to it.
    But then, not-commenting could also be interpreted as lack of good
    arguments

  95. avatar
    nbc July 19, 2012 at 5:11 am #

    foreigner: But then, not-commenting could also be interpreted as lack of good
    arguments

    So in other words, we do not know. But given that the WH has addressed the issue twice, once unwittingly by releasing the short form and once on purpose by releasing the long form, there is just nothing more to add.

    The facts speak for themselves.

  96. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 6:48 am #

    obviously it was not enough. See the polls, see the posse, see all the
    birther webpages and ballot challenges.
    See this very blog which thanks its existence to the lack of
    WH/OC commenting. I mean, why are we discussing here and not on
    a WH-forum ? With a faq and occasional (once per year …) Obama
    post ? And Dr.C and Woodman as moderators paid by the Obama campaign

  97. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 7:10 am #

    foreigner: obviously it was not enough. See the polls, see the posse, see all thebirther webpages and ballot challenges.See this very blog which thanks its existence to the lack ofWH/OC commenting. I mean, why are we discussing here and not ona WH-forum ? With a faq and occasional (once per year …) Obamapost ? And Dr.C and Woodman as moderators paid by the Obama campaign

    OK, let me get this straight. You are actually trying to tell us that if only the White House said the magic words, the birthers would all say, “Oops, we were wrong, please excuse us”? What are they putting in the water in Germany?

  98. avatar
    Arthur July 19, 2012 at 7:11 am #

    foreigner: obviously it was not enough.

    I doubt anything would be enough. Fish gonna’ swim and birthers gonna’ carp. Yet somehow, life goes on. Conspiracy nuts are the price of doing politics–at least in the United States. Put another way: the fact that there are mosquitoes doesn’t keep me from going camping.

  99. avatar
    AlCum July 19, 2012 at 8:20 am #

    Jerry Collette:
    Doc, I don’t get your opening statement to this article. (I don’t have the exact dates or the name or title of the official who wrote the letter, but) if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim. The apparent loopholes in the law itself, on its face, make it a national security threat, without any other evidence needed.

    They are not “loopholes,” you and Arpaio simply don’t understand what you’re reading. As far as Zullo and Corsi, they are purposely twisting and misrepresenting what you read so as to fool you.

  100. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 8:22 am #

    scientist, not all, but most.
    arthur, birthers went down a lot after the release.
    But there were the WND campaign and WH/OC didn’t
    response to the .pdf oddities, how it was created.
    Without the pdf (just a color jpg instead, with the security paper background)
    I estimate there were only half as many birthers now

  101. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 19, 2012 at 8:35 am #

    Precisely what are you calling a loophole?

    The law is pretty much standard across the country. Hawaii is not special, and Hawaii poses no threat.

    If a Hawaiian resident visits Kenya and returns to Hawaii (since 1982) they may apply for a birth certificate upon providing documentation of the birth abroad (like a US Consular Certificate of Birth abroad if to a US parent) and the State of Hawaii will register the birth and issue a certificate saying that the child was born in Kenya.

    As the quote says, having a birth certificate from Hawaii (that says someone was born in Kenya) is not proof of US citizenship and poses no threat to anybody.

    What Zullo is trying to do is make something that is normal business in many states, something that is reasonable and something that poses no threat SOUND dangerous and subversive through innuendo. He is trying to smear Obama by smearing the entire state of Hawaii. Dante put the falsifiers in one of the lower circles of Hell.

    The idea that birth certificates are easier to get in Hawaii than anywhere else is false. States in general, and Hawaii in particular, generally follow national model legislation.

    Let me ask you: in this time of heightened national security and fears of terrorist threats, where was the Congressional investigation, the news article, the Homeland Security report that singles out Hawaii as a threat? There is none because the story is bogus.

    Jerry Collette: Doc, I don’t get your opening statement to this article. (I don’t have the exact dates or the name or title of the official who wrote the letter, but) if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim. The apparent loopholes in the law itself, on its face, make it a national security threat, without any other evidence needed.

  102. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 8:36 am #

    Besides releasing the documents, they have commented. Not on this farce. But elsewhere at other times. They’ve kept it simple, and the President has even used it as the basis for a few jokes. There is no need for much comment, and there is not much point to bringing a lawsuit; politically speaking.that woul be counterproductive. No need to give them attention they do not deserve.

    They don’t actually even deserve the commentary we provide, the attention we give them here. Doc brings his professional background to bear and this blog is very useful for exploring the topic, providing facts and perspective, but that’s a blog, the hobby of a professional in the field. The WH would never be foolish enough to publicly engage the topic at any length. *I* might be foolish enough to try and reason with birthers in my family, but even that foolishness reaches its limits.

    foreigner:

    The reluctance of WH,OC to comment could also be because they are afraid
    of being incorrectly quoted with what they say. Or because they are afraid
    any comment of them would just draw the attention of the media to it.
    But then, not-commenting could also be interpreted as lack of good
    arguments

  103. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 8:38 am #

    foreigner: The White House doesn’t care about the birthers, nor should they, since none of them would vote for Obama anyway. You only need 50.1% to win. Given the electoral college, possibly less than that. I know that is a hard concept for you to deal with, but it’s the truth. It’s the same in advertising; everyone is trying to target ads. Soap operas have cosmetic ads, football games have beer ads. Google and Facebook make their living targeting ads.

    Deal with reality.

  104. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 8:44 am #

    paper, so debunking birthers is foolish ?

  105. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 8:46 am #

    foreigner: so debunking birthers is foolish ?

    Perhaps, but it’s fun….That’s really the ONLY reason why I am here.

  106. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 8:47 am #

    Scientist, they do care. See the Obama statements on 2011.04.27
    It’s the reason why they released the LFBC.

  107. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 8:53 am #

    foreigner: Scientist, they do care. See the Obama statements on 2011.04.27
    It’s the reason why they released the LFBC.

    It was a mistake to release it, and they realize it and won’t do it again. End of discussion. Have a nice rest of your life.

  108. avatar
    Arthur July 19, 2012 at 8:55 am #

    foreigner:
    paper, so debunking birthers is foolish ?

    Debunking birthers is not foolish, but trying to convince birthers to abandon their infatuation with misinformation and crank legal theories may be,

  109. avatar
    bovril July 19, 2012 at 9:04 am #

    Ah I see that the Birfoon troll GSGS from The Fogbow is infesting Doc C’s home now.

    So “foreigner” since every single one of your tedious, peurile and infantile idiocies has been debunked and shredded on both sites why don’t you bugger off to Freeperville or any of the other RWNJ echo chambers, they’ll just love you there.

    Troll-B-Gone

  110. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 19, 2012 at 9:13 am #

    [This comment has been edited]
    You were fooled by a sleight of hand in the video, Jerry. When I first heard it, I didn’t catch the point where the letter ends and the editorializing kicks in. The criticisms of the law are those of the narrator and not the Health Director from the 1980′s.

    The letter itself says that the writer supports the law but is concerned about increased workload. He describes NO OTHER PROBLEMS.

    Jerry Collette: if birth certificates are as easy to get as they appear to be from what the revised law from the 1980′s says, and what the HI official said who who wrote that letter when the law was proposed, pointing out its problems, this is not a bizarre claim.

  111. avatar
    Thomas Brown July 19, 2012 at 9:34 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    You were fooled by a sleight of hand in the video, Jerry.

    The narrator reads the letter and then without pause or change of voice launches into a commentary critical of the law. None of that is in the letter.

    The letter itself says that the writer supports the law but is concerned about increased workload.

    Jerry’s not too bright for a genius, is he?

  112. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 9:47 am #

    Scientist: What are they putting in the water in Germany?

    Ask Joseph Goebbels. If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

  113. avatar
    Majority Will July 19, 2012 at 9:47 am #

    Scientist: The White House doesn’t care about the birthers, nor should they, since none of them would vote for Obama anyway. You only need 50.1% to win.

    And the only reason that Floppy Mittens and his cronies are pandering to the birthers is to reach that magic number.

    Floppy Mittens is counting on the delusional, angry bigot demographic.

  114. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 9:53 am #

    By the way, here is a critical point-whose job was it to contact the White House and ask how they made the pdf? Not mine, or yours or the press’s, but Arpaio’s. That’s right, who ever heard of an investigation where no one speaks to the alleged suspects? If I accuse a contractor of scamming me and report it to the police, I would expect that they would speak with him and hear his side of the story before holding a presser. Maybe he has a good explanation and I am a crank.

    In science, if I try to reproduce a paper and fail, before I yell fraud, I am obligated to contact the authors and ask them how they did it. Maybe I am not doing things exactly as they did. Maybe they don’t even know themselves which steps and reagents are critical and which aren’t. The fact that Arpaio didn’t ask the White House what scanner they used and what settiings, etc. before trying 600 scans or 6,000 and failing to get the same results shows that this was a political witch hunt, not an investigation right from the start.

  115. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 10:03 am #

    foreigner: I’m from Germany

    If you really are writing from Germany, which I doubt, you are the last person on Earth to judge others.

    If anyone wants to understand Birthers, Denialists and fascists, I recommend Freud’s “Civilization and Its Discontents.”

    Note: I have read it twice.

  116. avatar
    y_p_w July 19, 2012 at 10:13 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: What Zullo is trying to do is make something that is normal business in many states, something that is reasonable and something that poses no threat SOUND dangerous and subversive through innuendo. He is trying to smear Obama by smearing the entire state of Hawaii. Dante put the falsifiers in one of the lower circles of Hell.

    Several states allow adoptees to obtain birth certificates regardless of place of birth. I linked to one of an adoptee in Michigan who was born in China. She was given an Anglicized name along with the presumed birth date. The parents were listed as the adopted parents and not the biological parents. The date of filing was several years after the DOB.

  117. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 19, 2012 at 10:34 am #

    The IP address is German.

    misha: If you really are writing from Germany, which I doubt

  118. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 10:41 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The IP address is German.

    OK, but he still is the last to judge.

    Rudolf Hess Riots in Spandau Prison –
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/nyregion/15about.html

  119. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 11:39 am #

    First, debunking birthers is easily done. There’s not much to it. Birth certificate, check. Long form birth certificate? Double check. State of Hawaii verification? Triple check. Birth announcements? One-arm-tied-behind-my-back, check. Time travel still impossible? Reverse double flip check. No logical reason he would have been born in Kenya? Check check check. The logistics for his being born in Kenya are exceedingly prohibitive? Extra credit bonus check.

    Anything else is PhD thesis grade refinement (unnecessary but sometimes interesting).

    It would be extremely foolish for the *White House* to engage on any level approaching what we do here. *That* would be foolish.

    Slice and dice, wie du willst, ultimately the only thing that would make any difference would be fraud by the state of Hawaii. (But surprisingly–not–I am still waiting for that video I was promised showing the fake records being planted in Hawaii.)

    The only official responses necessary from the President are to the various court cases and sometimes not even then (see the Jablonski Empty Chair technique).

    Beyond that, at this point, I suspect the White House is happy to have the birthers babbling. If only Romney would wave Corsi’s book on stage! Swing voters love such foolishness. Not.

    foreigner:
    paper, so debunking birthers is foolish ?

  120. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 12:06 pm #

    Paper,
    > debunking birthers is easily done.

    but can you do it in a way that they are convinced in large numbers ?
    psychology involved, not just the usual insulting and ridiculing

    > It would be extremely foolish for the *White House* to engage on any level
    > approaching what we do here. *That* would be foolish.

    why would that be foolish ? Would it only be foolish in USA (and why ?)
    or also, if a similar situation would arise in Germany ?
    And then, if Dr.C. and others are doing it here, would the WH hate that ?

  121. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 12:46 pm #

    Yes. And it has been done. I refer you back to my post. Birth certificate? Check. Long form birth certificate? Double check. Etc. etc. Huge numbers of people have been convinced by such basics. Every further detail beyond these basics is a matter of diminishing returns. There are not large numbers of people remaining who need to be convinced, or who can be convinced. Anyone who gets past these basic hurdles and still *actively* believes the President was born elsewhere is not going to let facts get in their way. And that is my very personal experience with the birthers I actually know.

    That all said, it’s taken me a long time, but I’ve come around to ridiculing ideas. l myself am not interested in insulting birthers, but their arguments are a different story, being as ridiculous as they are. In many ways, I have birthers to thank for that personal growth. As a point of reference, I used to be extremely bothered by Galileo’s use of ridicule in his *Dialogue,* but I understand it much better now.

    There is a certain point when it is no longer about debate or argument. When engaging in debate is not even rational. You can talk with a mugger as much as you like, acknowledging their humanity, but they still are mugging you.

    foreigner:

    but can you do it [debunking] in a way that they are convinced in large numbers ?
    psychology involved, not just the usual insulting and ridiculing

  122. avatar
    Majority Will July 19, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

    Paper:
    Yes.And it has been done.I refer you back to my post.Birth certificate?Check.Long form birth certificate?Double check.Etc. etc.Huge numbers of people have been convinced by such basics.Every further detail beyond these basics is a matter of diminishing returns.There are not large numbers of people remaining who need to be convinced, or who can be convinced.Anyone who gets past these basic hurdles and still *actively* believes the President was born elsewhere is not going to let facts get in their way.And that is my very personal experience with the birthers I actually know.

    That all said, it’s taken me a long time, but I’ve come around to ridiculing ideas. l myself am not interested in insulting birthers, but their arguments are a different story, being as ridiculous as they are. In many ways, I have birthers to thank for that personal growth.As a point of reference, I used to be extremely bothered by Galileo’s use of ridicule in his *Dialogue,* but I understand it much better now.

    There is a certain point when it is no longer about debate or argument.When engaging in debate is not even rational. You can talk with a mugger as much as you like, acknowledging their humanity, but they still are mugging you.

    Do you ever get the impression that some birthers who keep posting the same inane questions over and over again are just desperate for any kind of attention?

  123. avatar
    Arthur July 19, 2012 at 1:13 pm #

    Majority Will: Do you ever get the impression that some birthers who keep posting the same inane questions over and over again are just desperate for any kind of attention?

    Double plus good.

  124. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 1:14 pm #

    I don’t have any answer about Germany, despite having visited many times. I know holocaust denial is against the law there.

    I would note that Rachel Maddow did a segment about conspiracies last night, wondering if we could label our cranks here as being Not For Consumption Abroad (or some such label). Part of free speech here is to let the cranks express themselves, not just to make their case, but also to be seen as what they are by the public at large. That’s also why part of free speech is that other people get to respond. Free speech doesn’t mean free to be ridiculous without anyone saying anything.

    As for Dr. C, he does debunk birther arguments here all the time, straightforwardly and without insult. The man bends over backwards, as much as is possible, to be fair. Even he, though, can’t turn himself into a pretzel! ;-} This site is one of the best for collecting and getting at all those little details that birthers like to throw into the wind like so much shrapnel or cloud cover. I also have no idea what the WH thinks about such sites as this.

    But as to why would it be foolish for the White House to engage birthers in any serious way…

    Because they have responded with the basic facts, more than any other President ever has. Because it is basic politics and basic human wisdom to not engage foolishness. It just gives foolishness more importance than it deserves. Once you’ve laid out the facts, it is foolishness to expect you are going to change anyone who doesn’t actually care anyway, but just is out to cause trouble. Because, once you have laid out the case and facts, to engage on such a level is the kind of weakness that would demonstrate a disconcerting inability to deal with real enemies in the world, and people don’t like that in their presidents. And finally because birthers at this point help the President’s chances at being reelected.

    it is codependency and being a victim to engage one’s abuser beyond a certain point. You make your case, you make your request, then if they keep up the abuse, you have to stop engaging, in whatever way seems best to the situation. Or play the role of a victim.

    foreigner: why would that be foolish ? Would it only be foolish in USA (and why ?)
    or also, if a similar situation would arise in Germany ?
    And then, if Dr.C. and others are doing it here, would the WH hate that ?

  125. avatar
    foreigner July 19, 2012 at 2:09 pm #

    I think Germany is also pretty much free speech.
    Even more privacy, less government internet surveillance than in USA.
    But such claims as supecting the president (or chancellor or other important politicians)
    of fraud would be taken more seriously and better examined.
    Even Dr.C is not free of the ridiculing, I called him earlier on it.
    Also John Woodman, who I also respect, with his recent wolf post and
    the frequent Apuzzo insults.
    But presumably it’s even worse on the birthers forums and blogs ?!?

    > [WH] have responded with the basic facts, more than any other President ever has
    but much less than Dr.C. has done and other presidents were not so much asked about that

    > Because it is basic politics and basic human wisdom to not engage foolishness.
    then don’t become a politician

    >It just gives foolishness more importance than it deserves
    not if dealt with correctly. Can be short for foolish, long for less foolish claims.
    Make a FAQ if questions repeat.

    > Because, once you have laid out the case and facts, to engage on such a level
    > is the kind of weakness that would demonstrate a disconcerting inability to deal
    > with real enemies in the world, and people don’t like that in their presidents.
    and I think that’s typical American. Obama with the birth certificate plastered
    on his forehead.The case and facts are changing. He has his stuff to reply
    to questions, update the FAQ. Dr.C. _does_ continue to “engage on such a level” -
    did it result in weakness ? Those “real enemies” may appear stupid to American culture
    but still cause serious problems.

    > you have to stop engaging
    or refer the case to the lower staff

    > And finally because birthers at this point help the President’s chances
    > at being reelected
    but isn’t that a bit dishonest and unethical ?

  126. avatar
    Scientist July 19, 2012 at 2:22 pm #

    foreigner: I think Germany is also pretty much free speech.
    Even more privacy, less government internet surveillance than in USA.
    But such claims as supecting the president (or chancellor or other important politicians)
    of fraud would be taken more seriously and better examined.

    Where is Merkel’s birth certificate? College transcripts? Have YOU demanded them? If not, why not?

  127. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 2:49 pm #

    Scientist: Where is Merkel’s birth certificate?College transcripts?Have YOU demanded them?If not, why not?

    Any SS officers in Merkel’s family tree, like Kurt Waldheim? The Gestapo’s Office of Racial Purity went back 16 generations.

    Here is a picture of foreigner:
    http://www.third-reich-books.com/pt-2717-75dpi.jpg

  128. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 3:15 pm #

    The instance of President’s Obama’s birth is not taken as seriously as you seem to wish because it is ridiculous, deserving of ridicule. All that needs to be done has been done. There is nothing of any serious quality to be examined further. If someone were to have proof of fraud by Hawaii, then and only then would there need to be any further serious examination. And unless someone provides such proof it is meaningless to examine whether or not Hawaii committed some kind of conspiratorial fraud, merely because someone makes sh&t up. In this country, the burden is on the accuser; otherwise we would spend our whole lives in court fending off and “examining” all kinds of b.s.

    Some people’s arguments and statements deserve ridicule, or at least being called out. Go read Galileo, the master of ridicule. The part that is hard to master is calibrating, something Stephen Colbert speaks about, where he will temper his remarks against a non-professional but feels comfortable bringing it to the professionals or outright hypocrits who put themselves in the line of comedic fire.

    foreigner:
    Ithink Germany is also pretty much free speech.
    Even more privacy, less government internet surveillance than in USA.
    But such claims as supecting the president (or chancellor or other important politicians)
    of fraud would be taken more seriously and better examined.
    Even Dr.C is not free of the ridiculing, I called him earlier on it.
    Also John Woodman, who I also respect, with his recent wolf post and
    the frequent Apuzzo insults.
    But presumably it’s even worse on the birthers forums and blogs ?!?

  129. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    foreigner: I think Germany is also pretty much free speech. Even more privacy, less government internet surveillance than in USA.

    Pure nonsense.
    - Home schooling is illegal in Germany.
    - Scientology has been banned in Germany.
    - Income tax rates are much higher, as are all taxes.
    - German citizens pay ~6% income tax for clergy. The only way to get out of it, is to declare yourself an atheist, and prove it.
    - If someone wants to put a fence around his property, he has to get signatures of all neighbors agreeing to it.
    - Photographs and references to the Nazi era are banned, as is the case in Austria.
    - Truck owner-operators pay 3x what states charge here for a base plate.

    And that’s just for openers.

  130. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 19, 2012 at 4:31 pm #

    Germany’s censorship is infamous among gamers too. Back in the 1980s and 90s, The European version of most video games, had to be toned down to the point of utter butchery, just to appease Germany’s over-the-top censorship laws. IE: Anything with living things killing other living things had to be turned into robots. Blood turned to water, etc.

  131. avatar
    Paper July 19, 2012 at 5:19 pm #

    An Alphabetical Test of the Emergency Broadcast System

    (questions and responses are matched by letters of the alphabet)

    [A]

    So? I wouldn’t want my President to waste time on such nonsense. There are so many other important things for him to worry about. Plus, again, it is one thing for Dr. C, a professional in the field, to make a hobby of debunking such conspiracies; any President giving anything like the time Dr. C spends on this issue would make himself a laughing stock. You don’t spend all your time arguing with childish opponents. People don’t want presidents who can’t handle the heat.

    [B]

    Then don’t become a politician? We are talking about the White House and the President. They are politicians. You asked why it would be foolish for *them* to engage in any deeply involved way. Because they *are* politicians. But forget about the word “politician,” I also spoke about basic human wisdom. Also, the wisdom necessary to be a leader. Leaders don’t get into tit-for-tats with such people. One, it is indeed foolish to tar yourself with such garbage. Two, a fair number of such people are just out to hurt you, period, they don’t care how. You don’t turn yourself into a petty, small person to be able to fight on such petty, small turf.

    [C]

    It has been handled correctly. Hawaii’s website has basically what you ask for, the equivalent of a FAQ. The President has released the relevant documents, held a press conference to do so, and the Press Secretary has answered it appropriately and succinctly.

    You don’t go down the rabbit hole trying to convince earthworms to stop eating rabbit turds. (This has been a test of the local ridicule alert system. If this had been a real alert, you would have been notified to find shelter.)

    You don’t hand-hold your enemies and try to step-by-step guide them to merely accepting your existence, while they refuse to admit the most obvious and basic facts. As President, you’ve got real agendas and real problems to handle; you don’t spend time trying to convince your haters that you are actually a human being. You just get on with the work of being human, or in this case, the work of a President. You want to debate policy? Fine. You want to debate and explore my birth? What? I’m supposed to watch these people masturb&te and give them tips on how to do it right?

    (Reminder: This is a test of the local ridicule alert system…)

    [D]

    Hawaii is in charge of the birth records, and they have “updated” their FAQ, as you might call it. They have given verifications to two states upon legitimate request. They just responded to Arpaio. That is who should respond to such developments, not the President or his White House staff.

    Besides, nothing of note actually has changed. The basic case and facts are not changing. The President still was born in Hawaii. That hasn’t changed. That’s all the President has to do with this silliness.

    Arpaio’s conference was a joke, a real honest to goodness joke. Most people here see it as just that. They don’t want the President wasting time on such silliness, which is how most people see it.

    [E]

    Last I checked, Dr. C is not President of the United States, nor Chancellor of Deutschland. He is a semi-retired professional in the very field in question. He is exactly the kind of person to engage with the matters that he does in fact engage.

    I can’t speak for Dr. C if it ever results in weakness for him. I can say for myself, that yes sometimes for me it does. I entered the birther world as an experiment in communication with someone in my family. I continue here as a kind of Al-Anon group for family members of “addicts.” Confrontation is sometimes necessary, but it becomes codependence if it just goes on and on.

    I have spent most of my life enemy-free. I once joked that I liked the people I didn’t like. I once had a full conversation with a mugger mugging me. Recently, however, I have received one of the few threats, if not the only threat in my life, not counting childhood skirmishes, from a birther I know personally. There is nothing wise about engaging him further. I have dealt with the practical matters of such a threat, but you think I should continue to engage?

    Hardcore birtherism is not about knowledge or facts. We are talking about emotional, psychological and personal issues. In such matters, there is a wise practice of the teacher waiting for the student. In this case, of course the birther I know who has threatened me is full of self-righteousness and believes he is the teacher and wise one. I like the story of the Fifth Patriarch of Zen who hid behind a rock from his pursuer who wanted to do him harm. Until that miscreant had a change of heart on his own and then asked for guidance.

    So, any birthers want guidance? In the meantime, there’s the birth certificate over there, right over there; go take a look.

    [F]

    Real enemies are not stupid. And indeed enemies who can cause trouble are the ones to pay attention to, and not just write off. There however is no parallel universe in the closest five billion versions of parallel universes where birthers are a real legal or political danger. Their danger comes from their overlap with hate groups. I know a birther involved in such a group, though he of course doesn’t call it that; he calls it being a Patriot. You send the Secret Service to visit such people, not your administrative staff to show them the ins and outs of where they are wrong.

    I’m also not talking about American Imperialism, or looking down on others or seeing enemies everywhere in the world. Even the Dalai Lama has enemies. Jesus had enemies. How you deal with real enemies is beyond the scope of this thread. The point is such enemies exist, for individuals of even the noblest stripe, not to mention for countries of every type, including a potent but sometimes flawed country like America. The Constitution right from the beginning talks about the ongoing quest to build a “more perfect union.” How America (or Germany for that matter) responds to its enemies is a whole other point. It can be done well, and some enemies can be made friends. But not all. The point here is that the President needs to be focused on such matters, not just potential enemies, but real matters, like oh, the health of the nation, the economy, etc.

    This is not a real scandal. It’s baby food. Real scandals might deserve real attention. This deserves a good burping.

    [G]

    “Lower staff” in this case is the Hawaiian Dept. of Health. They are on the case. They’ve said all they need to say. Also, there are the attorneys, for Obama and the Democratic Party etc. They too are on the case. Jablonksi has apparently trademarked his Empty Chair technique. Those are the appropriate responses, not detailed responses to irresponsible individuals such as Sheriff Arpaio or Jerome Corsi. The appropriate response to Trump was to release the long form, one single deft stroke, then make a joke out of him at the Correspondent’s Dinner, while keeping his presidential eye on the ball called Bin Laden. That’s a president in action.

    [H]

    No. It is not dishonest or unethical to not hold a teach-in for birthers, even if their foolishness helps you in an election. The President said what the truth is, he backed it up with actual evidence. People are free to make fools of themselves. It is up to the voters to decide what matters to them. The wiser Republicans, and certainly the President, know that swing voters are not interested in and are put off by this garbage. The rabid birthers think it helps their case. It helps to the extent that it whips up part of the anti-Obama base, but only people whom were anti-Obama already; it doesn’t swing voters, it pushes them away. There is nothing unethical in demonstrating to the voters your wisdom in not engaging such fools, but merely deftly handling it.

    foreigner:

    [A]

    > [WH] have responded with the basic facts, more than any other President ever has
    but much less than Dr.C. has done and other presidents were not so much asked about that

    [B]

    > Because it is basic politics and basic human wisdom to not engage foolishness.
    then don’t become a politician

    [C]

    >It just gives foolishness more importance than it deserves
    not if dealt with correctly. Can be short for foolish, long for less foolish claims.
    Make a FAQ if questions repeat.

    [D]

    > Because, once you have laid out the case and facts, to engage on such a level
    > is the kind of weakness that would demonstrate a disconcerting inability to deal
    > with real enemies in the world, and people don’t like that in their presidents.
    and I think that’s typical American. Obama with the birth certificate plastered
    on his forehead.The case and facts are changing. He has his stuff to reply
    to questions, update the FAQ.

    [E]

    Dr.C. _does_ continue to “engage on such a level” -
    did it result in weakness ?

    [F]

    Those “real enemies” may appear stupid to American culture
    but still cause serious problems.

    [G]

    > you have to stop engaging
    or refer the case to the lower staff

    [H]

    > And finally because birthers at this point help the President’s chances
    > at being reelected
    but isn’t that a bit dishonest and unethical ?

  132. avatar
    misha July 19, 2012 at 6:02 pm #

    Paper: Their danger comes from their overlap with hate groups. I know a birther involved in such a group, though he of course doesn’t call it that; he calls it being a Patriot.

    That is exactly the danger – and the rabble-rousers know it.

  133. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 4:16 am #

    Paper, that was a long reply, let me keep it short.
    A-not the president himself, his staff
    B-politicians must engage with their population=their voters
    The WH proudly announced that they are doing this
    C-WH must be aware of the pdf-controversy.They could just
    explain how it was created. Birthers are not (only) Obama’s
    “enemies” but also his people
    D-Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf
    E-the WH could then link to Dr.C at least ?
    F-one more reason to avoid this in the first place.I think most of
    birtherism was created by the secrecy and dismissing actions
    G-lower staff is WH-staff or Obama campaign staff. Hawaii has
    its own agenda and is bound by their privacy rules.
    H-dishonest to deliberately mislead them so they can ridicule them later

  134. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 4:20 am #

    wrt. censorship
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
    as you can see most European countries score higher than USA

  135. avatar
    G July 20, 2012 at 5:31 am #

    What an utter waste of ANY of his staff’s time! There are an endless number of very REAL issues to deal with and address in this country. A never-ending litany of mythological smears from irrational people and obvious propagandists is NOT one of them…

    foreigner:
    Paper, that was a long reply, let me keep it short.
    A-not the president himself, his staff

    But these people are NOT his “voters”. Show me the Birther that would actually vote for Obama “if only…” No such creature. What an utter BS argument you make here. You seem to conveniently neglect that the “population” includes a greater percentage of people who ARE his voters, who DON’T want to see any time wasted on such ludicrousness… so in terms of the very diametric conflict of “interests” within the voting population, the smart politician will focus on where he actually has votes to be gained or lost. The Birther votes have NEVER been on the table in these regards, so your entire argument here is nothing but fallacy and folly.

    foreigner:

    B-politicians must engage with their population=their voters
    The WH proudly announced that they are doing this

    Complete waste of time. See response to B above. There is ZERO evidence that anyone who would credibly be considering voting for him is concerned about this at all. In terms of politics, YES, Birthers *ARE* his political “enemies”. That is crystal clear.

    foreigner:
    C-WH must be aware of the pdf-controversy.They could just
    explain how it was created. Birthers are not (only) Obama’s
    “enemies” but also his people

    Wrong. Look at the HI DOH FAQ. They specifically LINK to the White House PDF and call it Obama’s Birth Certificate. That is a direct endorsement by them of it. *DUH*

    foreigner:
    D-Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf

    Why on earth do they need to? This is just a personal blog on the internet, after all. The HI DOH is an OFFICIAL source, which cannot be trumped in these specific regards. Issue addressed. End of Story.

    I find it completely comical how you reality deniers consistently ignore OFFICIAL sources and instead give too much credence to personal blogs on the internet. Foolish.

    foreigner:
    E-the WH could then link to Dr.C at least ?

    Except that is all in your imagination. You simply see only what you want to see, not what has actually taken place.

    foreigner:
    F-one more reason to avoid this in the first place.I think most of birtherism was created by the secrecy and dismissing actions

    Hawaii’s “agenda” is simply following Hawaii laws and US law, within their particular jurisdiction. Nothing more. As to the rest of your silliness, see response to B above.

    foreigner:
    G-lower staff is WH-staff or Obama campaign staff. Hawaii has its own agenda and is bound by their privacy rules.

    Nonsense! There is no “deliberately mislead” here at all. ALL official positions have been that the documents ARE what Obama and HI has ALWAYS said they are and that Obama is NBC.

    That a bunch of willful malcontents insist on believing Birther nonsense is their own fault and gullible Birthers only have themselves to blame for willfully accepting and spreading Birther myths and lies. If you say ridiculous things and chose to ignore actual facts and evidence, then you rightfully deserve to be ridiculed for that.

    foreigner:
    H-dishonest to deliberately mislead them so they can ridicule them later

  136. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 5:45 am #

    A) Doesn’t matter. Staff is a waste of resources. He has explained all that he needs to explain, more than he needs to explain by far.

    B) Obama supplied his b.c. He thus engaged the people on this issue more than any other president. He even wrote an autobiography. Engagement does not mean following foolishness down a rabbit hole.

    C) re: PDF, please, that is not a controversy. That is garbage barely worthy of a response from me, much less a president. All that needs to be said is that Hawaii verifies the information, that Obama was born there, and even provides a link to the PDF. After that, it doesn’t matter even if it were in crayon. That’s how foolish and even vile that “controversy” is.

    D) Again, Hawaii provides a link from their own official website to the PDF itself. No further comment really necessary. But they do verify the information and that the President was born there.

    E) Why? That’s just foolishness. They posted the b.c. on the WH website (that PDF). Hawaii has verified Obama was born there more than once. Hawaii is the authority over its own b.c.’s, not Dr. C.

    F) That would be incorrect, the opposite of what happened. The more the President presented, the more hardcore birthers moved the bar. But everyone else accepted reality.

    G) Unless Hawaii itself has committed fraud, there is nothing actually important to discuss. And the birth records themselves *belong* to Hawaii, not the President. So deal with Hawaii, or acknowledge the truth and move on to actual pressing problems, like the economy etc.

    H) They are misleading themselves. The President has not misled any of us on this issue. He has presented the facts. He need not chase down every lie. If you want to believe lies and foolishness, that’s your business. If you don’t like it, don’t vote for him. Indeed, no one who still has “doubts” about the President’s birth is going to vote for him, and never will no matter how much the President or his staff say at this point.

    foreigner:
    Paper, that was a long reply, let me keep it short.
    A-not the president himself, his staff
    B-politicians must engage with their population=their voters
    The WH proudly announced that they are doing this
    C-WH must be aware of the pdf-controversy.They could just
    explain how it was created. Birthers are not (only) Obama’s
    “enemies” but also his people
    D-Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf
    E-the WH could then link to Dr.C at least ?
    F-one more reason to avoid this in the first place.I think most of
    birtherism was created by the secrecy and dismissing actions
    G-lower staff is WH-staff or Obama campaign staff. Hawaii has
    its own agenda and is bound by their privacy rules.
    H-dishonest to deliberately mislead them so they can ridicule them later

    foreigner:
    Paper, that was a long reply, let me keep it short.
    A-not the president himself, his staff
    B-politicians must engage with their population=their voters
    The WH proudly announced that they are doing this
    C-WH must be aware of the pdf-controversy.They could just
    explain how it was created. Birthers are not (only) Obama’s
    “enemies” but also his people
    D-Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf
    E-the WH could then link to Dr.C at least ?
    F-one more reason to avoid this in the first place.I think most of
    birtherism was created by the secrecy and dismissing actions
    G-lower staff is WH-staff or Obama campaign staff. Hawaii has
    its own agenda and is bound by their privacy rules.
    H-dishonest to deliberately mislead them so they can ridicule them later

  137. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 5:58 am #

    So you are saying you are going to keep it presidential?

    Not be foolish like me to expound at length?

    See how it works?

    foreigner:
    Paper, that was a long reply, let me keep it short.

  138. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 7:03 am #

    if it’s all that irrelevant, then why are we here ? Why do so many people
    believe that he was not born in USA ?
    Not commenting, when they could easily clarify, is defacto a misleading.
    I do think that most people outside USA would agree that the WH should
    comment and answer questions.
    And they would consider it strange why people here would oppose to such clarifying,
    while they themselves declare it their mission
    to do exactly that.

  139. avatar
    Lupin July 20, 2012 at 7:37 am #

    foreigner: if it’s all that irrelevant, then why are we here ?

    This is the internet, remember? Somewhere a like-minded group of people are discussing the sodomization of drosophiles.

    Why do so many people
    believe that he was not born in USA ?

    Actually, not many do. Also keep in minds that polls report (true or false) that a majority of Americans believe in angels, UFOs, big foot, etc.

    Not commenting, when they could easily clarify, is defacto a misleading.
    I do think that most people outside USA would agree that the WH should
    comment and answer questions.

    Certainly not! Most people outside the USA are no more aware of this 100% lunatic fringe than they are about the Face on Mars and other weird American beliefs — and they certainly don’t agree that the US President should cater to or even acknowledge the whims of a coterie of potential KKK members.

  140. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 7:50 am #

    We are here, not the President. I personally am here as a kind of a support group for birther family members. Delving into all the details is at times interesting and educational, but it is not in any way a pressing matter.

    There are not “so many” people who believe he wasn’t born here.

    You are talking about the President or his staff chasing down lies and foolishness that most people don’t believe and most people understand as garbage.

    You talk about the need for clarification, but it HAS been clarified. Anything else that you want is not clarification, no matter how much you use that word.

    My friends abroad can’t believe how ridiculous birthers are. I do not notice foreign press at large talking about how the President should be doing more about this.

    foreigner:
    if it’s all that irrelevant, then why are we here ? Why do so many people
    believe that he was not born in USA ?
    Not commenting, when they could easily clarify, is defacto a misleading.
    I do think that most people outside USA would agree that the WH should
    comment and answer questions.
    And they would consider it strange why people here would oppose to such clarifying,
    while they themselves declare it their mission
    to do exactly that.

  141. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 8:03 am #

    Lupin,
    I meant, those foreigners that knew about the issue and informed themselves
    would presumably agree with me, that the WH/OC should clarify about the issue and reply.
    E.g. a German magazine writing an article about it.
    They would contact the WH and ask those questions.
    ——————–
    Paper,
    i.e. how the pdf was created, the numbering, the statistical pencil marks,
    that are the current questions, heavily discussed here, as you know.
    The WH and the statistical bureau could easily explain this.
    What we are doing here and do consider a good and useful thing -
    that same thing when done by the WH – who is directly involved
    and more competent – would then suddenly become inappropriate ?
    I don’t understand that.

  142. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 8:07 am #

    They would ask the questions that have already been asked and answered.

    foreigner:
    Lupin,
    I meant, those foreigners that knew about the issue and informed themselves
    would presumably agree with me, that the WH/OC should clarify about the issue and reply.
    E.g. a German magazine writing an article about it.
    They would contact the WH and ask those questions.
    ——————–

  143. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 8:15 am #

    These are not important questions to the level,of the President or staff needing to weigh in. Discussion about the PDF is silliness. It’s barely worth a comment from anyone.

    But you are also wrong to say the WH is directly involved in or competent to discuss such issues as pencil marks and numbering. That is precisely Hawaii’s bailiwick.

    Hawaii not talking as much as you want? Take it up with Hawaii. I think they are doing just fine.

    foreigner:

    Paper,
    i.e. how the pdf was created, the numbering, the statistical pencil marks,
    that are the current questions, heavily discussed here, as you know.
    The WH and the statistical bureau could easily explain this.
    What we are doing here and do consider a good and useful thing -
    that same thing when done by the WH – who is directly involved
    and more competent – would then suddenly become inappropriate ?
    I don’t understand that.

  144. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 8:33 am #

    so, how was the pdf created ? What hardware and software and settings were used ?
    This is not yet answered, AFAIK, although much discussed since Apr.2011 !
    That’s really easy to answer by the WH, just find the person who did it – takes
    a few minutes.
    And yes, for the pencil marks asks Hawaii statistical bureau, no trip to Hawaii
    required. Or/and the federal statistics, how it was being done in 1961.

    > barely worth a comment from anyone
    more than 20% of the population believes the president is not born in USA and
    you have elections in a few months, but it’s not worth a comment that just needs
    a few minutes ?

  145. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 8:59 am #

    Meaningless questions about the PDF. The only value is educational, as in oh, that is how PDFs work. You can pick up a book, search online or take a class. You don’t need the President. You don’t actually need to know what hardware or software they used. It would tell you nothing about his birth.

    Hawaii links to that PDF from their official site. They have verified the President was born in Hawaii, as well as the information on the PDF as matching their original records.

    You want clarification?

    That means the PDF cannot be a forgery, or if you insist that it still might be, then, it would be a forgery of accurate information. Cue the ridicule alert system.

    Thus, there is nothing to discuss about the PDF except as an intellectual exercise.

    The only possible avenue in such a discussion is to discover fraud, changing or planting of records in Hawaii. Not forgery, not PDFs.

    More on your other points shortly…

    foreigner:
    so, how was the pdf created ? What hardware and software and settings were used ?
    This is not yet answered, AFAIK, although much discussed since Apr.2011 !
    That’s really easy to answer by the WH, just find the person who did it – takes
    a few minutes.

  146. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 9:05 am #

    It also would take just a moment to tell you what I ate for breakfast. But it turns out you don’t need to know, and I’ve got to focus as best I can on addressing the key aspects of your post.

    foreigner:
    just find the person who did it – takes
    a few minutes.

  147. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 9:14 am #

    These individuals are never going to vote for the President, and I would hazard they didn’t vote for him the first time. They are just a subset of the group that is not going to vote for him no matter what.

    The only comment that takes a few minutes worth saying is: the President was born in Hawaii, as verified by the state of Hawaii. This and press conference has already been done.

    foreigner:

    > barely worth a comment from anyone
    more than 20% of the population believes the president is not born in USA and
    you have elections in a few months, but it’s not worth a comment that just needs
    a few minutes ?

  148. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 9:20 am #

    If you care, you go do the research. Dr. C has. I would imagine the President nor his staff know. And it’s not their business really. The answer to that is simple. Like every other American with a birth certificate, the President has no part in the processing of his birth certificate, and any questions should be directed to Hawaii’s Dept. of Health.

    There you go. You’re right. It took just a moment.

    foreigner:
    .
    And yes, for the pencil marks asks Hawaii statistical bureau, no trip to Hawaii
    required. Or/and the federal statistics, how it was being done in 1961.

  149. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 9:27 am #

    Just in case you are not aware, foreigner, in this country birth certificates are considered prima facie evidence. On their face, they are all the evidence needed. Show some fraud, okay, then people will take note. But go on a fishing expedition? No. States also in this country have complete control over their own documents. And the Constitution requires other states to give full faith and credit to those documents. Which means obviously fraudulent fishing expeditions are frowned upon.

  150. avatar
    y_p_w July 20, 2012 at 9:52 am #

    foreigner: so, how was the pdf created ? What hardware and software and settings were used ?
    This is not yet answered, AFAIK, although much discussed since Apr.2011 !
    That’s really easy to answer by the WH, just find the person who did it – takes
    a few minutes.

    Frankly I would think whoever did it probably didn’t note the settings used. I just scanned a document and applied a little bit of contrast adjustment, but I don’t even remember where I set it exactly.

  151. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 10:01 am #

    Good point. For instance, on the level of such important matters, I already am forgetting how much milk I put in my coffee.

    I mean, *if* I had coffee. I neither confirm nor deny that. And don’t get cute, I also neither confirm nor deny that I actually used milk. This is all strictly “need to know” stuff.

    y_p_w: Frankly I would think whoever did it probably didn’t note the settings used.I just scanned a document and applied a little bit of contrast adjustment, but I don’t even remember where I set it exactly.

  152. avatar
    misha July 20, 2012 at 11:05 am #

    Paper: It also would take just a moment to tell you what I ate for breakfast.

    I saw the lord on my toast.

  153. avatar
    Lupin July 20, 2012 at 11:08 am #

    foreigner: Lupin,
    I meant, those foreigners that knew about the issue and informed themselves
    would presumably agree with me, that the WH/OC should clarify about the issue and reply.
    E.g. a German magazine writing an article about it.
    They would contact the WH and ask those questions.

    Not at all. Any magazine, French, German, etc. would first research the issue and either drop it altogether or write a scathing sarcastic article about those American morons who believe in any kind of rubbish.

    Birtherism has only been mentioned a few times in French papers (only when Trump brought it up AFIK), very briefly, and always as an object of ridicule.

  154. avatar
    Lupin July 20, 2012 at 11:09 am #

    Paper: Just in case you are not aware, foreigner, in this country birth certificates are considered prima facie evidence.

    That is true here as well. “foreigner” is sorely deluded if he thinks things would be different in France or Germany.

  155. avatar
    misha July 20, 2012 at 11:19 am #

    Lupin: Birtherism has only been mentioned a few times in French papers (only when Trump brought it up AFIK), very briefly, and always as an object of ridicule.

    From Der Spiegel (The Mirror): The ideological chasms in the US are as deep as they have ever been, with Republicans blocking the president at every turn. Who is responsible for his failure?

    Read on:
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/president-barack-obama-has-disappointed-in-his-first-term-a-838648.html

  156. avatar
    JD Reed July 20, 2012 at 12:49 pm #

    Foreigner, given your foreign origins and by what you post here, it’s obvious that in your sojourn here you still don’t have a solid grasp of how this country’s politics operate — poisonously hyperpartisan, and growing more so every day. If 20 percent of Americans believe that Mr. Obama certainly was born elsewhere, it’s because the great bulk of them choose to believe that way — or profess to believe that way — because it’s negative about this president. It’s most definitely NOT about having objectively and dispassionately weighed the evidence,before arriving at their position.
    Don’t believe so? Check out the 70 or so lies having nothing to do with presidential eligibility that those who hate Mr. Obama have widely circulated. Exampes: a rightwing shill named Michael Savage a couple of years back told his radio audience that Mr. Obama was the only sitting president to ever skip a Memorial Day ceremony at Arlington National Cenetery, when a quick check of the easily available evidence — to anyone with competent search skills — showed that the first George Bush skipped all four during his presidency. A more recent similar rumor says the same thing abour the president in regard to D-Day. And another rumor has Mr. Obama repainting Air Force One to remove the American flag from the plane’s tail.
    I’m sorry, Mr. Foreigner, but from what you’ve posted here to date. I suspect you share the attributes of the 20 percent.

  157. avatar
    foreigner July 20, 2012 at 1:17 pm #

    I’m not sure, what you want to say.
    The 20+% really only count as ~5%, not enough for the WH
    to comment on the pdf which requires more % ?
    No matter, how much time and effort it takes the WH to comment,
    it’s a matter of principle ?
    Or it just mustn’t be done for some
    not to be disclosed reason of American ethics – they’d somehow
    lose their honor, if they did ?

  158. avatar
    misha July 20, 2012 at 1:28 pm #

    foreigner: Read Der Spiegel for a few weeks, and then come back.

    Right now, what you are doing would make Goebbels proud.

  159. avatar
    G July 20, 2012 at 2:04 pm #

    Considering that the OFFICIAL authority agency in HI has kept a dedicated FAQ page on its website to deal with this VERY issue, I can’t see what more any reasonable person could want…

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

    I mean, that reality and their official records are quite inescapable…yet these Birther idiot denialists keep pretending it isn’t there…

    …But of course, foreigner is not being reasonable here at all… he simply will only accept something that reinforces his own personal preconceived BIAS…and can’t deal with a reality that doesn’t match up with that…

    Paper: Hawaii not talking as much as you want? Take it up with Hawaii. I think they are doing just fine.

  160. avatar
    G July 20, 2012 at 2:11 pm #

    NO it is not worth further comment by them at all.

    You’re completely ludicrous premise FAILS, because you can’t establish that ANY of those people would EVER vote for Obama in the first place…

    The ODS crowd’s votes against Obama have already been baked into the electoral equation since the beginning. They therefore DO NOT impact the margin of votes in any significant form. Pandering to them at all has ZERO potential gain.

    Only self-deluded fools think this particular angle of Birther smear propaganda tactics can be their ticket to changing an election dynamic. In reality, you are only preaching to an already locked in choir.

    foreigner: more than 20% of the population believes the president is not born in USA and
    you have elections in a few months, but it’s not worth a comment that just needs
    a few minutes ?

  161. avatar
    G July 20, 2012 at 2:17 pm #

    You again demonstrate that you are completely clueless and have ZERO grasp of the dynamics in modern American politics and how free speech and meaningless but bizarre beliefs are simply entrenched in certain portions of our diverse population.

    To an American, your weird rant here is about as foolish and ignorant as it gets…

    foreigner:
    I’m not sure, what you want to say.
    The 20+% really only count as ~5%, not enough for the WH
    to comment on the pdf which requires more % ?
    No matter, how much time and effort it takes the WH to comment,
    it’s a matter of principle ?
    Or it just mustn’t be done for some
    not to be disclosed reason of American ethics – they’d somehow
    lose their honor, if they did ?

  162. avatar
    G July 20, 2012 at 2:18 pm #

    BINGO!

    That has been quite obvious since nearly the beginning of his crazy posts…

    JD Reed: I’m sorry, Mr. Foreigner, but from what you’ve posted here to date. I suspect you share the attributes of the 20 percent.

  163. avatar
    justlw July 20, 2012 at 2:26 pm #

    foreigner: Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf

    Come, walk with me.

    Imagine that during the press conference, the White House hands out high-resolution paper copies of the LFBC. After the press conference, the WH posts a web page with text that lists all the boxes on the LFBC, both the field names and the data, and notes and describes its various stamps and seals. (The date stamp, the Onaka stamp, and the raised seal).

    Imagine now that the State of Hawaii then links to this page from their site and says, “Everything on this page matches our data.”

    What would your conclusion be?

    Note that the web page contains all the data on the LFBC. It is not itself a certified document, nor is it characterized as one. But the State of Hawaii explicitly verifies its data as matching the data they have at hand.

    Finally, imagine that a team of cracked individuals — er, a crack team of individuals — goes through the web page and raises objections, not about the content, but about how the page is laid out internally.

    1. It’s not an exact copy of the LFBC. Is the White House engaging in deception?
    2. It’s not an exact copy of the LFBC. Is the data invalid?
    3. Is there some reason to believe the State of Hawaii is engaging in deception?
    4. Is the internal layout of the page relevant in any way?

    And finally, of course:

    5. How is what I described above different from what is actually the case today?

  164. avatar
    Paper July 20, 2012 at 3:51 pm #

    here is the principle: they already clarified all that a reasonable person needs.

    I have already given you the only answer necessary re the PDF, for instance, and you haven’t acknowledged it. Which is what would happen if the WH bothered to go down the rabbit hole you think they should.

    It is not up to the President or his staff to show you how foolish you are being.

    foreigner:
    No matter, how much time and effort it takes the WH to comment,
    it’s a matter of principle ?
    Or it just mustn’t be done for some
    not to be disclosed reason of American ethics – they’d somehow
    lose their honor, if they did ?

  165. avatar
    gorefan July 20, 2012 at 5:44 pm #

    foreigner: D-Hawaii won’t comment on the pdf

    Not true. Dr. Onaka sent a certified verification of the information on the pdf to a Federal Court in Mississippi. It doesn’t get more official then that.

  166. avatar
    JPotter July 20, 2012 at 9:35 pm #

    Paper: Yes. And it has been done.

    Paper, thanks for that excellent pair of posts. As I need to start saying again, “It is well settled.”

  167. avatar
    JPotter July 20, 2012 at 9:37 pm #

    justlw: Come, walk with me.

    Enjoyed the trip and fresh perspective, justlw ;)

  168. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 1:47 am #

    gorefan,justlw,
    the context was, how the pdf was created.
    The “content” matches what Hawaii has, says Hawaii. But we go beyond that,
    since the birthers do. One of their major claims is that the layering
    can’t be explained, you must have noticed that (Zebest,Papit,Zullo).
    If so, then the pdf could have been forged
    without the information been changed.
    This could easily be resolved by the White House.
    People here are strangely somehow not seeing that argument
    and talking around it, diverting.
    It’s one of the central points of birtherism and i.e. the recent press conference
    and what this blog is about and the WH could resolve it easily.
    But somehow this mustn’t be talked about here.

  169. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    No, you don’t seem to get it at all. From any REAL meaningful context, the “content” match *IS* the END OF STORY right there.

    It doesn’t matter at all that the Birthers “go beyond that”. Because the Birthers beliefs have ZERO connection to how the laws in this country actually work. Their complaints are BOGUS on the face of it and therefore, not worth any official attention.

    This blog’s purpose is to look into and report on these conspiracies. It does that. But this is a place of nothing more than individuals coming together to observe and look at something that is a matter of personal hobby-level interest. There is ZERO reason for the White House, the Courts, the State of HI, etc. to pay any attention to IRRELEVANT nonsense arguments about meaningless PDF images at all.

    Under all REAL world law and procedure here, the HI vouching for the “content” IS ALL that has any RELEVANCE. That has been done repeatedly.

    Wasting official time paying attention to wrongheaded kook claims is not going to happen. The erroneousBirther PDF tantrums deserve no more serious attention than Flat Earth Society members insisting upon a geocentric instead of heliocentric model for the solar system. Such arguments are nonsense on their face.

    Again, you are just Concern Trolling here and have NO serious argument to make…

    foreigner:
    gorefan,justlw,
    the context was, how the pdf was created.
    The “content” matches what Hawaii has, says Hawaii. But we go beyond that,
    since the birthers do.
    One of their major claims is that the layering
    can’t be explained, you must have noticed that (Zebest,Papit,Zullo).
    If so, then the pdf could have been forged
    without the information been changed.
    This could easily be resolved by the White House.
    People here are strangely somehow not seeing that argument
    and talking around it, diverting.
    It’s one of the central points of birtherism and i.e. the recent press conference
    and what this blog is about
    and the WH could resolve it easily.
    But somehow this mustn’t be talked about here.

  170. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 2:02 am #

    foreigner: But we go beyond that,
    since the birthers do. One of their major claims is that the layering can’t be explained, you must have noticed that (Zebest,Papit,Zullo). If so, then the pdf could have been forged

    How far removed are you, in your family tree, from Joseph Goebbels?

  171. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 2:27 am #

    G,
    let me give another example. I’ve talked about a hypothetical unprofound accusation
    of Russia towards USA having shot one of their ships and USA not commenting
    for similar reasons as with the pdf here. Someone said that were different and
    more serious, OK.
    Now we had cases with authors publishing pictures of Mohammed or ridiculing
    about Muslim leaders. That gave lots of fuss, Muslims were furious.
    How would the US-government handle such things ?
    I assume it’s perfectly legal in USA to publish (satirical) pictures of Mohammed
    and the anger was totally unjustified and you even have that 1st amendment
    and they have the wrong religion in the first place anyway, so there is no
    reason to deal with it or even to respond and issue any statement, and those
    reporters who even dare to ask questions about it are being labeled
    “picturers” and ridiculed ?

  172. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 2:34 am #

    misha,
    Germany is big, not as big as USA but still ~80M people.
    How many of them do you know ? I don’t know why you pick Goebbels,
    who is even dead since decades. I’m not aware of any relationship.
    But even if, opinion,rhetorics,attitudes and such do not inherit.
    But even if they did, you’d still have to read what I write and
    judge by my words, not inheritage, OK ?

  173. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 2:39 am #

    Our Constitution specifies freedom of religion. Therefore there is NO “wrong religion” under our laws.

    There are NO laws against publishing pictures of religious figures, Mohammed or otherwise. Of course, private institutions are within their private right to choose or not chose to display/publish materials of “controversial nature” as they see fit. There are broad expressions of satire, including those of a controversial religious context, which get published or even put on display in museums here all the time.

    In general, government officials wisely usually tend to stay away from doing much to weigh in on such controversies, but the populace is free to express their opinions, including ridicule, as much as they want.

    You seem to not grasp how our 1st Amendment rights work here at all. Let me put it in simple terms – In America, you are free to be an @sshole and others are just as free to point out to people that they are being @ssholes… same with being ridiculous and being ridiculed as a result. But none of that requires the government to weigh in on such matters at all…

    foreigner: How would the US-government handle such things ?
    I assume it’s perfectly legal in USA to publish (satirical) pictures of Mohammed
    and the anger was totally unjustified and you even have that 1st amendment
    and they have the wrong religion in the first place anyway, so there is no
    reason to deal with it or even to respond and issue any statement, and those
    reporters who even dare to ask questions about it are being labeled
    “picturers” and ridiculed ?

  174. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 2:47 am #

    foreigner: I’ve talked about a hypothetical unprofound accusation of Russia towards USA having shot one of their ships

    Nena – 99 Luftballons:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQno2cL0iWQ&feature=related

  175. avatar
    linda July 21, 2012 at 2:47 am #

    I have to disagree. Second part first. No, nothing can be easily resolved by the WH. Obama released the short form BC prior to the 2008 election, because that would resolve everything. He released the long form in 2011, because that is all the birther-curious wanted, but that wasn’t enough. He has at least 12 years of tax returns online, but that isn’t enough, they are clamoring for college transcripts. It will never end.

    The first part, to me, is a no-brainer. The State of Hawaii has posted on their website to this day, the letter from Obama requesting his long form BC and authorizing his attorney to pick it up. They have the letter from the attorney, requesting the BC and saying they will go to Hawaii and hand carry the BCs back to DC. They have the letter from Director of Health Fuddy, saying she personally observed the copying of the BC and is enclosing two certified copies. Hawaii also says the BC can be viewed on the WH website and links to it. They have also issued two Verifications of the BC. Yet, there are those who consider what is posted on the WH website is a “forgery”.

    Even though we know the BCs were issued and that Obama’s attorney picked them up, even though we know that Hawaii has said, repeatedly, that what is on the WH website matches their records, it is suspected of being a forgery? How? Even if, a big-fat-no-it-never-happened IF, the actual BC would not scan well, and even though they had two certified copies to chose from, the WH decided to create from whole cloth, a duplicate so that it would be more legible to the public, how is that a forgery? It is not a legal document, it cannot be used in court, it is for information purposes only, and Hawaii vouches for the information. I don’t believe that happened, but what if it did? What is the problem with it? As long as the information is the same, what possible difference could it make?

    foreigner: If so, then the pdf could have been forged
    without the information been changed.
    This could easily be resolved by the White House.
    P

  176. avatar
    linda July 21, 2012 at 2:50 am #

    Did you really just say they have the wrong religion?

    foreigner: they have the wrong religion in the first place anyway

  177. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 2:51 am #

    foreigner: I don’t know why you pick Goebbels…But even if they did, you’d still have to read what I write and judge by my words, not inheritage, OK ?

    If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

    Tell me the difference between that and the Birthers/Denialists.

  178. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 2:56 am #

    linda: Did you really just say they have the wrong religion?

    He said it – just like they used to say about us.

    foreigner: I don’t know why you pick Goebbels, who is even dead since decades. I’m not aware of any relationship. But even if, opinion,rhetorics,attitudes and such do not inherit. But even if they did, you’d still have to read what I write and judge by my words, not inheritage, OK ?

    A truckload of irony meters just exploded, and a highway has been shut down.

  179. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:10 am #

    I suspect that might be foreigner’s true issue with Obama – he doesn’t like the sound of his name or that his dad was Muslim…regardless that President Obama and his family are practicing Christians…

    …nor do I suspect that foreigner properly appreciates that the entire issue of religion would be immaterial to US eligibility and that it is expressly stated in our Constitution that there are NO religious tests for holding political office here. Therefore, the US electorate would be perfectly within our rights to elect a Muslim to the office of President.

    Does that cause you “concern” foreigner??

    linda:
    Did you really just say they have the wrong religion?

  180. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 3:23 am #

    G: it is expressly stated in our Constitution that there are NO religious tests for holding political office here.

    Is Nikki a Christian? – In Nikki’s words: “My faith in Christ has a profound impact on my daily life and I look to Him for guidance with every decision I make. God has blessed my family in so many ways and my faith in the Lord gives me great strength on a daily basis. Being a Christian is not about words, but about living for Christ every day.”

    http://www.nikkihaley.com/truthinfacts/question-is-nikki-a-christian/

    US Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 3: “…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    Does not apply to Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, all red states, and Tea Partiers.

  181. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:26 am #

    linda,
    how do you know the WH can’t easily resolve this ?
    It seems much more likely to me that they do know
    which hardware and software was used to produce the .pdf.
    They probably still have the original scan-file which was
    processed. And they could probably repeat the process.
    Then you go on to list what all was already done …
    Compared to that declaring how the pdf was created
    is really a small effort. No trip to Hawaii, no lawyers needed.
    But it would enhance the purpose of the BC-release by
    a big amount. The declared purpose which was to
    satisfy the birthers, beyond any legal requirement.
    See the Obama press conference on 2011.04.27
    I’d estimate that ~30% of the current birther movement
    is concentrated on that .pdf and would be resolved by
    the WH-explanation and reproduction of the layers
    and all the other perceived oddities.

  182. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:28 am #

    linda: Did you really just say they have the wrong religion?

    you are quoting out of context.
    I did put those words in the mouth of those who might hypothetically be
    arguing (like people do here) why no government statement would be necessary

  183. avatar
    linda July 21, 2012 at 3:31 am #

    Because there is no issue with the pdf, the birthers’ issue is with Obama. As long as he is president, there will some issue. Any rational person can look at the evidence and realize Obama was born in Hawaii. Nothing else matters. Who, when, why or how the pdf was made is irrelevant.

    foreigner: how do you know the WH can’t easily resolve this ?

  184. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:33 am #

    the birthers have an issue with the pdf and that one
    could be presumably resolved easily.

  185. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:35 am #

    Foreigner, here is your exact words. Please explain exactly what you mean by this…

    foreigner: I assume it’s perfectly legal in USA to publish (satirical) pictures of Mohammed
    and the anger was totally unjustified and you even have that 1st amendment
    and they have the wrong religion in the first place anyway,

    So please explain, as within the context of the English language, you just said that Muslims have the “wrong religion”… what do you mean by that, exactly?

    foreigner: you are quoting out of context.
    I did put those words in the mouth of those who might hypothetically be
    arguing (like people do here) why no government statement would be necessary

  186. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:36 am #

    G: Our Constitution specifies freedom of religion. Therefore there is NO “wrong religion” under our laws.There are NO laws against publishing pictures of religious figures, Mohammed or otherwise. Of course, private institutions are within their private right to choose or not chose to display/publish materials of “controversial nature” as they see fit. There are broad expressions of satire, including those of a controversial religious context, which get published or even put on display in museums here all the time. In general, government officials wisely usually tend to stay away from doing much to weigh in on such controversies, but the populace is free to express their opinions, including ridicule, as much as they want.You seem to not grasp how our 1st Amendment rights work here at all. Let me put it in simple terms – In America, you are free to be an @sshole and others are just as free to point out to people that they are being @ssholes… same with being ridiculous and being ridiculed as a result. But none of that requires the government to weigh in on such matters at all…

    Same here, but at some point the governments _had_ to jump in,
    to stop the escalation

  187. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:40 am #

    Did you just ignore her entire post, in which she went into great detail explaining WHY???

    I understood her perfectly. YOU are the one with this ludicrous premise that the WH could “easily resolve this”…so why don’t you explain WHY you think that is the case? Exactly what do you expect them to do and WHY would that action “suddenly” resolve the issue, where EVERY action they’ve done already, just leads to further goal-posts being shifted, further denialism, and extra demands for yet MORE…

    You are being absurd and not reasonable in your thinking at all… You want a standard applied to Obama that NO other president in history has ever been put under.

    foreigner: linda,
    how do you know the WH can’t easily resolve this ?

  188. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:45 am #

    What escalation?

    Further, how is this related to Birtherism exactly? I see ZERO equivalency between these two issues. …unless you are saying that zealous threats of Birther demands against someone’s life is equivalent to zealous Islamofacist threats…

    There is NO real escalation with Birtherism at all. You simply have the same overall batch of malcontents complaining and not voting for Obama, regardless. There is NO change in that equation and NOTHING lost by ignoring them and NOTHING gained by wasting time attempting to appease them….

    foreigner: Same here, but at some point the governments _had_ to jump in,
    to stop the escalation

  189. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:47 am #

    BS. Simply saying that doesn’t make it so. You just keep repeating the same claim, without backing up your statement with any reasoning to justify it at all.

    The history of Birtherism to date has shown that NOTHING is “resolved easily”. Further, as repeatedly told to you, there is ZERO evidence that any Birther would ever vote for Obama, regardless.

    So who are you trying to fool…?

    foreigner:
    the birthers have an issue with the pdf and that one
    could be presumably resolved easily.

  190. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:51 am #

    misha: If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.Tell me the difference between that and the Birthers/Denialists.

    I don’t know whether Goebbels said that, maybe he did.
    But why then did you ask whether I were a relative to him ?
    Did you want to suggest that way, I would be spreading lies here,
    without having to explicitely quote those alleged lies ?

  191. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 3:53 am #

    There is NO legal requirement for a Birth Certificate at all.

    Nor is there any requirement / entitlement to satisfy Birthers.

    The President is well within his right to ignore them. If I were him, I’d tell them to go pound salt. He would be within his right to do that too.

    If they are unsatisfied, they HAVE an existing and simple solution – to NOT vote for him. That is it. That is ALL they have any rights to do.

    Nor is there any real concern about them not voting for him. They never had any intentions of doing so, regardless. Their votes against him have already been factored into the equation from the outset.

    foreigner: The declared purpose which was to satisfy the birthers, beyond any legal requirement.

  192. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 3:59 am #

    G, you still left out the first part :
    > Now we had cases with authors publishing pictures of Mohammed or ridiculing
    > about Muslim leaders. That gave lots of fuss, Muslims were furious.
    > How would the US-government handle such things ?

    meaning, how the US-government would/should handle such things
    as compared with the birthers,
    I.e. would a not-commenting strategy be appropriate.

    > I assume it’s perfectly legal in USA to publish (satirical) pictures of Mohammed
    > and the anger was totally unjustified and you even have that 1st amendment
    > and they have the wrong religion in the first place anyway,

    comparing the situation with the birthers.
    “wrong religion” vs. “wrong party” , see ?
    The birther’s are suspected to have political motivation.
    (also my impression)

    > so there is no reason to deal with it or even to respond and issue any statement,
    > and those reporters who even dare to ask questions about it are being labeled
    > “picturers” and ridiculed ?

  193. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 4:12 am #

    Why wouldn’t it? You’ve given no demonstrable equivalent scenario in which it would be necessary and further, you’ve failed to make any reasonable correlation between that hypothetical situation that would be equivalent to the Birther phenomenon…

    foreigner: I.e. would a not-commenting strategy be appropriate.

    Well, your terminology again translates incorrectly here in english. There is no such thing as a “wrong religion” or “wrong party” under our laws.

    There are people of different faiths and different parties. That is VASTLY different than wha the meaning of the term “wrong” implies.

    The Birthers are a mixed set of both political and personal motivations. The whole point there is that there is there is ZERO reason to believe that any Birther will vote for Obama, regardless.

    So from that political standpoint, those aren’t votes that went to Obama in 2008 and they won’t be votes that go to him in 2012.

    foreigner: comparing the situation with the birthers.
    “wrong religion” vs. “wrong party” , see ?
    The birther’s are suspected to have political motivation.
    (also my impression)

  194. avatar
    G July 21, 2012 at 4:23 am #

    Maybe you are having difficulty grasping how our General Election for President works here – we do NOT have a parlimentary system, like in Europe. The major Party primaries serve a function only earlier in the process, to help select their nominees to run for President.

    In the General Election, people vote directly for the electors representing an individual candidate , not a party.

    The main credible candidates for President in the General Election almost always represent the major two parties, but other candidates (both independents and minor parties) run as well.

    In other words, voters cast their vote for the named individuals of a President/Vice-Presidential ticket at that point.

    So again, Birthers voting desires are quite clear – they will NOT be voting for Obama. Although some could chose to vote for a third party candidate or not vote at all, the safest default assumption is that in general, Birthers will simply vote for whoever the GOP nominates, as that is the most credible alternative to Obama, who they would NOT vote for under any credible scenario.

    So again, there is NO political gain for Obama from attempting to appease the Birther crowd and nothing changes if he ignores them or makes fun of them either.

    foreigner: comparing the situation with the birthers.
    “wrong religion” vs. “wrong party” , see ?
    The birther’s are suspected to have political motivation.
    (also my impression)

  195. avatar
    Lupin July 21, 2012 at 4:29 am #

    Dr. C told us that “foreigner” uses a German IP address to post (although as we all know that can be bought; I have a US IP address, but I don’t bother) but I have to say that “foreigner” is extremely uncharacteristic of all French, German, Dutch, British, Irish, Spanish (and a few Swedes, our village is quite international) I’ve met in his seemingly stubborn and willful incomprehension of American politics.

    Either he is a fake German & real American birther using a German IP address or living in Germany, or a very dense, uninformed real German. I can’t tell which.

  196. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 4:57 am #

    I was not speaking about legacy but rather about the kind of arguments
    that I saw here. I had thought that were sufficiently clear by now.
    While the majority of birthers presumably are strong Republican
    voters, the big total number of them suggests that millions
    are undecided and possible switch-voters.
    So I don’t buy the argument “why bother, they won’t vote for Obama anyway”
    And Obama himself _did_ bother when he released the LFBC in 2011
    without legal pressure. (apparently it was Trump’s increasing popularity)
    I’m aware of the US-voting system and had been following the 2011/2012 process so far.

  197. avatar
    Keith July 21, 2012 at 5:02 am #

    foreigner:
    I was not speaking about legacy but rather about the kind of arguments
    that I saw here. I had thought that were sufficiently clear by now.
    While the majority of birthers presumably are strong Republican
    voters, the big total number of them suggests that millions
    are undecided and possible switch-voters.
    So I don’t buy the argument “why bother, they won’t vote for Obama anyway”
    And Obama himself _did_ bother when he released the LFBC in 2011
    without legal pressure. (apparently it was Trump’s increasing popularity)
    I’m aware of the US-voting system and had been following the 2011/2012 process so far.

    There are not millions of birthers. There may be millions of people who would like to see Obama defeated and will answer any question in a manner to put the most negative appearance on it, but there are not millions of birthers.

    That is ludicrous.

  198. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 5:03 am #

    Lupin,
    see here:
    http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=7825
    http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&f=73&p=400663
    it’s all easily verified.

  199. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 5:10 am #

    Keith, so what’s your estimate on how many birthers there are ?
    I’m going by the polls and the official definitions like
    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/birther
    (slang, pejorative, US politics) A believer in one or more conspiracy theories, holding
    that President Barack Obama is not a “natural born” citizen of the United States,
    and therefore ineligible for the presidency.

  200. avatar
    JPotter July 21, 2012 at 8:29 am #

    foreigner: One of their major claims is that the layering
    can’t be explained,

    Which is dead wrong. You can put your mind at ease about that one. Next?

  201. avatar
    Scientist July 21, 2012 at 9:02 am #

    foreigner: I will ask you again, where is Angela Merkel’s birth certificate? Is she the legitimate Chancellor? I have my doubts. I bet many Germans have their doubts about her too (not to mention close to 100% of Spaniards, Greeks, Italians, Portugese, etc.). She needs to release it and it had better have pencil marks on it or she is out…

  202. avatar
    Ann July 21, 2012 at 9:33 am #

    “The bizarre claims from Arizona that Hawaii is a “national security threat” may be sensational enough to warrant some national press attention, despite any real evidence.”

    Here is your evidence that Hawaii is a “national security threat”.

    ———Arpaio has a legitimate concern for Hawaii’s Statute that states, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”

    In other words…..to be ‘born’ in Hawaii, you have to simply prove your parents lived there for a year leading up to your ‘birth.’ Arpaio and his investigators have “grave concerns” about the “gaping loophole that makes it possible for foreign born people to legally establish U.S. citizenship even if neither parent is an American citizen.“

    I hope everyone can now see the importance of the above statement and why it required national press.

  203. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 9:56 am #

    Okay, I’m just catching up and will try not to repeat others too much, but I want to jump in on this point, about going “beyond that, since the birthers do.” Anyone can go as far as they like. John Woodman was just talking on another thread about the value of details. All well and good. But the President and his staff need not engage such rabbit-hole stuff. All of us “independent researchers,” not conspiracy theorists mind you, can dig as much as we want. Hey, opposition research does it all the time.

    But that is a whole different matter than giving it the level of importance where the President and his team supposedly should be out there clarifying nonsense and answering tit-for-tat, or delving into the “legends and lore” of the Ancient Coding Knights.

    It also is important to remember the big picture, and not get lost in the weeds following birthers and always reacting to their latest. That is called being led by the nose and operating within their frame where they set the terms, otherwise known as smearing with innuendo. I mean: “I don’t know if Suzie is sleeping with the postman, but she did just get a package with the wrong zip code on it. You know, I’m just saying. M-i-g-h-t-y suspicious.”

    If any birthers out there want to pretend to be reasonable and objective (just looking for the facts, M’am), then please note that objective people might follow out details to the ends of the earth for whatever reason, but they also do not ignore the big picture.

    In the case of the PDF, the big picture is it doesn’t matter if you can’t explain the layering of the PDF. Dig in all you want. If you find something real, great; then and only then will anyone escalate it. In the meantime, to make a big f’ing deal out of it, to paraphrase our VP, is just propaganda or birther-pandering or such. And let’s just leave the President, and his staff, do real work in the meantime.

    If the PDF was forged “without the information [having] been changed,” then it is a forgery that matches what Hawaii says, and in the end the President was still born in Hawaii. Is that the kind of ridiculous matter you want to use our taxpayer dollars on? And then also at the same time desire not to be called ridiculous?

    It need not “easily be resolved by the White House” because it is easily resolved by anyone who uses their brain.

    Indeed, however, they do easily resolve it. Just go to:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

    I would have you note in particular the letter from Ms. Fuddy where she writes that she witnessed the copying of the certificate and attests to the copies’ authenticity. Note also how she hopes (vainly) that such evidence would end the disruptive and resource-straining inquiries.

    Thus, the PDF as an electronic forgery is nonsense. Any forgery, or more properly speaking, fraud, would have to be on the Hawaiian side. So go, get on that important possibility. I’ve been promised by a birther who is hooked into the scene, so I’m told (hard to know what to believe from him), that there is a video showing the records being planted in Hawaii. Now there is something a birther can get excited about.

    That the PDF is such a central concern of the Sheriff and Friends merely demonstrates their venality. Practically prima facie evidence of venality.

    And that venality is what you want the President to engage? How far should he bend over? Does he need to grab his ankles or is just reaching his knees okay? That’s what’s really behind that press conference and those frauds known as Corsi and Arpaio and friends.

    foreigner:
    gorefan,justlw,
    the context was, how the pdf was created.
    The “content” matches what Hawaii has, says Hawaii. But we go beyond that,
    since the birthers do. One of their major claims is that the layering
    can’t be explained, you must have noticed that (Zebest,Papit,Zullo).
    If so, then the pdf could have been forged
    without the information been changed.
    This could easily be resolved by the White House.
    People here are strangely somehow not seeing that argument
    and talking around it, diverting.
    It’s one of the central points of birtherism and i.e. the recent press conference
    and what this blog is about and the WH could resolve it easily.
    But somehow this mustn’t be talked about here.

  204. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 9:57 am #

    foreigner: I don’t know whether Goebbels said that, maybe he did.

    The Big Lie (Große Lüge): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie

    foreigner: Did you want to suggest that way, I would be spreading lies here, without having to explicitely quote those alleged lies ?

    The Denialists modus operandi is innuendo, libel and slander – non-stop, 24/7. You are doing it.

  205. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 10:12 am #

    Ann: I hope everyone can now see the importance of the above statement and why it required national press.

    I hope it keeps you up at night. Also, check under your bed. There’s a communist hiding.

  206. avatar
    Jim July 21, 2012 at 10:23 am #

    Ann:
    “The bizarre claims from Arizona that Hawaii is a “national security threat” may be sensational enough to warrant some national press attention, despite any real evidence.”

    Here is your evidence that Hawaii is a “national security threat”.

    ———Arpaio has a legitimate concern for Hawaii’s Statute that states, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”

    In other words…..to be ‘born’ in Hawaii, you have to simply prove your parents lived there for a year leading up to your ‘birth.’ Arpaio and his investigators have “grave concerns” about the “gaping loophole that makes it possible for foreign born people to legally establish U.S. citizenship even if neither parent is an American citizen.“

    I hope everyone can now see the importance of the above statement and why it required national press.

    Again, Ann, this law or many types like it were in effect in all 50 States at that time. They had those laws because, you know, babies don’t always wait till it’s convenient. They come during blizzards, floods, blackouts, etc. People couldn’t always make it to the hospital for days after the birth…and the only people present for the birth might only be family. So, since all 50 states had those kinds of laws, does that mean your birth certificate is suspect? Should the DHS hire a million new officers to investigate every birth in the US to make sure there are no sleeper terrorists in our midst?

  207. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 10:31 am #

    The most strident birther I know has said he will not be voting for Romney, as Romney is part of the same NWO conspiracy behind Obama, the point being that the NWO has its bases covered no matter who wins (except for Ron Paul, who they apparently haven’t been able to corrupt).

    Maybe, just maybe (note tongue in cheek), Obama voters *should* help birthers understand the full reach of the NWO conspiracy, so that they too understand they shouldn’t vote for Romney.

    I say to all birthers, when it comes to the general election, write in Ron Paul. Stick to your principles!

    G:

    So again, Birthers voting desires are quite clear – they will NOT be voting for Obama.Although some could chose to vote for a third party candidate or not vote at all, the safest default assumption is that in general, Birthers will simply vote for whoever the GOP nominates, as that is the most credible alternative to Obama, who they would NOT vote for under any credible scenario.

  208. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    Simply incorrect. Birthers are not switch-voters, swing voters, by any stretch of the imagination. Not a single birther I know would vote for Obama for any reason period, ever, exclamation point, with spit and bile on top. Even the merely birther-curious people I know, or those who were birther-curious and then later begrudgingly accepted his birth in Hawaii, would never vote for Obama.

    Moreover, they would never be swung were the President to put out a press release about how a PDF was generated. Anyone who thinks the PDF is a big f’ing deal is not a person who is going to be swayed to vote for Obama. For that matter, the people I know who finally accepted the long form as legitimate are not going to vote for Obama.

    There is one way only that birthers may be swing voters, in that they might not vote, and thus deprive Romney.

    foreigner: While the majority of birthers presumably are strong Republican
    voters, the big total number of them suggests that millions
    are undecided and possible switch-voters.

  209. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 10:47 am #

    JPotter: Which is dead wrong. You can put your mind at ease about that one. Next?

    prove it

  210. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 10:53 am #

    Scientist: foreigner: I will ask you again, where is Angela Merkel’s birth certificate? Is she the legitimate Chancellor? I have my doubts. I bet many Germans have their doubts about her too (not to mention close to 100% of Spaniards, Greeks, Italians, Portugese, etc.). She needs to release it and it had better have pencil marks on it or she is out…

    I tried to get it. But only relatives or people with legal interest can.
    Search Merkel at fogbow. I never heard about doubts. Both parents, place of birth,
    childhood, University were German,.

  211. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 11:04 am #

    paper,
    what means “rabbit hole” ?
    If others do the research, the WH can just link to it.
    You can dispute how much they should engage, but IMO not “whether”
    Not the president himself, not “out there” , just a faq on the WH webpage with links
    for further details for the journalists.
    The president and its staff should really be able to do the “real work” in parallel.
    The amount of taxpayer’s dollars spent on this would be small as compared
    to the estimated costs of the examinations spent by birthers and antibirthers
    and journalists.
    I know about the Fuddy letters etc. , again, what is needed most urgently
    now is an explanation, how the pdf was created.
    If the claim of a pdf-forgery is nonsense – fine. Easy for the WH to point
    that out. But it _is_ the claim of the birthers and it got wide attention.

  212. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 11:07 am #

    This is called the Law of Diminishing Returns.

    It’s easy to build a bridge to be 98% safe (I just grab a percent off the top of my head from memory to exemplify the principle). Trying to make the bridge 100% safe becomes a nightmare; indeed it isn’t done. The cost and effort involved is prohibitive. We try for that 2% in certain instances, such as with nuclear reactors, but even that proves the point, as we all know reactors are not 100% safe.

    Similarly, it is easy to prove to 98% accuracy that Obama was born here. (Okay, okay guys! Don’t jump on me. 99.999999999% accuracy, okay?) It’s that last decimal place that you are so bothered about and want the President to resolve.

    foreigner: And Obama himself _did_ bother when he released the LFBC in 2011
    without legal pressure.

  213. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 11:10 am #

    misha: The Big Lie (Große Lüge): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie The Denialists modus operandi is innuendo, libel and slander – non-stop, 24/7. You are doing it.

    show me, where I lied here.
    Your link to the “big lie” just shows Goebbels attributing it to the English strategy.
    Making it even more obscure (as if that were possible) that any hypothetical
    relationship of mine to Goebbels would indicate a “big lie” of mine

  214. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 11:14 am #

    Paper: Simply incorrect. Birthers are not switch-voters, swing voters, by any stretch of the imagination. Not a single birther I know would vote for Obama for any reason period, ever, exclamation point, with spit and bile on top. Even the merely birther-curious people I know, or those who were birther-curious and then later begrudgingly accepted his birth in Hawaii, would never vote for Obama. Moreover, they would never be swung were the President to put out a press release about how a PDF was generated. Anyone who thinks the PDF is a big f’ing deal is not a person who is going to be swayed to vote for Obama. For that matter, the people I know who finally accepted the long form as legitimate are not going to vote for Obama.There is one way only that birthers may be swing voters, in that they might not vote, and thus deprive Romney.

    want to bet ?
    how many birthers do you know and how many are there in total ?
    Show the polls and we can discuss this.

  215. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 11:20 am #

    Already did.

    The bottom line is you can worry all you want, but the PDF is never going to be an issue.

    foreigner: prove it

  216. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 11:24 am #

    You are “lying” by acting like the PDF matters, that that is an “objective” concern. Lying is Misha’s word, thus I put it in quotes. Skirting innuendo might be a better technical way of describing your actions. I’m not sure what is the best term of art, but it isn’t “objective.” I plead ignorance of knowledge of your motivations, but this PDF nonsense does not reflect well upon your efforts.

    foreigner: show me, where I lied here.

  217. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 11:44 am #

    My whole family, except for a few oddities such as myself. A *large* eastern European family (including German, thus my visits to Germany). Many of their friends and acquaintances. One is involved with The Oath Keepers.

    Take it or leave it. I’m well aware that my comments here are merely word-of-mouth. And that my family is just one example of one aspect of birtherism. For instance, one of them has started to play with the idea of two-parent-birtherism, but they pretty much stick to the President being born in Kenya. But many of them are open to any slander or conspiracy involving him, so it’s hard to know where they would categorize themselves if they were really put to it.

    When it comes to betting, I already have offered my family a huge whopping bet in $. I haven’t been taken up on it. Lots of insults hurled at me, but no willingness to put up $. As we are never going to be other than anonymous to each other, I unfortunately can’t bet you.

    foreigner: want to bet ?
    how many birthers do you know and how many are there in total ?
    Show the polls and we can discuss this.

  218. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 11:52 am #

    I’m not about to spend time tutoring you on English idiom. Doing so, however, would be somewhat of an example of going down a rabbit hole. Look it up.

    foreigner: paper,
    what means “rabbit hole” ?

  219. avatar
    foreigner July 21, 2012 at 11:54 am #

    Paper,
    I _repeatedly_ wrote that the pdf is an issue just because the birthers
    make it one and it gets so much attention and thus should be
    addressed by the WH.
    I never said that the birther claims wrt. the pdf were justified,
    in contrary. Still you insist I lied or “lied” about it.
    ———————-
    OK, you may be biased by your family. But see the polls.
    Many (millions) had changed minds after the 2011 release.
    ———————
    You may know that there are betting websites like intrade.com where
    you can bet anonymously. Unfortunately I didn’t find a birther claim,
    I’d like to see it.

  220. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 12:05 pm #

    On this particular point, you have to know that in America people don’t care if private people or businesses spend millions, but if the government spends a penny, they’re on the case and there better be good reason.

    foreigner: The amount of taxpayer’s dollars spent on this would be small as compared
    to the estimated costs of the examinations spent by birthers and antibirthers
    and journalists.

  221. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 12:07 pm #

    But not against you, and the point of such bets is about putting-your-money-where-your-mouth-is, not profit.

    foreigner: You may know that there are betting websites like intrade.com where
    you can bet anonymously.

  222. avatar
    Ann July 21, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    Jim: Again, Ann, this law or many types like it were in effect in all 50 States at that time. They had those laws because, you know, babies don’t always wait till it’s convenient. They come during blizzards, floods, blackouts, etc. People couldn’t always make it to the hospital for days after the birth…and the only people present for the birth might only be family. So, since all 50 states had those kinds of laws, does that mean your birth certificate is suspect? Should the DHS hire a million new officers to investigate every birth in the US to make sure there are no sleeper terrorists in our midst?

  223. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    See the law of diminishing returns.

    foreigner: But see the polls.
    Many (millions) had changed minds after the 2011 release.

  224. avatar
    Ann July 21, 2012 at 12:13 pm #

    Jim: The laws you refer to may have been in effect at that time and in different locations….but, I think the problem Sheriffe Arpaio is referring to is NOW.
    These laws are still in effect now in Hawaii (& should have been replaced by Federal laws) whereas all other states are goverened by the Federal laws which are the same in every state. It is obvious Hawaii has not kept up with the Federal system and still remains under the original system which allows anyone from anywhere to become an American Citizen.

  225. avatar
    Scientist July 21, 2012 at 12:17 pm #

    foreigner: I tried to get it. But only relatives or people with legal interest can.

    So Germany has the same laws as Hawaii. But I didn’t ask that, I asked why you have not demanded of Merkel that she release it, which of course, she could do. If she wanted to. Why is she hiding this? It is very suspicious.

    foreigner: I never heard about doubts.

    So what? You are hearing it now, from me.

    foreigner: Both parents, place of birth,
    childhood, University were German,.

    Without a birth certificate (with pencil marks) how do you know where Mrs. Merkel was born or who her parents were? You simply have a double standard-one for Obama and another for everybody else.

  226. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 12:18 pm #

    Ann: I think the problem Sheriffe Arpaio is referring to is NOW. These laws are still in effect now in Hawaii (& should have been replaced by Federal laws) whereas all other states are goverened by the Federal laws which are the same in every state.

    Prove it.

  227. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

    Scientist: where Frau Merkel was born

    FIFY

  228. avatar
    Scientist July 21, 2012 at 12:24 pm #

    Ann: Jim: The laws you refer to may have been in effect at that time and in different locations….but, I think the problem Sheriffe Arpaio is referring to is NOW.These laws are still in effect now in Hawaii (& should have been replaced by Federal laws) whereas all other states are goverened by the Federal laws which are the same in every state. It is obvious Hawaii has not kept up with the Federal system and still remains under the original system which allows anyone from anywhere to become an American Citizen.

    There is nothing unique about Hawaii laws. All states give birth certificates in some sets of circumstances to people born abroad (foreign adoptees, for example). The birth certifcates list the actual place of birth and will not make someone a US citizen. You are sadly misinformed.

  229. avatar
    y_p_w July 21, 2012 at 12:35 pm #

    Ann:
    “The bizarre claims from Arizona that Hawaii is a “national security threat” may be sensational enough to warrant some national press attention, despite any real evidence.”

    Here is your evidence that Hawaii is a “national security threat”.

    ———Arpaio has a legitimate concern for Hawaii’s Statute that states, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”

    In other words…..to be ‘born’ in Hawaii, you have to simply prove your parents lived there for a year leading up to your ‘birth.’ Arpaio and his investigators have “grave concerns” about the “gaping loophole that makes it possible for foreign born people to legally establish U.S. citizenship even if neither parent is an American citizen.“

    I hope everyone can now see the importance of the above statement and why it required national press.

    That’s not the case at all. The statute allows for someone to register a birth with the Hawaii DOH for a foreign or out of state birth. The kind of proof required would be a birth certificate or other official government document, such as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad from the State Dept. It would also be specific of the place of birth. If it were in California, it would state California. If it were in Japan, it would state Japan. The Hawaii Attorney General’s office has been steadfast that A) this would only be allowed for births that occurred after 1982 (when the law went into effect) and B) that the place of birth if outside of Hawaii would be listed.

    http://www.kpho.com/story/19029890/arpaio-to-release-new-info-in-birther-flap-tuesday

    Hawaii officials said there is no secret. Joshua Wisch, Special Assistant to the state’s Attorney General, said in a statement Tuesday that the allegations from Arpaio’s office are “untrue, misinformed and misconstrue Hawaii law.”

    Wisch went on to say that:

    “The purpose of section 338-17.8, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), is to accommodate foreign-born individuals whose parents were residents of Hawaii but were temporarily outside of this state due to employment or military service. Similar to section 338-20.5, HRS, which provides for a certificate of foreign birth, anyone who receives a birth certificate under this section would have noted on their birth certificate the physical location of their actual birth. It does not confer citizenship, which is, of course, a power of the federal government.

    “We also note that section 338-17.8 was not passed until 1982, so it cannot apply to President Obama, who was born at the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu in 1961, as is reflected on his certificate of live birth, a copy of which can be viewed on the White House website, a link to which is provided on DOH’s website.”

    Hawaii has specific rules to file for a birth certificate for foreign-born adoptees of Hawaii residents. Place of birth is required.

    http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/AdmRules1/8%208A%20B%20VR%20Admin%20Rules.pdf

    This can be done in other states too. Here’s a family that published the birth certificate for their adopted child born in China. It was registered with the State of Michigan. This was an adopting, so the names of the adopting parents are listed, as well as the actual birth date and country of birth.

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4UiQhW5LVpg/SeEXLXlGffI/AAAAAAAAAw8/B6e3_Ke8X0I/s1600/4-11-2009+5%3B55%3B28+PM.jpg

  230. avatar
    y_p_w July 21, 2012 at 12:37 pm #

    Scientist: There is nothing unique about Hawaii laws.All states give birth certificates in some sets of circumstances to people born abroad (foreign adoptees, for example).The birth certifcates list the actual place of birth and will not make someone a US citizen.You are sadly misinformed.

    I don’t think California will do that. I think they would require that the amended BC be filed in the actual state of birth.

    Michigan definitely does. Would that make Romney’s BC suspect?

  231. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 12:46 pm #

    That was Misha. I was just trying to help out. My bad. As I said, I don’t actually know what the best “term of art” would be, nor do I need to know.

    The bottom line is you need not worry about the PDF. Birthers being in a tizzy about it is meaningless. It just shows everyone else, especially actual swing voters, how foolish they are.

    Nor does it reflect in any way upon the White House.

    If you seriously believe this is an issue of import, you are simply misguided. Sorry to say. I don’t like to be so declarative, but the one place in life one can be a bit declarative is with regards birtherism. That’s about the only nice thing about it. The alternative to your being misguided is Misha’s perspective.

    Of course, you could be extremely sincere, but your harping on it just plays to the slander and innuendo and smears. Which is why the White House isn’t interested in touching it. It’s like playing in the toilet. Flushing is sufficient. You don’t need to prove how many kernels of corn were flushed with the rest.

    As I said, anyone using their brain knows the PDF is a non-starter. That’s the blunt reality. That there are a limited number of people birtherizing themselves about it has no importance. For that matter, the issue doesn’t come close even to the level of public buzz (nor close to the normal, idle wondering) that the long form issue had.

    The PDF is not an issue. It’s not going to be. You can fret all you want.

    foreigner: Still you insist I lied or “lied” about it.

  232. avatar
    Ann July 21, 2012 at 12:51 pm #

    Ann:

    Jim:…..NOPE…..only the people applying for the position of President of the U.S.A who already has a questionable history without knowing where he was born.
    You don’t want the son of Communist Parents and Grandparents taking over America and turning it into what it now is do you and a person who has to hide every minute of his life from the public.?? There is usually a reason for that isn’t there especially when he has already had several names that he has gone by, many SIN numbers, and told many stories of his so called life history and denying the fact that he was raised amongst the Communist.
    I thought in america the people you hung out with and were related to and who you consorted with, had a very large bearing on holding a position of the President of the U.S.A……..I guess they must have overlooked Abama??

  233. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 12:54 pm #

    It got wide attention ridiculing them.

    An explanation of how the PDF was created is not urgently needed. Attention to Syria is urgently needed. Attention to Aurora Colorado is urgently needed. An explanation of how the PDF was created is about as urgently needed as an explanation of who manufactured my shoelaces and how.

    foreigner: again, what is needed most urgently
    now is an explanation, how the pdf was created.
    If the claim of a pdf-forgery is nonsense – fine. Easy for the WH to point
    that out. But it _is_ the claim of the birthers and it got wide attention.

  234. avatar
    Paper July 21, 2012 at 1:01 pm #

    Here’s an example from abroad even demonstrating exactly what kind of attention the PDF issue gets. Similar to the kind of attention it gets here. Ridicule. Which is what it deserves.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/mar/01/forgery-sheriff-joe-arpaio-barack-obama-birth-certificate

    foreigner: But it _is_ the claim of the birthers and it got wide attention.

  235. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

    Ann: You don’t want the son of Communist Parents and Grandparents taking over America and turning it into what it now is do you and a person who has to hide every minute of his life from the public.??

    Better than someone who came from polygamists, with a pattern of domestic violence. Better than someone who hides his tax returns, which would show a pattern of tax avoidance not available to the common man.

    Israel was founded by socialists: Ben Gurion and Golda Meir. When Meir first went to Palestine, she was a Marxist. The kibbutzim are the foundation of Israel, and are pure communism. They are a raucous democracy. I know; I’ve been there.

  236. avatar
    Scientist July 21, 2012 at 1:24 pm #

    Isn’t it fascinating that a guy from Germany who, I doubt is a professional campaign manager in his home country, feels that he is competent to give political advice to a campaign team in another country who won a solid victory last time and seem to be pulling ahead in the polls this time. What makes him think he knows better than Team Obama how to win a US election?

    foreigner reminds me of the guys who never went beyond Little League who call sports talk and claim they could manage the Yankees better than Joe Girardi.

  237. avatar
    gorefan July 21, 2012 at 4:22 pm #

    Ann: You don’t want the son of Communist Parents and Grandparents taking over America and turning it into what it now is do you and a person who has to hide every minute of his life from the public.??

    Are you talking about Senator Santorum – he comes from a long line of Italian Communists.

  238. avatar
    Jim July 21, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

    Ann: Jim:…..NOPE…..only the people applying for the position of President of the U.S.A who already has a questionable history without knowing where he was born.

    Oh, well no problem then. We know the President was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. We know his complete family history, he published books about it. We know that there is absolutely no proof he was born anywhere else. We know that some people don’t like the color of his skin or his politics and would lie through their teeth and make up any story to get him out of the White House. We recognize these realities and vote accordingly.

  239. avatar
    donna July 21, 2012 at 6:41 pm #

    gorefan: Are you talking about Senator Santorum – he comes from a long line of Italian Communists.

    TRUE and saintorum probably has dual citizen with italia too – perhaps apuzzo and donofrio do also

  240. avatar
    Ann July 21, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    Jim: Oh, well no problem then. We know the President was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. We know his complete family history, he published books about it. We know that there is absolutely no proof he was born anywhere else. We know that some people don’t like the color of his skin or his politics and would lie through their teeth and make up any story to get him out of the White House. We recognize these realities and vote accordingly.

    Yes Jim…..according to his Biographer he was born in Kenya…..according to the rest of his family he was born in Hawaii. More of his lies
    We know only the history he wants you to know but he doesn’t tell you he is a Communist with Communist background.
    As far as his skin colour goes….insignificant.
    Just take a good hard look at the direction this President is taking you and the rest of the country. Time to pack him in.

  241. avatar
    Arthur July 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm #

    Hi Ann,

    A paragraph-length blurb written by a speakers agency cannot rationally be called “his Biographer” (sic). Nevertheless, that blurb did get one thing right: Barack Obama WAS born in Kenya; however, according to the official records of the state of Hawaii, his son, Barack Obama II, was born in Hawaii.

    Ann: Yes Jim…..according to his Biographer he was born in Kenya…..according to the rest of his family he was born in Hawaii.

  242. avatar
    donna July 21, 2012 at 8:13 pm #

    Ann : “Yes Jim…..according to his Biographer he was born in Kenya”

    let’s see

    obama was a client of that firm

    the “pamphlet” was created in 1991 AFTER obama had given interviews in 1990

    From the New York Times (which uses real fact checkers), February 5, 1990:

    The new president of the [Harvard Law] Review is Barack Obama, a 28-year-old graduate of Columbia University who spent four years heading a community development program for poor blacks on Chicago’s South Side before enrolling in law school. His late father, Barack Obama, was a finance minister in Kenya and his mother, Ann Dunham, is an American anthropologist now doing fieldwork in Indonesia. Mr. Obama was BORN IN HAWAII.

    1990 latimes:

    Barack Obama’s Law : Personality: Harvard Law Review’s first black president plans a life of public service. His multicultural background gives him unique perspective.

    Born in Hawaii, where his parents met in college

    http://articles.latimes.com/1990-03-12/n

    1990 chicago tribune

    Activist In Chicago Now Heads Harvard Law Review

    Born in Hawaii to the late Barack Obama

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-

    so in birtherstan, obama told people in 1990 (and before) that he was born in hawaii but then, a year later, “he told” a publicist that he was born in kenya and then in his book (in 2005) he wrote that he was born in hawaii?

    the “publicist” said she NEVER SPOKE with obama

  243. avatar
    Northland10 July 21, 2012 at 8:22 pm #

    Ann: many SIN numbers

    Are you claiming he’s Canadian or do we have another foreigner who is trying to overthrow our government?

  244. avatar
    Rickey July 21, 2012 at 8:22 pm #

    Ann:

    many SIN numbers

    This is the United States, not Canada. We don’t have SIN numbers, we have Social Security Numbers. And there is no evidence that Barack Obama has ever used multiple Social Security Numbers.

  245. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:29 pm #

    Ann: Yes Jim…..according to his Biographer he was born in Kenya…..according to the rest of his family he was born in Hawaii. More of his lies

    It was not his biographer, it was a blurb mentioning that he was born in Kenya. They were wrong. We do know that his birth certificate shows him born in Hawaii, a fact recorded by two newspapers in 1961. So there is no doubt that at that time and place, a record had been entered for President Obama. Now that the President has gotten Hawaii to release his long form birth certificate we know that indeed, the birth certificate was filed and shows his birth in Kapiolani hospital, and signed and dated within a few days of his birth and filed soon thereafter.

    So on one hand we have some people getting the facts wrong and on the other hand we have official, certified evidence that shows him born on US soil. Why would you rather believe those who were not even present in favor of these official documents as verified by independent data?

    Explain that to me?

  246. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 21, 2012 at 8:31 pm #

    Hey Ricky,

    A zillion years ago you looked up a Drivers License suspension for Bari M. Shabazz in New York. Is there a way I can access online from an official source what you found?

    Rickey: And there is no evidence that Barack Obama has ever used multiple Social Security Numbers.

  247. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:33 pm #

    Ann: Just take a good hard look at the direction this President is taking you and the rest of the country. Time to pack him in.

    Close to universal healthcare, catching Osama and other leaders of Al Qaeda, ending the war in Iraq and moving towards ending the war in Afghanistan. After millions of job losses, the job numbers started to turn around when Obama was inaugurated and since then millions of jobs have been created, albeit at a slow pace. Now that the Republican Congress has refused to contribute to the recovery of our Nation and has abandoned it to the rich and powerful, President Obama is facing a situation where our Nation is being destroyed by those who dance to the tunes of the rich while ignoring totally the poor and middle class.

    Sorry my friend but this country has done quite well since President Obama took office. On the civil rights front, gays are now allowed to serve their Country and gain the same rights as other committed couples under the term of civil marriage.

    There is just so much that our Nation has grown in a positive direction. But yes, you are right to point out that our Nation is being destroyed at the same time. You should be focusing on the Republicans who are selling out our country to the rich and do not care about the middle class.

  248. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:35 pm #

    Ann: In other words…..to be ‘born’ in Hawaii, you have to simply prove your parents lived there for a year leading up to your ‘birth.’ Arpaio and his investigators have “grave concerns” about the “gaping loophole that makes it possible for foreign born people to legally establish U.S. citizenship even if neither parent is an American citizen.“

    That is incorrect. To be born in Hawaii, you need to be born within the geographical constraints. As the DOH has pointed out, a birth outside of Hawaii will still grant you a Hawaiian birth certificate but nothing else.

    So why do you continue to believe this obvious lie? Are you so feeble that you allow yourself to be manipulated by rumors and falsehoods rather than facts?

    Have you no shame?

  249. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:38 pm #

    Ann: It is obvious Hawaii has not kept up with the Federal system and still remains under the original system which allows anyone from anywhere to become an American Citizen.

    That is a lie. You do realize that citizenship and having a Hawaiian birth certificate that shows you born in a foreign country are quite different beasts, don’t you?

    Since President Obama’s BC shows him born in Honolulu as further evidenced by the attending physician, you have even less to worry about when it comes to President Obama, who was clearly and by any legal and rational standard born on US soil and thus a natural born citizen.

    That you ‘worry’ about something that does not exist shows again a good example of the ‘conservative mind’, willing to accept anything on authority if it supports their foolish beliefs and reject anything from more qualified authority when it disagrees.
    Must be nice to not be bothered by actual facts?

  250. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:57 pm #

    Worse of course, the HRS 338-17.8 was added in 1982

    Hawaii in 1955 shows that birth in district or territory was a requirement to be granted a Hawaiian birth certificate so the suggestion that somehow children born outside the State of Hawaii to Hawaiian resident parents could get birth certificates that would grant them citizenship remains totally unsupported by any evidence.

    Why are people so gullible?

  251. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 8:59 pm #

    Ann: We know only the history he wants you to know but he doesn’t tell you he is a Communist with Communist background.

    ROTFL… President Obama is by no standards of logic or reason either a communist or a socialist.

    Hilarious ignorance… And even if he were a communist, how is that somehow relevant? It’s not better or worse than someone being a capitalist for example.

    Why are people so afraid of communism? Is it ignorance? I would be far more afraid of the “American Taliban” for example, religious extremists who want to have our nation be ruled according to their religious beliefs.
    Now that is truly scary stuff…

  252. avatar
    nbc July 21, 2012 at 9:10 pm #

    PS: As a Christian myself, I do accept the interpretation that Jesus would have considered himself to be quite the socialist/communist if he had been born in our time period. Certainly, his disdain for those who focus on wealth at the cost of the poor

    Matthew 19:21
    Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

    read the parable of the rich fool, read how debts are forgiven

    In Biblical times, every fifty years came a Jubilee year. During that year, enslaved people were freed, and land lost to creditors was returned to its original holders. Everyone got a fresh start, a new chance for life, liberty and happiness.

    Debt forgiveness is a teaching that appears not just in Christianity, but in many religions. For example, in the Jewish tradition, every seven years, personal debts are forgiven, and food is not fully harvested but some is left to be gleaned by anyone. The crop becomes a public good, and trespassing a right! In some Native American religions, respect by the tribe is earned by how much you give away, not by how much you own. Religious attitudes toward debt include financial debt: Jesus chased the money lenders from the temple; Muslims cannot receive interest on money they lend (including money they put in bank accounts today).

    We Christians have a lot to learn from our God and understand why communism or socialism has far more in common with Christianity than laissez faire capitalism or unbridled Ayn Rand style egoism and selfish behavior.

  253. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 9:36 pm #

    nbc: I would be far more afraid of the “American Taliban” for example, religious extremists who want to have our nation be ruled according to their religious beliefs.

    Hitchens was right.

  254. avatar
    misha July 21, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

    Ann: many SIN numbers

    That’s because we’re all SINNERS.

  255. avatar
    Whatever4 July 21, 2012 at 10:01 pm #

    Ann:
    Jim: The laws you refer to may have been in effect at that time and in different locations….but, I think the problem Sheriffe Arpaio is referring to is NOW.
    These laws are still in effect now in Hawaii(& should have been replaced by Federal laws) whereas all other states are goverened by the Federal laws which are the same in every state. It is obvious Hawaii has not kept up with the Federal system and still remains under the original system which allows anyone from anywhere to become an American Citizen.

    What about Pennsylvania?

    Can we register the birth of our child that was born in another country?

    Yes. You may register the birth of your child who was born in a country other than the United States with the Division of Vital Records if either parent is a citizen of the United States and a legal resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The appropriate forms and instructions may be requested from the Division of Vital Records.

  256. avatar
    nbc July 22, 2012 at 1:04 am #

    Ann: here is usually a reason for that isn’t there especially when he has already had several names that he has gone by, many SIN numbers,

    He has only one SSN, there is just no evidence to the contrary. So why do you let yourself be manipulated by lies and misrepresentation? Have you no self esteem? Do you not feel responsible for your what you say in public, especially if it was spoon fed lies?

  257. avatar
    nbc July 22, 2012 at 1:05 am #

    Whatever4: What about Pennsylvania?

    Another lie bites the dust and Ann looks just foolish.

    Way to go Ann.

  258. avatar
    Rickey July 22, 2012 at 1:29 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Hey Ricky,

    A zillion years ago you looked up a Drivers License suspension for Bari M. Shabazz in New York. Is there a way I can access online from an official source what you found?

    No, you have to have an account with DMV, but I can e-mail a copy of the printout to you when I get home (I’m away for the weekend). Send an e-mail to me to remind me.

  259. avatar
    Keith July 22, 2012 at 4:23 am #

    Ann: We know only the history he wants you to know but he doesn’t tell you he is a Communist with Communist background.

    Have you considered the possibility that he hasn’t told you and us that because it would be a lie?

    I got the impression that you were against lies.

  260. avatar
    G July 22, 2012 at 4:45 am #

    Wow, you sure seem to be desperately spinning and talking out both sides of your mouth, foreigner.

    You seem to spend an awful lot of time spouting off about polls. Earlier, you focused on how the most recent polls on the topic have shown the pre-LFBC “birther numbers” have pretty much returned…and *NOW* you flip your position to claim that many (millions) had changed their mind after the 2011 release….

    So, which is it?

    Sounds to me like a bunch of ODS folks, who never voted for Obama anyways, just coming back to trotting out the Birther excuse again for why they STILL don’t plan to vote for Obama… gee, no surprise there. Newsflash – people that irrationally hate Obama in their gut spew dehumanizing venom against him, cry foul and make endless unreasonable demands while slurring him and threaten to not vote for someone they had no intentions to vote for anyways…

    What a sham tactic and so easy for everyone else to see through. Obama should continue to ignore them. There is NO political downside to him doing so.

    Further, I find it hilarious that you bring up intrade. If you were so “tuned in” to intrade, you would be well aware of the over/under betting on Obama’s re-election vs. Romney getting the gig.

    HINT: The bets have remained STRONGLY in favor of Obama… the percentages of which option people are betting on to win aren’t even close!

    foreigner: OK, you may be biased by your family. But see the polls.
    Many (millions) had changed minds after the 2011 release.
    ———————
    You may know that there are betting websites like intrade.com where
    you can bet anonymously. Unfortunately I didn’t find a birther claim,
    I’d like to see it.

  261. avatar
    Keith July 22, 2012 at 4:50 am #

    Whatever4: What about Pennsylvania?

    What about Arizona?

    Arizona DoHS: Foreign-Born Adoptions

    Info on other States?

    State Recognition of Intercountry Adoptions Finalized Abroad

    Intercountry adoption refers to the adoption of children who are citizens of one country by parents who are citizens of a different country. Intercountry adoptions may be finalized abroad or domestically. An intercountry adoption completed abroad is essentially a private matter between the adopting individual or couple and a foreign court operating under that country’s laws and regulations. For adoptive parents who are U.S. citizens, completing an adoption abroad does not entitle the adopted child to enter the United States. In order for a child who has been adopted abroad to enter the United States, the adoptive parents must fulfill the requirements set by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the foreign country in which the child resides, and sometimes the adoptive parents’ State of residence.

    OK, so foreign children adopted by US Citizens are not automatically citizens and are subject to Immigration, Homeland Security, the birth country laws, and the State laws. It turns out that if the actual birth country has signed the “Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption” there is a process for speeding the naturalization of the child via an IH-3 visa. Children from non-Hague countries must obtain an IR-3 visa and the process is different.

    But what about Birth Certificates?

    Approximately 34 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico require adoptive parents to submit documentation from readoption or validation of a foreign adoption in a State court when they wish to request that the State Registrar of Vital Statistics issue a State birth certificate for the adoptee. *

    (* Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.)

    The State Registrar issues the birth certificate in the new name of the adoptee, if requested by the adoptive parents, and the certificate shows the date and place of birth. In approximately 22 States and Guam, a notation is made on the certificate that it is not evidence of U.S. citizenship for the child.**

    (** Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia)

  262. avatar
    G July 22, 2012 at 5:07 am #

    Simple: How do you think a physical document can be displayed on the internet? It simply has to be scanned in. The scan is and will always be merely an image, not the document itself. Therefore, arguments about defects in the PDF will always remain silly and irrelevant, as they are NOT the physical document itself. Just as a photo taken of a dog is NOT the dog. So arguing that the photo has scratches, appears blurry or out of focus is irrelevant to the condition and health of the actual dog itself.

    You simply can’t get around the FACT that the HI DOH clearly vouches for what is displayed on the WH website and outlines that they observed the whole process of creating the LFBC from the source document. Therefore, the information (data fields) shown in the scanned IMAGE *must* match up with the data they have and generated. They would not vouch for the image UNLESS it matched up with the original document they created. You are being completely illogical and in denial to pretend otherwise.

    foreigner:

    I know about the Fuddy letters etc. , again, what is needed most urgently
    now is an explanation, how the pdf was created.

    They have – repeatedly. Any time the WND press reporter tried to bring up the PDF issue in a press briefing, the Administration representatives dismissed that whole line of questioning as being nonsense.

    Further, as already stated, the official issuing agency, the HI DOH vouches for that WH document and provides a direct link to the image of it on the WH website as showing the results they provided. There simply is NO getting around this FACT.

    foreigner:
    If the claim of a pdf-forgery is nonsense – fine. Easy for the WH to point
    that out.

    Hardly. Nobody pays any attention to the PDF issue, except on the same insular circle of private RWNJ websites, blogs and extreme RW talk radio sites. The PDF issue barely gets mentioned outside of those amateur rumour mills and when it does, it is within the context of pointing out what kooky nonsense it is. All attempts at pulling the PDF argument in the courts have been easily shot down and dismissed as frivolous.

    That is NOT “wide attention” by any stretch of the imagination. That is nothing more than esoteric joke material territory. As conspiracies go, rumoured Bigfoot sightings get wider attention.

    foreigner:
    But it _is_ the claim of the birthers and it got wide attention.

  263. avatar
    G July 22, 2012 at 5:11 am #

    AGREED! You summed it up well.

    Paper: Simply incorrect. Birthers are not switch-voters, swing voters, by any stretch of the imagination. Not a single birther I know would vote for Obama for any reason period, ever, exclamation point, with spit and bile on top. Even the merely birther-curious people I know, or those who were birther-curious and then later begrudgingly accepted his birth in Hawaii, would never vote for Obama.
    Moreover, they would never be swung were the President to put out a press release about how a PDF was generated. Anyone who thinks the PDF is a big f’ing deal is not a person who is going to be swayed to vote for Obama. For that matter, the people I know who finally accepted the long form as legitimate are not going to vote for Obama.

  264. avatar
    G July 22, 2012 at 5:49 am #

    Well, you are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that you grasp how our system of government works, nor our voting methods, nor how to make logical extrapolations from polls…

    There are over 300 million people in the US. Here are some statistics for you on how that translates to both the portion of that population that is eligible to vote and more importantly, the portion that actually does:

    http://smpbff1.dsd.census.gov/TheDataWeb_HotReport/servlet/HotReportEngineServlet?reportid=767b1387bea22b8d3e8486924a69adcd&emailname=essb@boc&filename=0328_nata.hrml

    In 2010 , the observed percentage of age-eligible citizens who voted in the United States was 46 percent.

    http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p20-562.pdf

    In the 2008 presidential election, 64 percent of voting-age citizens voted , an estimate not statistically different from the percent that turned out in 2004, but higher than the presidential elections of 2000 and 1996

    Overall, 131 million people voted in 2008, a turnout increase of about 5 million people since 2004. During this same 4-year period, the voting-age citizen population in the United States increased by roughly 9 million people.3
    In 2008, 71 percent of voting-age citizens were registered to vote, a decrease compared to the 72 percent who were registered in 2004. The 2008 election had a higher registration rate than the presidential election of 2000, but was not statistically different from the 1996 rate. Overall, 146 million people were registered to vote in 2008, an increase of approximately 4 million people since 2004.

    So, two things that you need to understand about how our election cycles play out:

    First of all, the demographic mix and turnout of our population for voting is much different and much higher, whenever there is a Presidential election vs. a mid-term election. As the stats have shown, the turnout rate has not varied that significantly for Presidential elections from cycle to cycle. (5 million more voters than last time isn’t that much of a statistical increase, when dealing with those sized turnouts).

    So, it is quite reasonable to expect to see similar numbers and demographic compositions return to cast their ballots in this Presidential election cycle as last time.

    Obama won in 2008 by quite a significant margin: 53% to 46%, roughly. In terms of vote margin, that was OVER 9.5 million MORE votes for Obama than his nearest competition, McCain.

    In the 4 years of closely following the Birther movement, NONE of us have found a Birther that actually cast a vote FOR Obama in 2008. Believe me, we’ve tried. Those that are Birthers either voted for McCain (most common), some lesser candidate or didn’t even vote at all.

    There is simply ZERO evidence out there that any Birther or would-be Birther would be voting for Obama in this cycle, under any circumstances. You keep trying to push this crazy claim that they “might”, YET you cannot provide ANY evidence to back up your foolish notion, NOR offer any plausible scenario to justify your beliefs.

    So, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, there is ZERO political gain or reason for Obama to pay attention and cater to the never-satisfied and disingenuous Birther crowd. They will simply howl, complain and hate him, regardless. He doesn’t have to worry about losing their votes, as he never had them in the first place. They are already factored into the existing fixed portion of the voting block against him.

    No matter how much you “proclaim” that there are lots of Birthers out there and over-inflate the significance of small sampling polling data of BIrthers, you still are dealing with numbers that reflect a minority position.

    Moreover, Obama’s support remains extremely solid within his actual base. Needing only 50%+1 to win and having banked over 53% and an 9.5 million vote margin in his favor last cycle, he can also afford to weather a fairly significant amount of turnout and vote support erosion and still win.

    His opponents are the ones with a lot of ground to make up; which can be quite a challenge when facing off against an incumbent in general, and even more so when the opposition’s candidate lacks much charisma, believability or set of positive alternative solutions…

    So no – he doesn’t need to pander to his committed Birther enemies at all. He can effectively ignore them, which is the response his actual voter base would prefer to see.

    foreigner:
    I was not speaking about legacy but rather about the kind of arguments
    that I saw here. I had thought that were sufficiently clear by now.
    While the majority of birthers presumably are strong Republican
    voters, the big total number of them suggests that millions
    are undecided and possible switch-voters.
    So I don’t buy the argument “why bother, they won’t vote for Obama anyway”
    And Obama himself _did_ bother when he released the LFBC in 2011
    without legal pressure. (apparently it was Trump’s increasing popularity)
    I’m aware of the US-voting system and had been following the 2011/2012 process so far.

  265. avatar
    justlw July 22, 2012 at 9:32 am #

    G: the condition and health of the actual dog itself.

    Misha in 3… 2… 1…

  266. avatar
    misha July 22, 2012 at 10:03 am #

    Ann: he doesn’t tell you he is a Communist with Communist background.

    Please define these:
    - communism
    - Marxism
    - socialism
    - capitalism
    - mixed economy

    I’m waiting.

  267. avatar
    misha July 22, 2012 at 10:06 am #

    “the condition and health of the actual dog itself.”

    justlw: Misha in 3… 2… 1…

    I’m checking with Angel right now.

    Be back shortly, after I translate into English from Dogma. [bada-bing]

  268. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG July 22, 2012 at 10:19 am #

    misha: Please define these:
    - communism
    - Marxism
    - socialism
    - capitalism
    - mixed economy

    I’m waiting.

    This will be entertaining. Because as far as I can tell, the Ultra-right wing birther crowd see the “Communist”, “Marxist” and “Socialist” as synonyms for “Democrat”, or as words to describe anyone who doesn’t share their fanatical devotion to conservative ideals.

  269. avatar
    Paper July 22, 2012 at 10:29 am #

    One more point on this issue, something you may not know about why the Long Form took on some importance (and why the PDF does not).

    Because many of us here have old birth certificates, or hospital souvenir birth certificates, that include more information than a COLB (short form). Both the COLB and LFBC are legal and completely sufficient, mind you (not the hospital souvenir copy, however). But there is a history of longer forms and so a fair number of people associate that additional information with a birth certificate, even though it is not legally necessary.

    So some birther-curious were asking, where is the hospital, where is the doctor’s signature, etc., because that is their experience with their own forms. And for those people especially who already thought poorly of him, that is an easy hook for their doubts.

    But then the President got his LFBC released as an exception by Hawaii, and a chunk of people let it go. How many of those people voted for or will vote for the President? I don’t know. But none of the LFBC holdouts I know will. Nonetheless, that issue was resolved.

    People say fine, that’s just like my birth certificate. The end.

    Regarding the PDF, most people have enough experience with their computers to know that a PDF or image on their screen is not a piece of paper. If they do the simplest research, they learn there was a press conference where the President presented the paper long form, and that the seal was even touched by a reporter. They also learn that Hawaii says the information is accurate. That makes sense to most people, leaving only the conspiracy theorists and propagandists to make hay of the matter.

    The big point here is that the number of possible reasonably objective people left in this equation is very close to zero. Again, I point you to the law of diminishing returns.

    Good luck, also, to perhaps any incumbent winning over conspiracy theorists. The most strident birther I know voted for Bush in the first election in 2000, but then not in the second 2004, as in the meantime he had become a truther.

    foreigner: And Obama himself _did_ bother when he released the LFBC in 2011
    without legal pressure.

  270. avatar
    Whatever4 July 22, 2012 at 10:42 am #

    Keith: What about Arizona?

    These are 2 separate scenarios. One is adoption — state residents adopt a child born to other parents in another country. Every state has some sort of procedure for that. The other is what the CCP is referring to — registration of a child born to state resident parents but in another country. PA and Hawaii have both, AZ appears to only have the adoption scenario.

  271. avatar
    Paper July 22, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    from the Complete Guide to Evangelical Economics (CGEE):

    Capitalism is the economy of Heaven.
    Communism is the economy of the Ninth Circle of Hell.
    Marxism is the economy of the Eight Circle.
    Socialism is what they practice in the Fourth Circle.
    Mixed Economies are all the rage in Purgatory.

    misha: Please define these:
    - communism
    - Marxism
    - socialism
    - capitalism
    - mixed economy

    I’m waiting.

  272. avatar
    Arthur July 22, 2012 at 11:28 am #

    misha: Please define these:- communism- Marxism- socialism- capitalism- mixed economyI’m waiting.

    According to the notes I took in my Political Theory class at Glenn Beck University:

    Communism: the economic system that Nobama wants! Spread through Cash for Clunkers. Would force mandatory drum circles, dreadlocks for women, and the use of patchouli.
    Marxism: the Jewish form of communism; invented by Alinsky. If implemented, would bring Yiddish theatre to the Upper Midwest.
    Socialism: Practiced by the Romans and responsible for the death of Jesus. Principle tenet: the least deserving will always get the last slice of pizza.
    Mixed economy: when a liberal marries a conservative. Usually ends in separate checking accounts.

  273. avatar
    bgansel9 July 22, 2012 at 11:31 am #

    Ann: These laws are still in effect now in Hawaii (& should have been replaced by Federal laws) whereas all other states are goverened by the Federal laws which are the same in every state. It is obvious Hawaii has not kept up with the Federal system

    U.S. Code Title 8, section 1401 applies to EVERY state. What you are talking about is for recording purposes only, not actual citizenship. Citizenship is covered in the U.S. Code and it applies to ALL states.

    And, might I add, THIS is the sort of thing that shows how States rights don’t trump Federal rights.

  274. avatar
    misha July 22, 2012 at 11:42 am #

    bgansel9: U.S. Code Title 8, section 1401 applies to EVERY state. What you are talking about is for recording purposes only, not actual citizenship. Citizenship is covered in the U.S. Code and it applies to ALL states.

    When has a birther ever let facts get in the way?

    bgansel9: THIS is the sort of thing that shows how States rights don’t trump Federal rights.

    The people who scream “states rights,” are silent when it is about medical marijuana. They only scream ‘states rights’ when it is about reproductive freedom, or peonage.

  275. avatar
    Arthur July 22, 2012 at 11:46 am #

    misha: They only scream ‘states rights’ when it is about reproductive freedom, or peonage.

    Or limiting civil rights, the right to unionize, and access to health care.

  276. avatar
    bgansel9 July 22, 2012 at 12:16 pm #

    James M: Without consequence? He’s standing for re-election while under multiple Federal investigations. I’d say that’s lousy with consequences!

    It is lousy with consequences, or it should be. Unfortunately, we have a very large rightwinger contingency here that is fully committed to giving him another term. This will NOT be easy by any means (but it can be done if enough people pay attention).

  277. avatar
    bgansel9 July 22, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

    misha: When has a birther ever let facts get in the way?

    Never, but those facts still exist.

  278. avatar
    misha July 22, 2012 at 2:31 pm #

    Ann: he doesn’t tell you he is a Communist with Communist background.

    Better a communist, than the American Taliban:
    http://adultthought.ucsd.edu/culture_war/the_american_taliban.html

    Randall Terry: “I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good…Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism.”

    “Our goal must be simple. We must have a Christian nation built on God’s law, on the ten Commandments. No apologies.”

    “I don’t think Christians should use birth control. You consummate your marriage as often as you like – and if you have babies, you have babies.”

    “When I, or people like me, are running the country, you’d better flee, because we will find you, we will try you, and we’ll execute you. I mean every word of it. I will make it part of my mission to see to it that they are tried and executed.”

    “There is going to be war, [and Christians may be called to] take up the sword to overthrow the tyrannical regime that oppresses them.”

  279. avatar
    Northland10 July 22, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: the Ultra-right wing birther crowd see the “Communist”, “Marxist” and “Socialist” as synonyms for “Democrat”, or as words to describe anyone who doesn’t share their fanatical devotion to conservative ideals.

    Or the fanatical devotion to what they want conservative ideals to be, as separate from real conservative ideals.