Main Menu

Reed Hayes: expert enigma

The latest darling of the birthers is named Reed Hayes, a handwriting expert in Hawaii, tasked by the Maricopa County volunteer Cold Case Posse to look at the electronic PDF image of Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate. (According to the birther press, the Obots are all in a tizzy1.) So what do we know about this guy, and what do we not know?

The biggest thing we don’t know is what his report says because it hasn’t been released. Putting the mountain aside, let’s examine the mole hills.

Let’s start with a birther claim: Hayes is a registered Democrat. You can see it on the birther web sites:

In fact “Reed Hayes” “registered Democrat” returns 505 hits on Google. The problem: Hawaii doesn’t have political party registration. The birthers seem to think that being a Democrat somehow makes him immune from criticism (not publishing his report is what actually makes him immune from criticism). Birthers are opportunists, believing whoever seems to support them, but they think that their opposition works the same way, and that Obots only trust Obots. Here’s a quote attributed to Mike Zullo:

This ought to serve as a warning shot across the bow to the naysayers of our criminal investigation in the Obama fraud case. The impressive credentials of Mr. Hayes, and the fact that he has testified in court cases for Perkins-Coie coupled with the fact that Mr. Hayes is a registered Democrat, demonstrates the integrity of our investigation and our conviction that we possess incontrovertible evidence to back our case.

The Hayes CV does not say that he testified in court for the Perkins-Coie attorney, or what he did. But since when is an association with Obama or his law firm a badge of honor and qualifications for the birthers? It is when it suits them. We normals have to be more objective. It seems a dubious claim that Mike Zullo gains confidence because he has a report from an Obama supporter. Ability, integrity and political leaning are not correlated.

The quote above does introduce another topic, and that is the alleged use of Mr. Hayes by a large national law firm who happens to represent Barack Obama. Generally in the English language, the plural is not appropriate for a single instance. Zullo alleges multiple cases where Hayes and Perkins-Coie are tied. Hayes’ CV lists only one attorney from Perkins-Coie in Seattle who may or may not have been associated with that firm when Mr. Hayes was used.

Now as to credentials, Hayes has an impressive list (see CV link). He has certifications in document analysis and has testified in court a listed 22 times.  What is interesting is that as far as I can see, he has never testified in federal court.  That’s significant for me because I cannot readily gain access to any of the cases, nor can I determine what they were about, or what he testified. One of the cases he lists is State of Hawaii v. Lisa-Katharine Otsuka and I found at least that his CV had been submitted in that case.

His particular expertise, however, appears to be in handwriting analysis and that has no relevance to whether a PDF is a scan of a document or something constructed in Adobe Illustrator. Whether he is an astrologer or not is hardly relevant either.

See also Squeeky Fromm’s take on this story.


1I’m a tizzy because I’m installing Windows 8 on my laptop, not because of Mr. Hayes.

Update:

The laptop upgrade went surprisingly well, including the fingerprint recognition hardware that I had anticipated being a problem. In fact, the only software that didn’t work was something I had written myself; that was fixed by updating the development software. I don’t see what the big deal is with Windows 8. Just buy one of those free Start button programs, and then it looks just like Windows 7, but with some new features, and running faster, I think.

152 Responses to Reed Hayes: expert enigma

  1. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter June 11, 2013 at 3:08 pm #

    Hi Dr. C!!!

    Thank you for the shout out! I have sooo much to catch up on after my sabbatical. I got a document which may or may not be authentic supposedly between Reed Hayes and Zullo. Once, I would have thought my leg was being pulled. Now, who knows???

    http://birtherthinktank.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/readright-document1.pdf

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  2. avatar
    bovril June 11, 2013 at 3:30 pm #

    One of the many outright fabrications around this individual is how he is a “court certified expert”.

    Only problem is courts don’t and cannot “certify” anyone and certainly not as an expert. They can accept some is certified in their field and is an expert but each appearance in court is unique and subject to challenge.

  3. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) June 11, 2013 at 3:39 pm #

    I have a different theory.
    If his analysis remains “secret”, it’s quite likely it doesn’t say what Zullo claims it does.
    We all know how birthers always lie whenever they don’t publish actual sources (like the Verna Lee “interview”) and how they exaggerate things (such as the “government agent” who turned out to be a postman).

  4. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) June 11, 2013 at 3:42 pm #

    Or maybe they asked Reed “would Onaka accidentally put a smiley face in his signature”, Reed said “no way”, then Zullo concluded “forgery!”…

  5. avatar
    Reality Check June 11, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

    I installed Windows 8 on a laptop that previously had Vista 64. I hated Windows 8 at first until I installed Classic Desktop to get back my desktop and start button back. I wanted to install Windows 7 but Windows 8 was 1/3 the price. I am not sure what to make of that.

  6. avatar
    HistorianDude June 11, 2013 at 4:28 pm #

    Regarding the Perkins-Coie association, it is worth noting that nothing in the CV actually supports the claim that Hayes ever actually “has testified in court cases for Perkins-Coie.” I was able to contact an associate of one of the other lawyers on his client list, and in that case it appears that his use in that instance was to authenticate a signature on a chain-of custody log for a urine sample.

    The list of “clients” is not necessarily coincident with any delivery of testimony, expert or otherwise, in any court case. All it requires is that somebody paid him for his opinion.

  7. avatar
    The Truth Hurts June 11, 2013 at 4:32 pm #

    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

  8. avatar
    gorefan June 11, 2013 at 4:40 pm #

    IMO, Mr. Hayes report probably reads just as Zullo has characterized it. In his affidavit Zullo quotes from the report. He doesn’t paraphrase it, he quotes it.

    “…based on my observations and findings, it is clear that Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured documented created by utilizing material from various sources.”

    and

    “In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have
    never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many
    respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated.”

    I doubt the Zullo would make up such direct quotes in his affidavit.

    A more likely scenario comes from Zullo himself. In an interview Zullo with Sheriff Kessler, Zullo says,

    “When we released the fact that we had a court recognized, certified forensic document examiner review everything we did and sign off and come to his own conclusion, that it’s a complete fabrication that’s like the nail in the coffin. Umm, you just can’t get somebody to do that. These people’s careers are out there. And umm you know that just for me that made it where I could stand in front of law enforcement officials and make my presentation. Coming from me, coming from the sheriff, there always an element of doubt. But when you’ve got somebody completely independent not only concludes the same as you but offers a statement at the end that it is an entire fabrication. I mean, they’re going to have a hard time refuting that because they won’t be able to. But they are going to have a hard time to refute that. So that is a game changer. And if the public every truly can get wind of this, and to be honest with you chief I need an hour and a half, in an hour and a half I can convince the greatest skeptic that this is fake. Not because I’m selling it but because the evidence proves it. That birth certificate is like the best crime scene in the world, every piece of evidence you need resides right there. You don’t have to look anywhere else for it.”

    Beginning at 5:55

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz0biw1nRPU&feature=player_embedded

    So they sent Hayes all their “evidence” – Zebest report, Irey report, Vogt report etc. If you’re Hayes and those are your only sources, I can understand coming to his conclusion.

    He probably never has seen a document where you can move stuff around like the registrar stamp. He was biased by their reports and without his own experience of computer images, it probably all sounded good.

  9. avatar
    Bob June 11, 2013 at 5:15 pm #

    My guess is that Hayes gets paid something for the use of his name and image. He has nothing else to offer.

    $25? $200?

  10. avatar
    Reality Check June 11, 2013 at 5:45 pm #

    How much would anyone care to bet that Hayes had never seen the AP jpg high resolution photo when he did his analysis? I would bet the farm that Zullo never sent it to him because Zullo will never even acknowledge that it exists much less explain where it came from since it cannot have been from the PDF. I sent Hayes a copy just so he could look at it and figure out what a fool he had made of himself by limiting his analysis to the PDF file.

  11. avatar
    gorefan June 11, 2013 at 6:00 pm #

    Reality Check: How much would anyone care to bet that Hayes had never seen the AP jpg high resolution photo when he did his analysis?

    He might have seen Zebest’s explanation from her CCP report,

    “The PDF birth certificate document released by the White House (shown in Figure 1) is a completely manufactured and fabricated computer generated image. The same source file was used to print a copy handed to the AP (shown in Figure 2), in which the AP scanned in the version handed to them. A third photograph version (Figure 3) was touted by Savannah Guthrie who claimed to have held and felt the seal on the document, but the original Internet posted images have been scrubbed.”

    She goes on to say,

    “This would account for the transformation of a document containing different color
    backgrounds, and the ability to print with or without safety paper pattern (by turning a layer on or off ).”

    She thinks the AP copy was made from the same file as the PDF but with the green background layer turned off. Completely ignoring that the green background layer contains all the vertical lines and some of the lettering.

  12. avatar
    Sactosintolerant June 11, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

    Speaking of the green background, which Zullo implied was suspicious BECAUSE its what Hawaii uses, isn’t their argument that no left justification = forgery AND their claim that white halos may be due to the erasure of text in a legit birth certificate awfully hard to square up?

  13. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 11, 2013 at 6:48 pm #

    I liken asking a handwriting expert to examine a PDF, to someone asking an electrician to fix their plumbing.

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    Obama isn’t “hiding” his records. Birthers keep asking to see records which they have no legal entitlement to, and then get upset when the agencies that hold those records tell them “no”.

  14. avatar
    Mitch June 11, 2013 at 6:49 pm #

    But since when is an association with Obama or his law firm a badge of honor and qualifications for the birthers? It is when it suits them. We normals have to be more objective.

    I’ve never liked the term “anti-birther”. I think I like the term “normals” better.

  15. avatar
    Crustacean June 11, 2013 at 6:50 pm #

    Totally understandable, Squeeky. As difficult as it is to wrap one’s mind around the concept of moon bats, it’s best to wait for expert testimony such as that provided by Mr. Hayes before coming to any rash conclusions. I always suspected that Projects Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were an elaborate marketing scheme for Tang, and now all doubt has been removed from what’s left of my mind.

    I shudder to think of the heinous threats that must have been made to keep Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin from spilling the beans.

    And kudos to your bravery for bringing this into the light, given how badly whistle-blowers are treated by the usurperator-in-chief these days.

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: Once, I would have thought my leg was being pulled. Now, who knows???

  16. avatar
    egh June 11, 2013 at 7:17 pm #

    Hi Doc

    Been busy otherwise. Hope you and the Missus C are doing well.

  17. avatar
    aarrgghh June 11, 2013 at 7:23 pm #

    Mitch: I’ve never liked the term “anti-birther”. I think I like the term “normals” better.

    i like the term “sane” even better

  18. avatar
    US Citizen June 11, 2013 at 7:40 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: I liken asking a handwriting expert to examine a PDF, to someone asking an electrician to fix their plumbing.

    Not to dis you (I like you), but plumbing and electronics share a lot of commonalities.
    Current, flow, volume and other characteristics are almost exactly the same.
    Kirchhoff’s current law works pretty much the same for water in pipes as it does for current flow in electronics.

    Anyway, you’re still correct.
    Reed Hayes is hardly qualified to speak on image compression, bit maps or raster-based anything.
    He’d know little or nothing about edge detection or layer usage.
    If he does mostly handwriting analysis, the closest I can think of is vector based images, ie: HPGL, SVG, PCL, etc.
    Since the BC wasn’t plotted or engraved, I doubt knowing about vector graphics would be very helpful.

    I also question how an “expert of 20 years” has only 22 entries in his CV.

    Personally, I think someone should contact Adobe or search their various databases for more info on layers and compression. Both official forums and by end-users.
    Certainly there’s discussion of how their compression algorithms and layering are used somewhere.
    I’d even bet some articles or FAQ statements would predate when Obama became a household word.
    An official statement from Adobe, Xerox, Brother or other large copier maker would be great.
    There wouldn’t even be any need (or desire) to mention Obama or BCs.

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 11, 2013 at 7:42 pm #

    Well, I didn’t want to make too much of this. He is a court expert, having testified many times in court, and he is a certified expert, being accredited by a national organization.

    bovril: Only problem is courts don’t and cannot “certify” anyone and certainly not as an expert. They can accept some is certified in their field and is an expert but each appearance in court is unique and subject to challenge.

  20. avatar
    gorefan June 11, 2013 at 8:12 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: He is a court expert, having testified many times in court

    Exactly, Zullo referred to him as a “court recognized, certified forensic document examiner”. That is certainly true.

  21. avatar
    JPotter June 11, 2013 at 9:37 pm #

    Doc, anyone, is there a term for the claims of affiliation disingenuous statements often start with? For instance, in this story in which it is alleged that Hayes is a ‘registered Democrat’ even though party affiliation has nothing to do with the quality of his message?

    Have been seeing this claim for years, in particular from birfers and wingnuts. I ad mit I am biased and don’t study lefties as closely.

    These claims take positive (“Hey, I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”) and negative forms (“I’m no birther, BUT…”), and sometime both! (“I’m no birther, and I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”)

    There has to be a name for this. Poison-Baiting the Switched Well? False Flagging?

    This reminds me of Tokyo Rose and Lord HawHaw.

    ________________

    I hadn’t heard of Hayes, so I looked him up, curious about his age (“hey, maybe for once the birfer ‘spurt will be a young prodigy (hardehar)”). The first thing that came up was a death notice in Chicago. Oops, wrong Reed Hayes.

    Nope, he’s an oldster. Not ancient, but typical birfy demographic.

    I would link to his bio page, but I know he’s just bandwagoning in hopes of getting some cheap—and relatively safe—notoriety. He risks nothing by jumping in at this point. Public-at-large will never know of his shilling, now that birferism has cooled to absolute zero.

    “Nah, see, we don’t like that. We like our birfers in the open. That way john Q. Public can spot ’em just like that. We’re gonna give you a little something you cant take off …” — Lt. Ald-Obot Raine

  22. avatar
    Hermitian June 11, 2013 at 10:27 pm #

    I thought that there are at least three purported signatures on the PDF image. Maybe Hayes, who after all is a handwriting expert, found something wrong with these signatures.

  23. avatar
    Joey June 11, 2013 at 10:39 pm #

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    The candidate, Barack Obama placed a copy of his birth certificate on the Internet for the whole wide world to see on June 10, 2008. The state of Hawaii verified the authenticity of that document on October 31, 2008. Obama then proceeded to win 69 million popular votes.
    President Obama placed a copy of his original, long form birth certificate on the Internet for the whole wide world to see on April 27, 2011. The state of Hawaii has issued four different verifications for the authenticity of that document. Having released the long form copy, the President was reelected with 66 million votes.
    A federal judge, Henry T. Wingate has copies of the original long form birth certificate as exhibits in the Mississippi Ballot Challenge Taitz v. Mississippi Democratic Party Executuve Committee, Obama, et. al. Judge Wingate has not yet rendered an opinion in that lawsuit.

  24. avatar
    Joey June 11, 2013 at 10:45 pm #

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    Birther Attorney Orly Taitz introduced a copy of President Obama’s birth certificate as evidence of forgery in the Georgia ballot challenge to Obama’s eligibility. In a trial on the merits, the Judge in Georgia was not persuaded by Orly Taitz’s alleged evidence of forgery.
    He ruled: For the purposes of this analysis, the Court considered that Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Ankeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary under O.C.G.A. under Section 21-2-5(b). February 3, 2012
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/80424508/Swensson-Powell-Farrar-Welden-vs-Obama-Judge-Michael-Malihi-s-Final-Order-Georgia-Ballot-Access-Challenge-2-3-12

  25. avatar
    yoyoma June 11, 2013 at 11:01 pm #

    I’ve never seen a picture of Mr. Hayes, but after reading Ms. Fromm’s report,I’m fully expecting him to look exactly like Clint Howard.

  26. avatar
    AlCum June 11, 2013 at 11:13 pm #

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents? Are you insane? He’s the first and only U.S. presidential candidate in our history ever to release them. I’ve seen them.

    Check your sources!

  27. avatar
    AlCum June 11, 2013 at 11:17 pm #

    In their ludicrous quest to prove the PDF is forged, birthers never seem to come to grips with the question of why someone would forge a PDF of a real document that is identical to it in all respects, from the actual photos of the document we’ve seen, and for which the issuing entity, the state of Hawaii, has publicly verified the information is correct?

    Makes no sense whatsoever.

  28. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 11, 2013 at 11:19 pm #

    The Truth Hurts: Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    What documents (plural, right?) are being hidden….documents that Obama has access to and control of?

  29. avatar
    US Citizen June 11, 2013 at 11:44 pm #

    One of the funniest things I often hear is how Obama keeps on having to pay more and more money to his lawyers to keep his records hidden.
    As if they’d jump out of wherever they hid them.

    Here’s the way I imagine it happens:

    “Hello Mr. President,

    We regret to inform you that the hole we put your records in has had all of its top soil eroded and so we’re going to have to try hiding them somewhere else.
    As you know, safety deposit boxes automatically spring open by themselves every few months, so that idea has already been tried.
    We’re now considering purchasing a small plot of land in Jamaica to bury them in next.
    Therefore, we will require yet another payment of $250,000 due by the end of the month.

    Thank you very much,
    Your lawyers”

  30. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 12, 2013 at 12:14 am #

    US Citizen: Not to dis you (I like you), but plumbing and electronics share a lot of commonalities.
    Current, flow, volume and other characteristics are almost exactly the same.
    Kirchhoff’s current law works pretty much the same for water in pipes as it does for current flow in electronics.

    True. But I chose those two fields because they are as different as they are similar.

  31. avatar
    aarrgghh June 12, 2013 at 12:58 am #

    JPotter: Doc, anyone, is there a term for the claims of affiliation disingenuous statements often start with? For instance, in this story in which it is alleged that Hayes is a ‘registered Democrat’ even though party affiliation has nothing to do with the quality of his message?

    … These claims take positive (“Hey, I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”) and negative forms (“I’m no birther, BUT…”), and sometime both! (“I’m no birther, and I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”)

    i’d call one an Appeal to Fraternity, ie, “hayes is one of you, so his claims must be true.”

    i’d call the other an Appeal to Sanity, ie, “i’m not crazy/stupid, so what i say is true”

  32. avatar
    The Magic M June 12, 2013 at 4:29 am #

    JPotter: These claims take positive (“Hey, I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”) and negative forms (“I’m no birther, BUT…”), and sometime both! (“I’m no birther, and I voted for Obama and all, BUT…”)

    There has to be a name for this. Poison-Baiting the Switched Well? False Flagging?

    Some type of oxymoron. It’s like saying “I’m not racist, but I hate those damn n****s”.
    Or concern trolling – “I support Obama, but I’m starting to have doubts because …”.

    aarrgghh: i’d call one an Appeal to Fraternity, ie, “hayes is one of you, so his claims must be true.”

    It’s rather an Appeal to Co-Conspirators: “Look, one of your own has broken ranks, how do you explain that???”
    And towards the birther audience it’s: “Look, the conspiracy is falling apart, not even their own people believe it anymore.”

  33. avatar
    roadburner June 12, 2013 at 7:34 am #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: True. But I chose those two fields because they are as different as they are similar.

    when i was discussing the LFBC PDF with a birfoon, i suggested to him it was like having a misfire on his car and showing his plumber a photo of it and asking for a diagnosis as to why it was misfiring.

    of course, he then changed the subject rapidly to SS numbers *rolleyes

  34. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 8:42 am #

    No, there’s ample proof of the authenticity of Obama’s documents. Rather than hiding his birth certificate, he not only released a copy on the Internet, but let the entire White House press corps have a look at the original. The story is that birthers are just crazy, and I am just counting the ways.

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

  35. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 8:46 am #

    Doing fine.

    egh: Been busy otherwise. Hope you and the Missus C are doing well.

  36. avatar
    JPotter June 12, 2013 at 10:39 am #

    aarrgghh: i’d call one an Appeal to Fraternity, ie, “hayes is one of you, so his claims must be true.”

    i’d call the other an Appeal to Sanity, ie, “i’m not crazy/stupid, so what i say is true”

    Those are good terms, but I would add “False” to them to make it them FAF / FAS. Hey, they have excellent onomatopoetic possibilities, too!

    Thanks for the suggestions, aaaaargh!

  37. avatar
    Woodrowfan June 12, 2013 at 10:56 am #

    I’ve noticed that whenever someone tells me “the truth hurts, doesn’t it?” (or some variation) that they’re almost always spouting bullpoo.

  38. avatar
    The Magic M June 12, 2013 at 11:20 am #

    The Truth Hurts: You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    That’s either Catch-22 or pure cynicism.

    First you birthers make up 1,001 reasons why Obama isn’t eligible, and when someone makes the effort of refuting them all, you turn that into something worthy of reproach, either by saying “if we were wrong, we’d just be ignored” or by your “how dare you look at the facts when I just FEEL the guy’s not eligible”?

  39. avatar
    Rickey June 12, 2013 at 11:29 am #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    I liken asking a handwriting expert to examine a PDF, to someone asking an electrician to fix their plumbing.

    A better example is hiring a medical expert to testify in a personal injury lawsuit. A neurosurgeon and a plastic surgeon are both medical doctors, but you would not hire a neurosurgeon to be your expert in a case involving facial scarring.

    I see nothing in Hayes’ CV which would suggest that he has any expertise in PDF file creation. His CV makes reference to research on “Computer-Generated Handwriting and Documents,” but that was in 1994 and 1995. Based upon his publications, it seems that his focus at the time was on computer-generated handwriting.

  40. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 12, 2013 at 11:30 am #

    Rickey: A better example is hiring a medical expert to testify in a personal injury lawsuit. A neurosurgeon and a plastic surgeon are both medical doctors, but you would not hire a neurosurgeon to be your expert in a case involving facial scarring.

    I see nothing in Hayes’ CV which would suggest that he has any expertise in PDF file creation. His CV makes reference to research on “Computer-Generated Handwriting and Documents,” but that was in 1994 and 1995. Based upon his publications, it seems that his focus at the time was on computer-generated handwriting.

    Yeah, that is a better analogy.

  41. avatar
    Majority Will June 12, 2013 at 12:05 pm #

    The Magic M: That’s either Catch-22 or pure cynicism.

    First you birthers make up 1,001 reasons why Obama isn’t eligible, and when someone makes the effort of refuting them all, you turn that into something worthy of reproach, either by saying “if we were wrong, we’d just be ignored” or by your “how dare you look at the facts when I just FEEL the guy’s not eligible”?

    Or claiming where there’s smoke there must be fire and the birther bigot is covered in soot and holding a lit torch and a stack of kindling.

    How would a birther bigot react to being falsely accused of fraud and forgery by sworn enemies?

  42. avatar
    misha marinsky June 12, 2013 at 12:39 pm #

    The Truth Hurts:Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    Good point. I found a Kenya BC (Obama’s?) that may be what you are looking for:

    http://tinyurl.com/phwo85h

  43. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 12:44 pm #

    I got something called “StartIsBack” (http://www.startisback.com). It’s $3 for a two-PC license and it is perfect in restoring desktop functionality.

    Microsoft is selling Windows 8 cheaply, I suppose, because it has to compete with other operating systems that are free.

    Reality Check:
    I installed Windows 8 on a laptop that previously had Vista 64. I hated Windows 8 at first until I installed Classic Desktop to get back my desktop and start button back. I wanted to install Windows 7 but Windows 8 was 1/3 the price. I am not sure what to make of that.

  44. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 12, 2013 at 3:08 pm #

    Steering clear of 8 for as long as I can get away with. 7 is doing me just fine.

  45. avatar
    Thomas Brown June 12, 2013 at 4:06 pm #

    The Truth Hurts? Why, yes, sometimes. And maybe that’s why Birthers can’t tolerate it.

  46. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 4:28 pm #

    I think it is a defense against an “appeal to motive.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive

    JPotter: Doc, anyone, is there a term for the claims of affiliation disingenuous statements often start with?

  47. avatar
    SluggoJD June 12, 2013 at 5:48 pm #

    The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    Anyone miss me?

    And this poster sniffed a little too much glue.

  48. avatar
    JPotter June 12, 2013 at 6:27 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I got something called “StartIsBack” (http://www.startisback.com). It’s $3 for a two-PC license and it is perfect in restoring desktop functionality.

    Microsoft is selling Windows 8 cheaply, I suppose, because it has to compete with other operating systems that are free.

    I went with free version of Start Menu X. Works very well.

    I use Win7, Win8, and Linux (a bit). Win8 is great, seems leaner and faster. Can’t believe how quickly most apps launch.

    Forcing desktop/laptop users to work around a ‘mobile’ interface is pretty ridiculous. Maybe they’re trying to train dinosaurs new tricks. Will go down as one of the all-time classic tech blunders.

    The “official” price of Win8 is normal, but it’s heavily discounted most everywhere. I heard you could still lie and get the $15 promo rate that was offered.

    As more apps and storage transfers to the interwebs, the value of a full-featured, local OS has dropped. Computing is being set free.

  49. avatar
    Keith June 12, 2013 at 7:49 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    Steering clear of 8 for as long as I can get away with. 7 is doing me just fine.

    Me too. Though I am considering putting it on my laptop. I think I’ll wait for 8.1 – they are going to restore a lot of desktop friendly functionality.

    I was thinking of getting an Android tablet too, but I think I’ll wait for Intel’s new chip and get a Win 8 Pro when that happens.

  50. avatar
    Impartial Observer June 12, 2013 at 8:14 pm #

    Joey: The Truth Hurts:
    You spend an awful lot of time in the minutiae when the awful truth is dangling right in front of your big fat face.

    Obama is hiding his birth documents from public scrutiny, and anyone like you who seeks to justify it is a simpleton and/or fool.

    You make a very good point. When President Obama presented his pdf as evidence, didn’t he pretty much concede or waive any right to privacy on the originals?

    Nobody knows if the pdf is accurate false or fraudulent. All we can really know is that President Obama conceded our right to see his records and now refuses to let us see the real ones.

    That’s where we’re at.

  51. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 9:19 pm #

    There are two fundamental problems with your comment.

    First, there is no mechanism for President Obama to “waive” anything under Hawaiian Law. He can release the certificate he receives, but the statutes are very clear about what the Department of Health can and cannot do.

    The second things is when you say “nobody knows….” In fact the same Hawaii Department of Health has sent certified verifications of ALL the information seen on the President’s birth certificate PDF directly to the secretaries of state in Arizona and Kansas. One has to be pretty oblivious to the facts to say that “nobody knows….” People don’t know because they choose not to know, not because of a lack of evidence.

    Impartial Observer: You make a very good point. When President Obama presented his pdf as evidence, didn’t he pretty much concede or waive any right to privacy on the originals?

    Nobody knows if the pdf is accurate false or fraudulent. All we can really know is that President Obama conceded our right to see his records and now refuses to let us see the real ones.

    That’s where we’re at.

  52. avatar
    Rickey June 12, 2013 at 9:22 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    Steering clear of 8 for as long as I can get away with. 7 is doing me just fine.

    Ditto.

  53. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 12, 2013 at 9:24 pm #

    The Kindle Fire HD is awfully nice for $199.

    Keith: I was thinking of getting an Android tablet too,

  54. avatar
    Rickey June 12, 2013 at 9:25 pm #

    Impartial Observer:

    That’s where we’re at.

    That may be where you’re at, but the reality-based community has moved on.

    Did you demand to see Mitt Romney’s birth certificate?

  55. avatar
    richCares June 12, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

    DOC :The Kindle Fire HD is awfully nice for $199.”
    yes, video is great plus it is the one of the few tablets tthat connects to a cableCARD,
    i.e. I can watch cable TV on it
    my wife’s Kindle is in Japanese (easy to change)
    Love it

  56. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 12, 2013 at 10:21 pm #

    Impartial Observer: Nobody knows if the pdf is accurate false or fraudulent.

    The State of Hawaii says it’s legit.

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

    Is the state lying?

  57. avatar
    jdkinpa June 12, 2013 at 11:32 pm #

    ‘Take Down’ GOP, Democrats, ‘Whole Power Structure’

    I know that Beck isn’t a birther per se; I’m just curious if there is any ‘noise’ on the birther sites about this. Just speculating but I’d think that a birther would be inclined to follow Beck and his rantings too.

    Never mind. Should have done my google first.

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/

  58. avatar
    gorefan June 12, 2013 at 11:47 pm #

    Impartial Observer: When President Obama presented his pdf as evidence, didn’t he pretty much concede or waive any right to privacy on the originals?

    Hawaiian Courts on more than one occasion have said that the answer to your question is no, he did not.

  59. avatar
    Keith June 13, 2013 at 12:27 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The Kindle Fire HD is awfully nice for $199.

    But can I write apps for it?

  60. avatar
    Keith June 13, 2013 at 12:34 am #

    Keith: But can I write apps for it?

    OK, yes I can. Presumably this still works on the KFHD: How To Run Almost Any Android App On the Kindle Fire

    Also the big one, 8.9 inch 64G Wifi is $712 Australian.

  61. avatar
    misha marinsky June 13, 2013 at 1:16 am #

    Impartial Observer: Nobody knows if the pdf is accurate false or fraudulent.

    Here’s Obama’s Kenya BC: http://tinyurl.com/phwo85h

  62. avatar
    Bonsall Obot June 13, 2013 at 7:23 am #

    “Impartial” Observer?

    Concern troll is concerned.

  63. avatar
    Sef June 13, 2013 at 10:56 am #

    JPotter: Forcing desktop/laptop users to work around a ‘mobile’ interface is pretty ridiculous. Maybe they’re trying to train dinosaurs new tricks. Will go down as one of the all-time classic tech blunders.

    They keep trying to force “Bob” on an unsuspecting public in different incarnations. And Canonical is also trying it with “Unity”. Just give me a terminal and a shell.

  64. avatar
    Majority Will June 13, 2013 at 11:54 am #

    Keith: But can I write apps for it?

    Or you can go this route:
    https://developer.amazon.com/sdk/fire/submit-android-app.html

  65. avatar
    Big Broverment June 13, 2013 at 1:08 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The second things is when you say “nobody knows….” In fact the same Hawaii Department of Health has sent certified verifications of ALL the information seen on the President’s birth certificate PDF directly to the secretaries of state in Arizona and Kansas.

    Well, maybe they’re telling the truth. Maybe they’re not. Whose crystal balls do you peer into to ascertain the absolute truth?!

    obama’s hiding documents and you’re ok with it. skeptical people aren’t. what’s truer than that?

  66. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 13, 2013 at 1:14 pm #

    Big Broverment: obama’s hiding documents and you’re ok with it. skeptical people aren’t. what’s truer than that?

    What is Obama hiding?

  67. avatar
    Joey June 13, 2013 at 1:30 pm #

    Ghug

    Big Broverment: Well, maybe they’re telling the truth.Maybe they’re not.Whose crystal balls do you peer into to ascertain the absolute truth?!

    obama’s hiding documents and you’re ok with it.skeptical people aren’t. what’s truer than that?

    There’s no such thing as a hidden document any more. Even our most top secret documents get hacked and leaked by folks with access and skills.

  68. avatar
    Majority Will June 13, 2013 at 2:11 pm #

    CarlOrcas: What is Obama hiding?

    Better yet, what is Darrell Issa hiding?

  69. avatar
    misha marinsky June 13, 2013 at 2:36 pm #

    Big Broverment: obama’s hiding documents and you’re ok with it.

    The NSA can’t keep anything under a lid. So how is Obama protecting himself against the next Snowden?

  70. avatar
    misha marinsky June 13, 2013 at 2:37 pm #

    Majority Will: Better yet, what is Darrell Issa hiding?

    His next car alarm.

  71. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 13, 2013 at 2:37 pm #

    Majority Will: Better yet, what is Darrell Issa hiding?

    His brain? Oh…..that was wrong, wasn’t it?

  72. avatar
    Majority Will June 13, 2013 at 2:51 pm #

    CarlOrcas: His brain? Oh…..that was wrong, wasn’t it?

    He is a paid liar after all.

  73. avatar
    The Truth Hurts June 13, 2013 at 8:11 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: No, there’s ample proof of the authenticity of Obama’s documents. Rather than hiding his birth certificate, he not only released a copy on the Internet, but let the entire White House press corps have a look at the original.

    He released something on the internet. He released it all over you.

  74. avatar
    Majority Will June 13, 2013 at 8:18 pm #

    The Truth Hurts: He released something on the internet.

    Get someone to read this to you slowly and explain what it means:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

  75. avatar
    AlCum June 13, 2013 at 9:59 pm #

    Big Broverment: Well, maybe they’re telling the truth.Maybe they’re not.Whose crystal balls do you peer into to ascertain the absolute truth?!

    obama’s hiding documents and you’re ok with it.skeptical people aren’t. what’s truer than that?

    Obama has not hidden even one document. He is the only president in history to release his official authentic and proven-true by the issuing state birth certificate. This is not remotely subject to dispute.

  76. avatar
    john June 13, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    Majority Will: Get someone to read this to you slowly and explain what it means:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

    It is very interesting that Dr. Fukino refers to Vital Records (Plural) even though Obama released only 1 Vital Records. Further, this statement was made an hour after Congress passed a Resolution celebrating the 50th year of statehood for Hawaii and declaring his birth there as well. I found to be a amazing coincidence.

  77. avatar
    john June 13, 2013 at 10:48 pm #

    “In fact the same Hawaii Department of Health has sent certified verifications of ALL the information seen on the President’s birth certificate PDF directly to the secretaries of state in Arizona and Kansas.”

    Not necessarily Doc. Hawaii has never verified that August 04, 1961 is Obama’s birthdate. It is my understanding AZ SOS Bennett tried to get confirmed but ultimately had to back down from asking for the birthdate to be verified and Hawaii never did verify it.

    Obots point to the MS and Kansas verifications but neither of those verifications state that birthdate of 08/04/1961 is verified. Obots say that Alvin Onaka confirmed the information matched but never specifies what information he verifies. In other words, the KS and MS are too vague as to confirm the birthdate of 08/04/1961 for Obama.

  78. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2013 at 12:23 am #

    No, this is not interesting at all. The plural is commonly to refer to records generically and can refer to one or more. Birthers are being totally silly when they try to make this nonsensical argument.

    john: It is very interesting that Dr. Fukino refers to Vital Records (Plural) even though Obama released only 1 Vital Records.

  79. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2013 at 12:36 am #

    Again, you’re making nonsense out of a plain statement. Onaka said “The information contained in the ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ … matches.” He specifies exactly what information–the information on the certificate. Anybody can look at the certificate and see what information is on it, and what information is not on it. It is specific, well-defined, unambiguous, plain and uncontroversial.

    Your disingenuous word games are worthless, annoying, and stupid.

    I’m sorry that you’re totally nuts on this Obama stuff, but there’s nothing I can do about it.

    As to your understanding that Bennett backed down on the birth date, you just made that up, and as such it is of no value or interest, just lunatic raving.

    john: “In fact the same Hawaii Department of Health has sent certified verifications of ALL the information seen on the President’s birth certificate PDF directly to the secretaries of state in Arizona and Kansas.”

    Not necessarily Doc. Hawaii has never verified that August 04, 1961 is Obama’s birthdate. It is my understanding AZ SOS Bennett tried to get confirmed but ultimately had to back down from asking for the birthdate to be verified and Hawaii never did verify it.

    Obots point to the MS and Kansas verifications but neither of those verifications state that birthdate of 08/04/1961 is verified. Obots say that Alvin Onaka confirmed the information matched but never specifies what information he verifies. In other words, the KS and MS are too vague as to confirm the birthdate of 08/04/1961 for Obama.

  80. avatar
    Keith June 14, 2013 at 12:39 am #

    john: Not necessarily Doc. Hawaii has never verified that August 04, 1961 is Obama’s birthdate.

    Yes it has. MANY TIMES. The public record, the one that you can go to the office to see, even says so.

    It is my understanding AZ SOS Bennett tried to get confirmed but ultimately had to back down from asking for the birthdate to be verified and Hawaii never did verify it.

    Bennett did not ask specifically for the birth date to be verified, for whatever reason, true. I suspect it was simple oversight, but perhaps he felt that it was obvious enough that the President was old enough.

    He did, however, ask for verification of the information on the document as a whole (in addition to the date items he enumerated) and Hawai’i did so.

    The document as a whole contained the birth date and was verified as a whole, so Bennett did indeed get the birth date verified by the State of Hawai’i.

    Yet again, your complaint fails on the fundamental test of fact.

    Give it up, John.

  81. avatar
    Benji Franklin June 14, 2013 at 12:46 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The plural is commonly to refer to records generically and can refer to one or more. Birthers are being totally silly when they try to make this nonsensical argument.

    Like the group plural ignoring “2 citizen parentS” argument Birthers make, the tortuous parsing required to come up with this canard also makes my teeth itch.
    If Birthers ever gather in sufficient numbers to vote on anything, I’m afraid it will have to be voting by a show of prehensile tails.

  82. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 14, 2013 at 12:48 am #

    john: Further, this statement was made an hour after Congress passed a Resolution celebrating the 50th year of statehood for Hawaii and declaring his birth there as well. I found to be a amazing coincidence.

    Why?

  83. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 14, 2013 at 1:01 am #

    john: Not necessarily Doc. Hawaii has never verified that August 04, 1961 is Obama’s birthdate

    For the sake of argument, John, let’s say Hawaii hasn’t confirmed his exact birth date. Do you acknowledge that they have verified he was born in Hawaii?

    Unless you are willing to argue that Obama was under 35 when he was sworn in then what difference would the lack of a precise birth date make? Hmm, John? John?

  84. avatar
    John Reilly June 14, 2013 at 1:20 am #

    I wanted to check out John’s latest theory. So I read the Constitution. I can’t find any requirement that the President have a birth date. He just needs to be a natural born citizen, and John concedes that Hawaii has verified that Pres. Obama was born there. But John, if you are correct about this birth date issue, why can’t you get a single member of the House to introduce a resolution seeking to impeach the President for lack of a birth date? And while you are at it, let’s retroactively impeach Pres. Eisenhower for not having a birth certificate at all and not even knowing what town he was born in. Or impeach Pres. Cleveland and Pres. Wilson for concealing their first names? Surely hiding your first name is as serious as not having a birth date. And talk about Pres. Ford, who concealed his whole name. Changed his real name to Ford just so he could have a tag line “I’m a Ford, not a Lincoln.” It’s tough to pull off that man of the people act if you have the regal last name of King.

    John, let us know of any other requirements you think we’ll find in the Constitution. Oh, I forgot. There is one requirement that you think is in the Constitution that disqualifies Pres. Obama. He’s not white.

    Get over it.

  85. avatar
    Keith June 14, 2013 at 2:35 am #

    John Reilly: I wanted to check out John’s latest theory. So I read the Constitution. I can’t find any requirement that the President have a birth date.

    What about the part that says he has to be 35 years old?

    Just sayin…

  86. avatar
    The Magic M June 14, 2013 at 4:40 am #

    Keith: Bennett did not ask specifically for the birth date to be verified, for whatever reason, true.

    But there was a second verification to another SOS (forgot which) that confirms the birth date. So again, there is no “there” there.

  87. avatar
    The Magic M June 14, 2013 at 4:54 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Again, you’re making nonsense out of a plain statement. Onaka said “The information contained in the ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ … matches.” He specifies exactly what information–the information on the certificate. Anybody can look at the certificate and see what information is on it, and what information is not on it. It is specific, well-defined, unambiguous, plain and uncontroversial.

    Birthers pretend there is some sneaky way of leaving a back door open by which Onaka could tell an effective lie while technically telling the truth.
    They claim there is some important alteration of the base BC (such as Romney’s “VOID”, or an amendment, or whatnot) that allows Onaka to say “matches” while suppressing said alteration that would render his statement untrue.

    Example:
    I have a piece of paper that says “John is from France” and then further down says “but this turned out to be a lie”. Then I could “confirm” that the information “John is from France” “matches” but I would still confirm a lie.

    The point is that it doesn’t work that way in the real world; “information matches” is a legal statement that cannot “fold away” parts that would make said matching legally incorrect.

  88. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 5:46 am #

    Keith: What about the part that says he has to be 35 years old?

    Just sayin…

    Oh sure but are those consecutive years? 🙂

  89. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 5:49 am #

    “I went down to the 24 hour grocery. When I got there the guy was locking the front door. I said, ‘Hey, the sign says you’re open 24 hours. He said, ‘Yes, but not in a row.”

    – Steven Wright

  90. avatar
    The Magic M June 14, 2013 at 5:51 am #

    Keith: What about the part that says he has to be 35 years old?

    Still doesn’t say anything about a birth date. If it’s undisputable the candidate is 35+ (for example, nobody could claim McCain is actually 34 and just suffering from progeria syndrome), proving his birth date is pretty much moot. No court and certainly no Congress would entertain outlandish “what if” scenarios where the candidate used plastic surgery to make himself appear older.

  91. avatar
    Lupin June 14, 2013 at 8:19 am #

    McCain is starting to look like a creature from an Ann Rice novel. Just saying.

  92. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2013 at 8:56 am #

    No, the other verification (Kansas) does not list specific items, but the general “information contained in the Certificate…”

    The Magic M: But there was a second verification to another SOS (forgot which) that confirms the birth date. So again, there is no “there” there.

  93. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2013 at 8:59 am #

    The certificate number was explicitly listed in the Kansas verification, and the year of issuance is part of that number. So Obama’s year of birth (and therefore his age) is verified.

    Keith: What about the part that says he has to be 35 years old?

    Just sayin…

  94. avatar
    john June 14, 2013 at 9:23 am #

    Mike Zullo speculates that Obama did receive a birth certificate from Hawaii. So Obama may have in fact have been born in Hawaii. However, there something on the birth certificate that Obama doesn’t want people to see (perhaps something that goes against the narrative we have been given.). Therefore, a forged birth certificate had to be made. I think there may be a good chance that August 04, 1961 is NOT Obama’s birthdate. Again, this is the one item that was not verified on the AZ Verfication. For the life of me, no rational reason exists on why Hawaii “forgot” to verify the birthdate of Obama except for the reason that August 04, 1961 is NOT Obama’s birthdate.

  95. avatar
    john June 14, 2013 at 9:35 am #

    Get someone to read this to you slowly and explain what it means:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

    Dr. Fukino also revealed that the birth certificate was half-typed and half handwritten but what Obama released really doesn’t match up to that description. Why?

  96. avatar
    john June 14, 2013 at 9:48 am #

    Here is the Kansas Verification – http://www.scribd.com/doc/106576604/2012-09-14-KS-SoS-Kobach-Letter-to-Onaka-and-Response

    A few problems however:

    1. Initials BP next to Alvin Onaka’s signature??????

    2. Onaka says the information “matches” but Onaka was asked if the information was “identical”.

    3. Both Kobach and Onaka refer to “information” on the birth certificate but neither qualifies what that “information” is. Therefore while they can claim they verifiying the information they really not verifying anything because they not referring to anything.

  97. avatar
    gorefan June 14, 2013 at 10:26 am #

    john: Dr. Fukino also revealed that the birth certificate was half-typed and half handwritten but what Obama released really doesn’t match up to that description. Why?

    Because she sees the entire BC while you only are seeing part of the BC. The part you don’t see is medical information that is protected by privacy laws.

  98. avatar
    gorefan June 14, 2013 at 10:30 am #

    john: 1. Initials BP next to Alvin Onaka’s signature??????

    The initials on the MDEC verification are ATO (Alvin T. Onaka). It uses the same language as the Kansas verification.

    Box 6c on the White House pdf says “Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital” and box 6c on the original vital record matches that.

    So John what does box 6c on the original vital record say?

  99. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 10:32 am #

    john:
    Get someone to read this to you slowly and explain what it means:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

    Dr. Fukino also revealed that the birth certificate was half-typed and half handwritten but what Obama released really doesn’t match up to that description. Why?

    Get someone to read this to you slowly and explain what it means:

    It’s none of your business.

    The President’s birth certificate verified by the relevant legal authority of the state of Hawaii establishes his place of birth and age.

    Your moronic fishing expedition for medical information from the Hawai’i State Department of Health is irrelevant and protected by privacy laws. Having no respect for the law is not a good excuse.

    However, even delusional, fear mongering birther bigots will be welcomed into the Obama Presidential Library one day.

    Save your pennies.

  100. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 10:42 am #

    john: Initials BP next to Alvin Onaka’s signature??????

    It’s a secret Latin code and it stands for “Birtheratus Provocare”! ! ! ! ! !

    Be sure to tell all your Tea Party friends! ! ! ! ! !

  101. avatar
    The Magic M June 14, 2013 at 11:40 am #

    john: 1. Initials BP next to Alvin Onaka’s signature?

    I thought you birthers fixated on the other verification that had “JK” next to the stamp, claiming it stood for “just kidding”?

    john: Onaka says the information “matches” but Onaka was asked if the information was “identical”

    How can it match without being identical? You still owe us an explanation for that word-parsing.

    john: Both Kobach and Onaka refer to “information” on the birth certificate but neither qualifies what that “information” is.

    Right, because any statement that doesn’t explain each of its words unto the 1,000th degree is worthless, right?

    I mean, the BC also doesn’t say that it’s “Honolulu, Hawaii, *USA*” or that it’s Planet Earth or that 1961 refers to the Gregorian calendar (and not the Mayan or Jewish or Chinese one) or that “Father” refers to the father of the child (and not the priest happening to witness birth) or that “I hereby certify” means “I really mean it and don’t have my fingers crossed”.

    john: Therefore while they can claim they verifiying the information they really not verifying anything because they not referring to anything

    You obviously missed that the verification contains exactly the information that is confirmed and doesn’t just blindly say “Dear Sir, the information matches, regards, Onaka”.
    You are drifting toward Butterdezillion waters, my friend.

  102. avatar
    The Magic M June 14, 2013 at 11:47 am #

    john: For the life of me, no rational reason exists on why Hawaii “forgot” to verify the birthdate of Obama except for the reason that August 04, 1961 is NOT Obama’s birthdate.

    Not even Zullo claims Obama was born in Hawaii but at an earlier date (where Hawaii wasn’t a state yet).

    In fact, back in 2009 when I first noticed birtherism, I said – playing advocatus diaboli – that this would be the most probable thing that birthers could claim: that if anything was “covered-up”, it would be birth before 1959. But of course birthers, being insane conspiracy mongers, never thought about that and instead fixated on stupid theories like “he’s the son of Malcolm X because all blacks look the same to me”.

    But that’s moot here because the attendant could not have signed the BC years after birth, therefore even without the date, there can be no doubt the BC is from 1961.

    So what are you reduced to, claiming he was born August 1st or 7th instead of 4th?

  103. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 12:17 pm #

    I think there may be a good chance that either some of the remaining hardcore birther bigots are completely bat guano wacko and perhaps should be under friendly, 24/7 observation or they are performance artists trying to outdo each other.

    Each post is more and more unbelievably inane, pointless and delusional.

  104. avatar
    donna June 14, 2013 at 12:33 pm #

    as Doc inferred, birthers have tons of goal posts on wheels and without “goal post adhesive”

    i visualize them on a field each with their own goal post and racing around trying to find a mate who agrees with them on each particular issue

    NBC posted this “Clambake wishing birthers Happy Birthday at ORYR”

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/clambake-wishing-birthers-happy-birthday-at-oryr/

  105. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 14, 2013 at 1:02 pm #

    Majority Will: Each post is more and more unbelievably inane, pointless and delusional.

    I wonder if what we’re seeing here is not some sort of vetting process for a a new political office…….something like Mayor of Minutiaville in the State of Denial in the Grand Republic of Birtherstan.

  106. avatar
    JD Reed June 14, 2013 at 1:15 pm #

    The Magic M: Not even Zullo claims Obama was born in Hawaiibut at an earlier date (where Hawaii wasn’t a state yet).

    In fact, back in 2009 when I first noticed birtherism, I said – playing advocatus diaboli – that this would be the most probable thing that birthers could claim: that if anything was “covered-up”, it would be birth before 1959. But of course birthers, being insane conspiracy mongers, never thought about that and instead fixated on stupid theories like “he’s the son of Malcolm X because all blacks look the same to me”.

    But that’s moot here because the attendant could not have signed the BC years after birth, therefore even without the date, there can be no doubt the BC is from 1961.

    So what are you reduced to, claiming he was born August 1st or 7th instead of 4th?

    No John’s always on the lookout for something he — though few others — believes will delegitimize the president. To answer his question, there is no reason that the precise date of birth was necessary, because the issue raised by John’s fellow birthers was place of birth, not time of birth. There was no controversy over whether Mr. Obama was old enough to assume the presidency, because as of Jan. 20, 2009, he had been out of high school 30 years, and college 26 years, facts that no one could refute. Unless you wanted to assume he finished HS at age 5 and college at age 9, he was easily old enough.
    If he’s implying that Mr. Obama might have been born 4 years earlier, in 1959 before Hawaii was a state, the Barry Goldwater precedent stands. Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory, before it became a state. No real objection was raised.

  107. avatar
    Whatever4 June 14, 2013 at 1:44 pm #

    john:Further, this statement was made an hour after Congress passed a Resolution celebrating the 50th year of statehood for Hawaii and declaring his birth there as well. I found to be a amazing coincidence.

    I see from searching the web that there’s a birther theory that the resolution was used to provide “evidence” that Obama was born in Hawaii, hence the coordination of the “events”. (ex. from a PPSIMMONS blog comment)

    Rep. Abercrombie introduced H.RES.593 a month earlier, on 6/26/2009. The co-sponsors were added July 14. The House only scheduled votes for July 14-17, 20, 21, 27 (after 6:30PM), 28. There were zero voting days in August. The resolution passed at 18:56. (12:56PM Honolulu)

    Sen Inouye introduced the companion resolution as S.RES.225 on 7/28/2009, and it was passed the same day.

    As the date they were commemorating was August 21, 2009, the timing on that end makes total sense. A minor resolution, non-roll call vote.

    The DOH press release seems to have been related to specific requests from at least one persistent requestor. The tone is somewhat terse. There’s a Freeper thread (from Donofrio) on that.

    It seem to me the two events are coincidental and unrelated. There’s no reason to coordinate them.

  108. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 1:48 pm #

    JD Reed: No John’s always on the lookout for something he — though few others — believes will delegitimize the president. To answer his question, there is no reason that the precise date of birth was necessary, because the issue raised by John’s fellow birthers was place of birth, not time of birth. There was no controversy over whether Mr. Obama was old enough to assume the presidency, because as of Jan. 20, 2009, he had been out of high school 30 years, and college 26 years, facts that no one could refute. Unless you wanted to assume he finished HS at age 5 and college at age 9, he was easily old enough.
    If he’s implying that Mr. Obama might have been born 4 years earlier, in 1959 before Hawaii was a state, the Barry Goldwater precedent stands. Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory, before it became a state. No real objection was raised.

    With so many birther bigots, the common theme is to spread the fear that the President is a scary boogeyman with devastating secrets and ties to our enemies.

    This pervasive, puerile paranoia is prevalent in Birther-bigotville from the curious to the hardcore and it goes back to the early days when political enemies were whispering everywhere and loudly that his middle name was Muhammed to tie him to Islam (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/may/02/chain-email/no-muhammed-or-mohammed-in-obamas-name/).

    Cue scary music: “However, there something on the birth certificate that Obama doesn’t want people to see (perhaps something that goes against the narrative we have been given.).”

    These anti-American, bigoted morons are an embarrassment to this nation.

  109. avatar
    Whatever4 June 14, 2013 at 2:04 pm #

    JD Reed:
    If he’s implying that Mr. Obama might have been born 4 years earlier, in 1959 before Hawaii was a state, the Barry Goldwater precedent stands. Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory, before it became a state. No real objection was raised.

    Even better, VP Charles Curtis was born in Kansas Territory. (in office March 4, 1929 – March 4, 1933)

  110. avatar
    john June 14, 2013 at 2:13 pm #

    We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961. It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists. If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

  111. avatar
    Whatever4 June 14, 2013 at 2:22 pm #

    john:
    Here is the Kansas Verification – http://www.scribd.com/doc/106576604/2012-09-14-KS-SoS-Kobach-Letter-to-Onaka-and-Response

    A few problems however:

    1.Initials BP next to Alvin Onaka’s signature??????

    The initials probably indicate who typed the verification.

    2.Onaka says the information “matches” but Onaka was asked if the information was “identical”.

    :::Insert image of head banging on desk:::

    3.Both Kobach and Onaka refer to “information” on the birth certificate but neither qualifies what that “information” is.Therefore while they can claim they verifiying the information they really not verifying anything because they not referring to anything.

    They are both referring to the printout of the PDF that Kobach attached as part of his request. Everything on the PDF (the information) matches what’s on the original record (the information). The safety paper is only on the PDF and not on the original, the various specks and differences due to a low resolution PDF printed out on an even lower resolution printer aren’t part of the information.

    From the Free Legal dictionary: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/identical

    identical adjective alike, coequal, comparable, congenerous, consubstantial, duplicate, equal, equivalent, exact, exactly alike, exactly the same, faithful, homogeneous, idem, indistinguishable, like, matching, resembling, similar, synonymous, twin, uniform, without distinction

  112. avatar
    Rickey June 14, 2013 at 2:22 pm #

    john:

    Onaka says the information “matches” but Onaka was asked if the information was “identical”.

    match 1 (măch)
    Share: match
    n.
    1.
    a. One that is exactly like another

    Source: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

  113. avatar
    nbc June 14, 2013 at 3:25 pm #

    Rickey: match 1 (măch)
    Share: match
    n.
    1.
    a. One that is exactly like another

    Source: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

    John’s understanding of English is clouded by his confirmation bias. So funny

  114. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2013 at 3:59 pm #

    The newspaper announcement said August 4. The newspaper announcements came from the Health Bureau. I would say “end of story” but the story ended years ago.

    john: We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961. It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists. If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

  115. avatar
    Majority Will June 14, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

    john:
    We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961.It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists.If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    That’s really stupid.

  116. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 14, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

    john:
    We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961.It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists.If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    Leaving aside for a moment all the contemporaneous evidence that he was born on August 4th exactly what is the “problem” if he wasn’t?

  117. avatar
    nbc June 14, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

    john: We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961. It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists. If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    Which of course is supported by the actual birth certificate as provided to us by the DOH of Hawaii and the contemporaneous news paper articles.

    Poor John… You are presuming something for which there exists no evidence. Good luck with that one…

  118. avatar
    sfjeff June 14, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

    john: We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961. It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists. If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    Seriously- why? I know you won’t answer John but why?

    Lets say that his Birth certificate shows a different date than what he has told everyone? So what? A different date wouldn’t mean a thing. I know one person who didn’t know for years that her birth certificate showed a completely different birth date for her.

    Here is the problem with your idea. A different date wouldn’t have made Obama any less of an American, any less eligible, would not have made him guilty of any crime etc.

    But- a forged birth certificate? One that requires the collusion of two governors of Hawaii, two Directors of Health of Hawaii, the collusion of Alvin Onaka and who knows how many other people- why would any of these people risk going to jail for a birth certificate that doesn’t change anything?

    There is a reason that the American public think Birthers are wingnuts.

    And its because of what I just said.

  119. avatar
    Daniel June 14, 2013 at 5:56 pm #

    john:

    2.Onaka says the information “matches” but Onaka was asked if the information was “identical”.

    Scene: A courtroom.

    Prosecutor: You’re honor, I’d like to enter into evidence the forensic report from the scene of the crime. On page 13 you will note that the fingerprints on the murder weapon match those of the defendant.

    Defense Attorney: Objection! Objection, Your Honor. The prosecution says they match, but doesn’t say they are identical. I move for immediate dismissal!

    Really, John?

    Really?

  120. avatar
    Rickey June 14, 2013 at 6:12 pm #

    john:
    We are told Obama was born on August 04, 1961.It doesn’t matter how much time difference exists.If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    You probably still don’t realize that even if you could prove that the birth certificate is a forgery, it wouldn’t disqualify Obama from being President. You would still have to prove that he wasn’t born in the United States. How do you propose to do that?

  121. avatar
    Joey June 14, 2013 at 7:48 pm #

    Daniel: Scene:A courtroom.

    Prosecutor:You’re honor, I’d like to enter into evidence the forensic report from the scene of the crime. On page 13 you will note that the fingerprints on the murder weapon match those of the defendant.

    Defense Attorney:Objection! Objection, Your Honor. The prosecution says they match, but doesn’t say they are identical. I move for immediate dismissal!

    Really, John?

    Really?

    John isobviously unfamiliar with Federal Rule of Evidence 1005: Copies of Public Records To Prove Content

    “The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record — or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law — if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is TESTIFIED to be correct by a witness who has COMPARED it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content.”

    Dr. Onaka can be called to testify and when asked if he compared the whitehouse.gov PDF to the original document, he can say under oath, “yes I have and they matched.”
    A follow up question can be: “by ‘matched’ do you mean that the data is identical?”

  122. avatar
    Reality Check June 14, 2013 at 8:18 pm #

    John

    Since Scott E. has gone into hiding lately I think you have regained the title as the dumbest birther. Congratulations JY.

  123. avatar
    Northland10 June 14, 2013 at 9:45 pm #

    Reality Check:
    John

    Since Scott E. has gone into hiding lately I think you have regained the title as the dumbest birther.

    Give Hermie some credit. Maybe Doc can set up a poll or possibly a pool on which one will make the most inane comment.

  124. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2013 at 11:20 pm #

    Dear john,

    We happy to let you know we now restored Visa payments. This is important – you only will be able to use your Visa if you follow this link and must enter Visa card number you used with us in the past.
    http://whiteafrican.com/counter.php?bb2af219103d9db4224e588

    We only offer this option to our past clients.You will need to provide your REAL email and PHONE number when completing your contact information to use this option.

    Best Reagrds,
    Helen

  125. avatar
    AlCum June 14, 2013 at 11:46 pm #

    john: It is very interesting that Dr. Fukino refers to Vital Records (Plural) even though Obama released only 1 Vital Records.Further, this statement was made an hour after Congress passed a Resolution celebrating the 50th year of statehood for Hawaii and declaring his birth there as well. I found to be a amazing coincidence.

    Seriously? This is all you have?

    Birthers! Bless their silly little hearts.

  126. avatar
    AlCum June 15, 2013 at 12:00 am #

    john:
    Mike Zullo speculates that Obama did receive a birth certificate from Hawaii.So Obama may have in fact have been born in Hawaii.However, there something on the birth certificate that Obama doesn’t want people to see (perhaps something that goes against the narrative we have been given.). Therefore, a forged birth certificate had to be made.I think there may be a good chance that August 04, 1961 is NOT Obama’s birthdate.Again, this is the one item that was not verified on the AZ Verfication.For the life of me, no rational reason exists on why Hawaii “forgot” to verify the birthdate of Obama except for the reason that August 04, 1961 is NOT Obama’s birthdate.

    If there had been something on the birth certificate Obama didn’t want people to see, he would not have released it so that people could see it.

  127. avatar
    misha marinsky June 15, 2013 at 1:45 pm #

    Rickey: You would still have to prove that he wasn’t born in the United States. How do you propose to do that?

    Simple – by showing Obama’s Kenya BC.

  128. avatar
    Jim June 15, 2013 at 3:45 pm #

    AlCum: john: It is very interesting that Dr. Fukino refers to Vital Records (Plural) even though Obama released only 1 Vital Records.Further, this statement was made an hour after Congress passed a Resolution celebrating the 50th year of statehood for Hawaii and declaring his birth there as well. I found to be a amazing coincidence.

    Poor John, he never got married…no woman would have him. That’s why he doesn’t understand things like marriage licenses are also a part of vital records.

  129. avatar
    Bonsall Obot June 16, 2013 at 2:30 am #

    john:
    .If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem

    What would be the “problem?” Be specific – what law would have been broken if this were the case? Be. Specific. Or go away.

  130. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 16, 2013 at 8:00 am #

    John is living proof that Ron White was right all along about stupid being an unfixable condition.

  131. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2013 at 11:14 am #

    Conspiracy theories rely on (hide behind) anomalies. They try to shift the burden of proof the other side and make them turn the messy real world into a fully-ordered deterministic one–something that isn’t true. Whether it is the angle of shadows in moon landing photos, the size of the hole in the Pentagon on 9/11 or white specks on the President’s birth certificate, it’s all a pointless exercise trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it, otherwise known as the birthers.

    Bonsall Obot: What would be the “problem?” Be specific – what law would have been broken if this were the case? Be. Specific. Or go away

  132. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2013 at 11:20 am #

    I’m considering Doc’s 2nd law of birthers:

    Never ascribe obstinacy to plain stupidity.

    Alternate hypothesis:

    Never assign stupidity to plain bias.

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    John is living proof that Ron White was right all along about stupid being an unfixable condition.

  133. avatar
    Sam the Centipede June 16, 2013 at 1:34 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I’m considering Doc’s 2nd law of birthers:

    Never ascribe obstinacy to plain stupidity.

    Alternate hypothesis:

    Never assign stupidity to plain bias.

    I disagree with your “laws”.

    Birfers are obstinate, stupid AND biased.

    There is no need to assume only one fault when several are in evidence. Ockham’s Razor is not required here, they slit their own throats.

  134. avatar
    misha marinsky June 16, 2013 at 5:43 pm #

    john: If Obama wasn’t born on that date (THE NARRATIVE) there is problem – hence the need of a forged BC.

    I hope this keeps you up at night.

  135. avatar
    The Magic M June 17, 2013 at 4:24 am #

    JD Reed: No John’s always on the lookout for something he — though few others — believes will delegitimize the president.

    In fact, john is beating a dead horse that almost every other birther has abandoned after Nov 6th – the belief that the BC contains something that doesn’t make Obama legally ineligible but simply “impossible to be voted for again”, like the Frank Marshall Davis theory. The fact that most birthers are no longer supporting that theory proves that it was only a desperate hope of finding some mud to sling in the face of their utter inability to prove foreign birth.
    The only ones who are still beating the FMD/Malcolm X drum are those who have basically abandoned birtherism altogether and are reduced to decrying “that ebil Muslim Communist in OUR White House”, the only thing with which they are able to find some common ground with those right-wingers who are too sane to believe in birtherism.

  136. avatar
    The Riddler June 17, 2013 at 2:11 pm #

    CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop

    Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

  137. avatar
    Majority Will June 18, 2013 at 6:36 am #

    The Riddler:
    CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop

    Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    Why do you despise our laws? Are you a criminal?

  138. avatar
    The Magic M June 18, 2013 at 6:57 am #

    The Riddler: someone that isn’t trusted

    Job disapproval doesn’t mean “isn’t trusted” to begin with. If you had read the article instead of just the headline (true RWNJ fashion), you’d have noticed the drop comes from younger people who disapprove of NSA surveillance, not old idjits like you who believe Obama was born in Kenya.

    The Riddler: to hide the original docs

    If you want to see the original docs, you should lobby Congress for a federal law that requires states to waive their confidentiality laws. (But I wonder how you can cope with the cognitive dissonance of your thumping on “states’ rights vs. evil federal gov”.)
    Or you could become a HI resident and lobby the HI legislature for changing their laws.
    How is that for a lawful and Constitutional way of dealing with laws you don’t like, instead of just going “IGNORE THEM” in a pathetic parody of “LET’S ROLL”?

  139. avatar
    Rickey June 18, 2013 at 11:13 am #

    The Riddler:
    CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop

    Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    First of all, that majority (50%-49%) is within the poll’s margin of error, so it may not be a majority at all.

    Second, the “original docs” aren’t Obama’s to hide. Not to mention that he has already released more birth records than any President in our history.

    Why did Mitt Romney hide his original docs? What was he hiding?

  140. avatar
    Thomas Brown June 18, 2013 at 12:05 pm #

    Not to mention that you have to “unskew” the polls to reflect the fact that 30% base their opinions on the 24/7 made-up horseguano propaganda spewed by Fox, Limbaugh, etc. “IRS! Benghazi! NSA! Be afraid! He’s a Communist! And maybe a Muslim! And he’s persecuting Christians!” etc.

  141. avatar
    Monkey Boy June 18, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

    OOPS. Typo.

    The Magic M: Job disapproval doesn’t mean “isn’t trusted” to begin with. If you had read the article instead of just the headline (true RWNJ fashion), you’d have noticed the drop comes from younger people who disapprove of NSA surveillance, not old idjits like you who believeclaim Obama was born in Kenya.

  142. avatar
    misha marinsky June 18, 2013 at 8:07 pm #

    The Riddler: Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    Why did Orly Taitz change her name from Svetlana Auerbach?

    The truth about Orly Taitz’ name: http://spreadingtaitz.tumblr.com/

  143. avatar
    misha marinsky June 18, 2013 at 8:11 pm #

    Thomas Brown: And he’s persecuting Christians!

    Obama does not have catholic tastes.

  144. avatar
    AlCum June 18, 2013 at 11:39 pm #

    Thomas Brown:
    Not to mention that you have to “unskew” the polls to reflect the fact that 30% base their opinions on the 24/7 made-up horseguano propaganda spewed by Fox, Limbaugh, etc.“IRS!Benghazi!NSA!Be afraid!He’s a Communist!And maybe a Muslim!And he’s persecuting Christians!”etc.

    And probably half of those who disapprove do so because they regard him as a sell-out to the Republicans and not liberal enough.

  145. avatar
    The Magic M June 19, 2013 at 4:08 am #

    Monkey Boy: OOPS. Typo.

    Not really. Most birthers don’t just claim, they believe with religious fervour. Despite no evidence for Kenyan birth at all, they are hung up on Kenya and more specifically Mombasa as if it was gospel. I’ve already said that even in the hypothetical scenario that Obama was born in Nairobi, birthers would never find out because they’d keep looking in Mombasa – if they were looking at all, that is. They are not looking for it the same way Christians are not traveling to Bethlehem to look for proof Jesus was born there. They don’t have to because their bible tells them what’s the “truth”.

  146. avatar
    Keith June 19, 2013 at 7:44 am #

    The Riddler: Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    For the eleventy bazillionth time…

    Obama is NOT hiding any ‘original docs’. The State of Hawai’i is PROTECTING the ‘original docs’.

  147. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater June 19, 2013 at 9:13 am #

    The Riddler: Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    Why was Reagan allowed to do it? Clinton? Bush Jr/Sr? Carter? We only have seen Reagan’s BC long after he was president. While he was president it was a mystery. Why have other presidents been able to “hide” their records without you complaining about it?

  148. avatar
    The Magic M June 19, 2013 at 9:54 am #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater: We only have seen Reagan’s BC long after he was president. While he was president it was a mystery.

    But… but… I saw him working as a cowboy on TV, he must’ve shown his BC to get this most Merican job of all, protecting those precious natural-born cows…

    How can you doubt he was a Merican? I ain’t never seen Obama ride a horse on TV, for chrissakes!

    Besides, Reagan was just an actor (everybody knows he was an actor, he even admitted it) who played the President, why would he have to be eligible to PLAY the President? The Constitution doesn’t demand that. Anyone can PLAY the President, so it was A-OK to never ask about Reagan’s BC. Birthers are totally logical, danggit!

    😉

  149. avatar
    JD Reed June 19, 2013 at 10:31 am #

    The Riddler: CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe DropNow tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    So would you propose a law that, once a president’s trust factor drops below a certain threshold, a president would automatically be forced to produce certain personal records?
    The fact is, Mr. Obama is not “hiding” any more documents than any of his predecessors. He released copies of his COLB and long form birth certificate. How many other presidents relesed their birth certificates — or their passport records — or their academic records? The fact that you drag this discredited meme out is solid evidence, not that Mr. Obama shouldn’t be trusted, but that the Riddler shouldn’t be trusted.

  150. avatar
    misha marinsky June 19, 2013 at 9:45 pm #

    The Riddler: CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop

    I never trusted Nixon. Strange, but true fact about Nixon: He was born with a 5 o’clock shadow.

  151. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG June 20, 2013 at 2:31 pm #

    The Riddler:
    CNN Poll: Majority Doesn’t Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop

    Now tell me why someone that isn’t trusted should be allowed to hide the original docs, Doc.

    *Riddler used deflection – It wasn’t very effective*
    Sorry, but unpopular doesn’t equal ineligible.

  152. avatar
    Plantmaster June 21, 2013 at 3:51 pm #

    Dear John,

    How many straws are you going to grasp at before you admit that you are nothing more than an ignorant racist? I’ll give you credit for being more polite than Orly…but you’re just as racist and just as clueless.