[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

... because when a grassroots movement of disagreement offends thee, become a racist moron and join the movement to try and bring it down from the inside.

Except the Tea Party wasn't a grassroots movement, it was astroturfed by Conservative lobbyists.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Except the Tea Party wasn't a grassroots movement, it was astroturfed by Conservative lobbyists.

"wasn't"
"was"

?

Have they been broken up and all put in prison for crimes against communism now or what?

( I agree that this wasn't a grassroots movement. No grassroots people heading that way would go anywhere near Palin. I know a lot of these people and there's just no way. Maybe invented to take the wind out of Ron Paul's sails?)

[stupendousman]

So, to put the "birther" thing to rest, has Obama yet just allowed the release of the original "long form" birth certificate, or explained why he has a S.S. # reserved for Connecticut residents?

As I've explained before, the reason why conspiracy theories persist normally is when people refuse to simply release all available information because they are hiding something. Maybe not the thing people are looking for, but hiding something none the less. It's much easier to just paint those asking for complete transparency as kooks.

That's not to say that those who rabidly cling to this one issue aren't kooks - just that they are a creation of Obama, and one that could have been "nipped in the bud" at the very beginning by not attempting to hide anything.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

So, to put the "birther" thing to rest, has Obama yet just allowed the release of the original "long form" birth certificate, or explained why he has a S.S. # reserved for Connecticut residents?

As I've explained before, the reason why conspiracy theories persist normally is when people refuse to simply release all available information because they are hiding something. Maybe not the thing people are looking for, but hiding something none the less. It's much easier to just paint those asking for complete transparency as kooks.

That's not to say that those who rabidly cling to this one issue aren't kooks - just that they are a creation of Obama, and one that could have been "nipped in the bud" at the very beginning by not attempting to hide anything.

Is he required to disclose his birth certificate? If he isn't and he gave in to the demands of these kooks, wouldn't you just turn around and say that by giving in to the demands of kooks just to appease them suggests that he'll give in to the demands of terrorists when push comes to shove?

I'm a little surprised to see a conservative recommending appeasement as a course of action.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

So, to put the "birther" thing to rest, has Obama yet just allowed the release of the original "long form" birth certificate, or explained why he has a S.S. # reserved for Connecticut residents

So, let me get this straight: The "birthers" don't believe the state of Hawai'i officials when they produce one type of document that says Obama was born in Hawai'i (a certificate of live birth) but they will believe the exact same state of Hawai'i officials if they produce a different type of document (the incorrectly named "long form" birth certificate) that says Obama was born in Hawai'i.

I'm just trying to understand how the same officials can be believed in one circumstance but can not be believed in another circumstance. And the only difference between the two circumstances is the length of the document being presented. Anyone here have insight into this logical inconsistency?

[The Final Dakar]

Grasping at straws.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

As I've explained before, the reason why conspiracy theories persist normally is when people refuse to simply release all available information because they are hiding something.

Hahahahahahaha

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Is he required to disclose his birth certificate? If he isn't and he gave in to the demands of these kooks, wouldn't you just turn around and say that by giving in to the demands of kooks just to appease them suggests that he'll give in to the demands of terrorists when push comes to shove?

There is a reasonable concern. His father was not a citizen and where he was born is of importance, and has been disputed. I don't think that in the interest of full disclosure, that providing all pertinent documentation is akin to terrorists making unreasonable requests under threat of violence.

The way Obama has played this situation is exactly like how one would do it if there was something to hide. That doesn't just not appease those who are "kooks" who will look for anything to try and discredit him, it gives pause to regular folks like me who simply ask why they don't just pony up the documents and get it all over with.

Unless they can prove the orignial birth certificate is a phony (like what happened with the Bush National Gaurd evidence) or the document is missing, the story is pretty much over. Obama is fueling speculation when he really could put it to bed.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The way Obama has played this situation is exactly like how one would do it if there was something to hide. That doesn't just not appease those who are "kooks" who will look for anything to try and discredit him, it gives pause to regular folks like me who simply ask why they don't just pony up the documents and get it all over with.

Tell me why "regular folks like [you]" are not happy with the Certificate of Live Birth released by the state of Hawai'i and insist that Obama "pony up the [long form] documents and get it all over with"?

If you are regular folk and not some conspiracy-minded "kook" why are you not satisfied with the statements made by the officials in Hawai'i (responsible for collecting, storing, and certifying records of births) regarding Obama's birth?

To me "regular folks" are those people who say, "OK, we've got official verification from the state of Hawai'i that his birth occurred when and where he claimed it did. End of discussion." But you are saying "regular folks" are the ones who remain suspicious of Obama's birth even after the official government statements. It seems to me your idea of what constitutes "regular folks" actually is what constitutes the "kooks" (i.e.: people who remain suspicious/skeptical in spite of having their questions answered).

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

There is a reasonable concern. His father was not a citizen and where he was born is of importance, and has been disputed.

So is Hawaii lying with its certificate of live birth? Are there examples of where it has been issued for non-citizens?

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Tell me why "regular folks like [you]" are not happy with the Certificate of Live Birth released by the state of Hawai'i and insist that Obama "pony up the [long form] documents and get it all over with"?
If you are regular folk and not some conspiracy-minded "kook" why are you not satisfied with the statements made by the officials in Hawai'i (responsible for collecting, storing, and certifying records of births) regarding Obama's birth?

He already answered that. They think he's hiding something. If there's an outside chance there's anything damaging in it they want it out in the open. They have nothing to lose.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

There is a reasonable concern. His father was not a citizen and where he was born is of importance, and has been disputed. I don't think that in the interest of full disclosure, that providing all pertinent documentation is akin to terrorists making unreasonable requests under threat of violence.

Stupendousman, why do you not trust the official pronouncements from the state of Hawai'i regarding this matter? If you want to claim that the government officials in Hawai'i were lying when they made their official pronouncements, hence the reason why you don't trust their official statements, then make that argument. But I have not heard that sentiment from you or anyone. So, tell us,

Do you, stupendousman, think the Hawai'ian officials were lying when they showed us Obama's Certificate of Live Birth?
Do you, stupendousman, think the Hawai'ian officials were engaged in a fraudulent fabrication of evidence when they showed us Obama's Certificate of Live Birth?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Stupendousman, why do you not trust the official pronouncements from the state of Hawai'i regarding this matter?

Regardless of whether I TRUST IT or not, there is a reasonable controversy and a refusal on the part of Obama to release all the evidence proving one way or another. THAT leaves my scratching my head because that's the sort of thing that people who have something to hide do.

It's like the Bush military service controversy. People stonewalled on that because even if the evidence didn't show that Bush didn't serve, it did show that he really didn't have that tough of a stint in the National Guard and might have got some kind of unprovable preferential treatment. People in positions of power and respect told us to trust that they actually did have documents that proved that Bush didn't serve as he was supposed to, but of course once the general public got to look at the actual contents of what was that was supposed to prove Bush's lack of service, it was discovered that those documents where all forgeries. Respectable people who should have known better vouched for those documents and in the end, the American people where deceived.

Do you, stupendousman, think the Hawai'ian officials were lying when they showed us Obama's Certificate of Live Birth?

Lying? No. I think that they really do believe that when they hit "print" on the computer they use to print the files that have been entered by their employees, that the files in the computer are accurate. Of course, I don't think that Dan Rather was "lying" when he gave us those forged documents either. I'm assuming he thought that he was providing accurate information as well.

Do you, stupendousman, think the Hawai'ian officials were engaged in a fraudulent fabrication of evidence when they showed us Obama's Certificate of Live Birth?

I have no idea. If there's accusations of that though, a good way to clear that up would be for them to release all the documents in question, wouldn't it?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Tell me why "regular folks like [you]" are not happy with the Certificate of Live Birth released by the state of Hawai'i and insist that Obama "pony up the [long form] documents and get it all over with"?

To be honest, it doesn't matter all that much to me.

But, if it really mattered to Obama to "nip" in the bud all the controversy, HE WOULD have done so. Instead of sending his henchmen out to regularly decry the "birthers" and spend time and resources, HE SHOULD be a lot happier if he'd just authorize a copy of the document created at the time of his birth instead of just what's on file in the computer system of the state of Hawaii.

He doesn't choose to do the easy thing, THE VERY EASY THING, and show that he's offered every document available to prove that he is a natural born citizen. Instead, he refuses and then attacks those who ask. THAT is exactly what people trying to hide things do, so it's really no wonder that some of the kooks feel vindicated and continue to attack him based on this.

The thing that makes the "trust us...we've got the original" thing not wash is that we've encountered forgeries, pay offs and other dishonest schemes in seeing to it that people in political power stay in political power. It wouldn't be all that unusual for Obama to not want the document released because doing so might open up some other can of worms he doesn't want out there.

[OAW]

It bears repeating ....

Originally Posted by OAW

Here's the bottom line with these "birthers" .....

You could show them a videotape of baby Obama coming out of his mother's snatch with a "Welcome to Pearl Harbor" sign and navy ships in the background ... and these knuckleheads still wouldn't believe he was born in the US! The fundamental issue here is that these people simply don't accept Obama's legitimacy as President. The "citizenship" issue is merely the pretext to express that sentiment.

Some relevant facts ....

Question: What is the state's policy for issuing a "Certification of Live Birth" versus a "Certificate of Live Birth"? My first, second and fourth children received certificates, but my third and fifth children received certifications. Why the difference? The certificate contains more information, such as the name of hospital, certifier's name and title; attendant's name and title, etc. The certification has only the child's name, date and time of birth, sex, city/island/county of birth, mother's maiden name, mother's race, father's name and father's race. Why doesn't the state just issue certificates? When did it stop issuing certificates? Is it possible to obtain certificates for my third and fifth children?

Answer: No, you can't obtain a "certificate of live birth" anymore.

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

"At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said.

Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.

"The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests," Okubo said.

Asked for more information about the short-form versus long-form birth documents, Okubo said the Health Department "does not have a short-form or long-form certificate."

"The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models," she said.

Okubo also emphasized the certification form "contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate."

She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state's current certification of live birth "as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements."

The issue of what constitutes an official Hawaii birth certificate received national attention during last year's presidential campaign. Those who doubted Barack Obama's American citizenship called the copy of the Hawaii birth document posted on his campaign Web site a fake.

Asked about that document, Okubo said, "This is the same certified copy everyone receives when they request a birth certificate."

Born identity - Kokua Line - Starbulletin.com

Bottom line? Hawaii does NOT have a long form version. So this ......

Originally Posted by stupendousman

So, to put the "birther" thing to rest, has Obama yet just allowed the release of the original "long form" birth certificate .....

.... is simply a bogus argument. End of discussion.

OAW

[besson3c]

stupendousman: publicizing the birth certificate on the internet in the first place was supposed to be the "very easy thing" to do, but it didn't make a difference, because now the birthers want something else. If Obama were to provide whatever it is that they want they would still be unsatisfied.

Let's face at, at the heart of this movement nobody is really interested in birth certificates, they are simply interested in taking down Obama, because everything and anything Obama is bad.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

stupendousman: publicizing the birth certificate on the internet in the first place was supposed to be the "very easy thing" to do, but it didn't make a difference, because now the birthers want something else. If Obama were to provide whatever it is that they want they would still be unsatisfied.

Let's face at, at the heart of this movement nobody is really interested in birth certificates, they are simply interested in taking down Obama, because everything and anything Obama is bad.

Additionally, the demands to produce a "long form" birth certificate (which may not exist, as OAW points out), would make some sense if there was some kind of neutral third party that is holding it and can validate authenticity. In the analogy to the Dan Rather situation that stupendousman brought up, the forged documents were said to have been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush's former commanding officer, and so in that situation the neutral third party would be the originator of the files themselves -- the military bureaucracy. In the case of the birthers though, they already distrust the record keeping of the government of Hawaii, which has said that Obama was born in that state. If they are already convinced that Obama was born in Kenya, then no additional records released by the government of Hawaii will convince them. They can always in their minds take the conspiracy one step further. That's why there would be no point for Obama to release more documents. The only people who don't believe him now are the ones who won't believe him anyway, and to respond to their demands weakens the Office of the President, politically.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

stupendousman: publicizing the birth certificate on the internet in the first place was supposed to be the "very easy thing" to do, but it didn't make a difference, because now the birthers want something else. If Obama were to provide whatever it is that they want they would still be unsatisfied.

Let's face at, at the heart of this movement nobody is really interested in birth certificates, they are simply interested in taking down Obama, because everything and anything Obama is bad.

Well, of course. Since Obama wasn't born in the US, any document saying he *was* born in the US must be a forgery.

[BadKosh]

It's not like his parents were normal. They were radical leftists without any respect of the US or it's way of government. A Certificate of live birth only means a baby has been presented. Hawaii trusted the words of the radicals. There is the problem.

[Wiskedjak]

so, basically, there is nothing that could convince you that he was born in the US, even though you lack any evidence suggesting he wasn't born in the US.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Regardless of whether I TRUST IT or not, there is a reasonable controversy

What makes you think this controversy is in any way "reasonable"? Do you trust the veracity of the documents, and the claims made by those who produced the documents, from the state of Hawai'i?

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Lying? No. I think that they really do believe that when they hit "print" on the computer they use to print the files that have been entered by their employees, that the files in the computer are accurate.

OK. Ignore the employees who printed the documents. Do you think the files in the computers maintained by the state of Hawai'i--the files related to Obama's birth--are accurate?


I am trying to figure out why you continue to argue in favor of Obama releasing more documents. Do you, personally, think there is some doubt as to the accuracy and/or veracity of the documents produced by the state of Hawai'i? Do you, personally, think those personal doubts of yours will be assuaged if you see Obama's "long form birth certificate"?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

It's not like his parents were normal. They were radical leftists without any respect of the US or it's way of government. A Certificate of live birth only means a baby has been presented. Hawaii trusted the words of the radicals. There is the problem.

BadKosh,

do you think Obama was born inside the United States?
OR
do you think Obama was born outside the United States?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Bottom line? Hawaii does NOT have a long form version.

So, basically, there's no evidence that *anyone* claiming to have been born in Hawaii is actually a US citizen? I guess the birthers just need to declare the entire state a bunch of illegals and be done with it.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

The people still harping about Obama's birth certificate are just as big a bunch of tools as the lefty twits who harped for 8 straight years about Bush 'stealing the election' and 'staging 9/11' and other assorted conspiracy theory nonsense.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

It's not like his parents were normal. They were radical leftists without any respect of the US or it's way of government. A Certificate of live birth only means a baby has been presented. Hawaii trusted the words of the radicals. There is the problem.

Man, I'm really sorry to be so harsh, I like you and stuff, but do realize how incredibly bad you are at debating? Have you noticed that you are often the subject of mockery because of this? It's not like I'm perfect, I suck at times too, but is it not evident yet that it isn't a good idea to make such incredibly bold statements without some form of argument, evidence, or something with substance?

Just be careful the next time you ramble on about the left being all emotional about everything, because surely some will remember posts like this and shove this back in your face.

For the record, more than half the time when I argue with you it's just because of your incredibly lazy intellectual approach. I'm more interested in accuracy and good argument than I am in agreeing with you. You need to start paying attention to the way ebuddy writes.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

so, basically, there is nothing that could convince you that he was born in the US, even though you lack any evidence suggesting he wasn't born in the US.

Hahaha.

Wow. You spend a good deal of time arguing with yourself and others, and then make up claim that doesn't bear any truth.

I know his dad wasn't a citizen. If he wasn't born in the US, then he isn't a citizen either. His grandmother had previously stated he was born in Africa (but later recanted this claim). Those facts seem to be reasonable enough to get all the official documentation that exists and have it released for examination to ensure that nothing legally amiss has occurred.

The fact is that whether the original birth certificate was officially referred to as a "long form" or something else is a game of semantics. The fact that semantic games are necessary also points to something being hidden. All the "evidence" as provided by OAW above does is explain that NOW they just give out the digital copy of what they have in their computer files, and it's "official". The fact is, back when Obama was born, another more detailed official document was put together and this is what has been requested to be released. Normally, this contains additional information like where the mother and father resided, their religious beliefs and more. I don't believe this information is taken anymore, but it was when Obama was born. I know it's contained on my own original birth certificate and I was born after Obama. This is all information which could be used to verify if Obama, his mother and his father where were they claimed back at the time of his birth. This can't be determined on the newer digital certification.

If you notice, while offering up the semantical gymnastics as an explanation, the official in question doesn't deny that there's another official "birth certificate" that was created at the time of Obama's birth, and it has information not contained in the newer digital form. They just say it's not a "long form" or a "short form." All they offer now is the digital copy - of course unless the person in question authorizes the release of the original complete birth certificate document.

Again - I'm not really all that interested EXCEPT to point out how bogus and phony Obama and his people are being when they could just authorize the release of his original birth certificate and have this pretty much all over. They chose not to, and there's a reason that likely has little to do with not appeasing kooks. It's the easy solution and one they chose not to put into play.

[Rumor]

I've posted this before, but my birth certificate from Hawaii looks the same as his (obviously with my information). I requested a copy of mine about four or five years ago because the one I previously had was lost. They couldn't offer me a copy of the original because of some excuse about paper certs being lost/destroyed or something some years back.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

I've posted this before, but my birth certificate from Hawaii looks the same as his (obviously with my information). I requested a copy of mine about four or five years ago because the one I previously had was lost.

It's already been acknowledged due to updates in technology that this is the preferred method of distributing an "official" certification for most states, despite up until recent years there actually being a non-digital record containing additional information.

They couldn't offer me a copy of the original because of some excuse about paper certs being lost/destroyed or something some years back.

If this is true, I'd like to see this documented with citations. As I've explained, the officials in the state of Hawaii have never claimed that his original birth certificate was lost or destroyed, and I'm pretty sure the law still requires them to keep these vital records in storage. All they do is dance around the fact that they've only been authorized to release the less descriptive digital certification based on what has been put into their database. If the document is still kept, it's a "public record" and can be accessed one way or another.

[dcmacdaddy]

Stupendousman,

It looks like you overlooked this reply of mine. Would you answer these questions to continue the debate. Thanks!

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

What makes you think this controversy is in any way "reasonable"? Do you trust the veracity of the documents, and the claims made by those who produced the documents, from the state of Hawai'i?

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

OK. Ignore the employees who printed the documents. Do you think the files in the computers maintained by the state of Hawai'i--the files related to Obama's birth--are accurate?

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

I am trying to figure out why you continue to argue in favor of Obama releasing more documents. Do you, personally, think there is some doubt as to the accuracy and/or veracity of the documents produced by the state of Hawai'i? Do you, personally, think those personal doubts of yours will be assuaged if you see Obama's "long form birth certificate"?

[dcmacdaddy]

As for me personally, I was curious about Obama's citizenship when this issue was raised as I was aware his father was not a citizen. But after the "Certificate of Live Birth" was published--and attested to for its accuracy by officials from Hawai'i's state government--my concerns/doubts were assuaged regarding the status of Obama's US citizenship.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The fact is, back when Obama was born, another more detailed official document was put together and this is what has been requested to be released. Normally, this contains additional information like where the mother and father resided, their religious beliefs and more. I don't believe this information is taken anymore, but it was when Obama was born. I know it's contained on my own original birth certificate and I was born after Obama. This is all information which could be used to verify if Obama, his mother and his father where were they claimed back at the time of his birth. This can't be determined on the newer digital certification.

Do you think "Obama, his mother and his father where were they claimed [to be] back at the time of his birth" or do you think they were somewhere else?

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Again - I'm not really all that interested EXCEPT to point out how bogus and phony Obama and his people are being when they could just authorize the release of his original birth certificate and have this pretty much all over. They chose not to, and there's a reason that likely has little to do with not appeasing kooks. It's the easy solution and one they chose not to put into play.

So, if you think there is a reason why "Obama and his people" have decided not to "authorize the release of his original birth certificate" and it is not related to "appeasing kooks", then what do you think is it related to?

What do you think is the reason why "Obama and his people" have not decided/agreed to "authorize the release of his original birth certificate"?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

As for me personally, I was curious about Obama's citizenship when this issue was raised as I was aware his father was not a citizen. But after the "Certificate of Live Birth" was published--and attested to for its accuracy by officials from Hawai'i's state government--my concerns/doubts were assuaged regarding the status of Obama's US citizenship.

This and the birth announcements in the local paper giving third-party affirmation. I'm relatively satisfied and confident with two things; 1. He's a US citizen and... 2. Even if his citizenship were arguable, it is fruitless at this point.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

This and the birth announcements in the local paper giving third-party affirmation. I'm relatively satisfied and confident with two things; 1. He's a US citizen and... 2. Even if his citizenship were arguable, it is fruitless at this point.

Yeah, I think those who are clamoring for the "long form" birth certificate are not concerned so much about citizenship as they are about religion. I think Obama's original/full/complete birth certificate would show his religion as Muslim and I think that likelihood is what has the "birthers" so concerned.

Of course, back in the 1960s the father's religion would have been automatically assumed to be the religion of the child regardless of what faith the mother practiced or even if the mother and father were not together on the same continent when the child was born. (Although, that was due more to patriarchal attitudes--society assuming the man dictated the religious practices in a family--than anything to do with preferred religious beliefs.)

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

This and the birth announcements in the local paper giving third-party affirmation. I'm relatively satisfied and confident with two things; 1. He's a US citizen and... 2. Even if his citizenship were arguable, it is fruitless at this point.

Yeah, the birth announcement is pretty much a no-brainer as far as verification goes. Back in the early 1960s it would have been hard, if not impossible, to give birth to a child in Kenya yet somehow arrange for a birth announcement in a newspaper on the other side of the world just a few days later.

[besson3c]

stupendousman wanting nothing more than to take down Obama ever since early campaign season... Him being unsatisfied with Obama's birth certificate....

Coincidence?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Stupendousman,

It looks like you overlooked this reply of mine. Would you answer these questions to continue the debate. Thanks!

I didn't overlook. I didn't answer. The reason why I didn't answer was because the questions were pretty much irrelevant. I already stated that I MYSELF don't really have a problem with his status. He's given all that's legally required of him, and unless something weird happens, he doesn't HAVE TO CHOOSE to give anything more.

That of course doesn't mean that he SHOULDN'T give the information/documentation in question in the interest of transparency. When he chooses to hide something and keep something away from the public eye, that reasonably arouses suspicion and creates more grist for the kook mill. The fact that the people in charge don't simply answer that Obama has chosen not to authorize the release of the document in question, instead of trying to pretend that the only document that exists is the "certification of live birth" that they give out these days (using semantics and misdirection), is totally dishonest to boot.

My point wasn't whether or not he's a citizen, rather that he's chosen a route which is NOT transparent, and which makes it look like he's trying to hide something. That's a really poor way to keep the focus on the issues and off of conspiracy theories. It would be a simple thing, and for some reason he choses not to do it. That speaks volumes.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

stupendousman wanting nothing more than to take down Obama ever since early campaign season... Him being unsatisfied with Obama's birth certificate....

Coincidence?

Keep grasping....keep grasping.

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Yeah, I think those who are clamoring for the "long form" birth certificate are not concerned so much about citizenship as they are about religion. I think Obama's original/full/complete birth certificate would show his religion as Muslim and I think that likelihood is what has the "birthers" so concerned.

Assuming there's no real funny business, I'm thinking this is probably why Obama has chosen to keep his original birth records hidden.

Better to keep the kooks guessing than to give them an actual issue to use. Obama's people tried so hard to NOT make Obama appear slightly Muslim despite all the evidence he was raised as one, this would be "icing on the cake" for those wanting to make Obama out to be Muslim, even though it's clear that Obama is a practicing Christian by choice.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I didn't overlook. I didn't answer. The reason why I didn't answer was because the questions were pretty much irrelevant. I already stated that I MYSELF don't really have a problem with his status. He's given all that's legally required of him, and unless something weird happens, he doesn't HAVE TO CHOOSE to give anything more.

That of course doesn't mean that he SHOULDN'T give the information/documentation in question in the interest of transparency. When he chooses to hide something and keep something away from the public eye, that reasonably arouses suspicion and creates more grist for the kook mill. The fact that the people in charge don't simply answer that Obama has chosen not to authorize the release of the document in question, instead of trying to pretend that the only document that exists is the "certification of live birth" that they give out these days (using semantics and misdirection), is totally dishonest to boot.

My point wasn't whether or not he's a citizen, rather that he's chosen a route which is NOT transparent, and which makes it look like he's trying to hide something. That's a really poor way to keep the focus on the issues and off of conspiracy theories. It would be a simple thing, and for some reason he choses not to do it. That speaks volumes.

Quoted for posterity. This is classic.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Quoted for posterity. This is classic.

I agree. The guy pledging the most transparent administration every chooses to hide documents that might shed more light on a controversy, is a classic case of irony. It's almost as classic as him announcing "Free Press" day and refusing to take any questions!

[sek929]

The only thing that is classic about this is the level of retardedness you are showing.

Obama is a US citizen, give it up already, you lost.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

chooses to hide documents that might shed more light on a controversy

The only way this is a controversy is if you think Hawaii state officials are lying.

Whether or not there's more information to be had on the long form which may not exist is completely irrelevant as to whether Obama is a citizen.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by sek929 

The only thing that is classic about this is the level of retardedness you are showing.

Obama is a US citizen, give it up already, you lost.

I never sought to win. I'm not asking for anything.

Obama on the other hand is seeking to chastise people who are asking for the transparency he promised, while hiding potentially pertinent information about himself.

Me = Zero loss, Zero Gain.
Obama = Losses more credibility by not just releasing the info and putting it all to bed.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

hiding potentially pertinent information

Complete supposition.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

The only way this is a controversy is if you think Hawaii state officials are lying.

I don't have to think anything of the sort to simply point out that Obama is trying to hide something by not doing the easy thing and asking for the original document to be released.

As I've pointed out, Obama can be a 100% true blue US born citizen and still be engaging in dishonest non-transparent misdirection that just perpetuates kooks and he has no one to blame but himself.

Whether or not there's more information to be had on the long form which may not exist is completely irrelevant as to whether Obama is a citizen.

I'm not saying it does, but what if the information on the birth certificate can be shown to have been false? Maybe home addresses that never existed or it was signed by someone that never had an official capacity to enter the documents in question into the official record? What if mysteriously, his birth certificate has become lost? What if it can be shown that the "official" birth certificate on record was a forgery like the Bush documents where? Until access was allowed to the documents in question, we were assured by "respectable" people this had all been looked into and everything was on the "up and up." That was until someone who knew what they were looking for proved that the document in question was a forgery.

I know this is far fetched, but weirder things have happened and like I said I suspect there's something other than citizenship at play here. Unless he's willing to stop hiding his original birth certificate, we really don't know what he's afraid might be unearthed.

What we know is that he refuses to release the document. The question is "why", when it could silence all but the most ardent kooks.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Complete supposition.

There has to be a reason why he has made the decision not to allow the release of his official birth certificate as it was documented at the time of his birth.

So, yes I suppose that there is a reason based on him not wanting pertinent information on that document to be made public. I don't think given the circumstances, that's an unreasonable assumption. Especially when it would be easier for him to not have to explain why he's refused to have it released and will only allow the newer digital standard to apply. If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to hide. It's does cause one difficulty when pesky people asking questions keep asking for that which you wish to hide.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I don't have to think anything of the sort to simply point out that Obama is trying to hide something by not doing the easy thing and asking for the original document to be released.

If you don't think Hawaii is lying, but Obama is, then you're no longer concerned about his citizenship. So why should Obama care?

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

As I've pointed out, Obama can be a 100% true blue US born citizen and still be engaging in dishonest non-transparent misdirection that just perpetuates kooks and he has no one to blame but himself.

He's not engaging in anything. Doing nothing ≠ "dishonest non-transparent misdirection."

Also, **** the kooks.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I'm not saying it does, but what if the information on the birth certificate can be shown to have been false?

It's up to skeptics to show that is even remotely the case. So far the compelling evidence being presented is: ???

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

What we know is that he refuses to release the document

Do we? All I know is what was released is what Hawaii considers to be an official birth certificate. The existence of the longer form is speculation.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

There has to be a reason why he has made the decision not to allow the release of his official birth certificate as it was documented at the time of his birth.

Sure. Right now the reason appears as it may not exist anymore.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

So, yes I suppose that there is a reason based on him not wanting pertinent information on that document to be made public. I don't think given the circumstances, that's an unreasonable assumption.

It's quite pessimistic, however.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Especially when it would be easier for him to not have to explain why he's refused to have it released and will only allow the newer digital standard to apply.

Yes, how dare he conform to current standards and not walk that extra mile to please people who will never be pleased with him anyway.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to hide. It's does cause one difficulty when pesky people asking questions keep asking for that which you wish to hide.

The only pesky people I hear asking these questions are kooks on internet forums. Nobody cares what they think, except other kooks on other internet forums.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

If you don't think Hawaii is lying, but Obama is, then you're no longer concerned about his citizenship. So why should Obama care?

I'm not that concerned with his citizenship, no. But, others are. Others do apparently think that people in Hawaii are either lying or don't know the truth. Obama should care because he promised transparency, seems to be ticked off that people keep asking for him to stop hiding his birth certificate, and it makes him look almost as foolish as they do. Seeing how it would be easy for him to authorize that every document pertinent to his birth be released to ensure that HE is NOT HIDING SOMETHING, he's giving the kooks a weapon to use against him.

He's not engaging in anything. Doing nothing ≠ "dishonest non-transparent misdirection."

He's refused to authorize the release of the document in question, and instead of just making a statement that he was refusing to release it (which would enforce the notion that he's hiding something), his people provided quotes from officials which engaged in semantic arguments and misdirection in order for it to look as though everything HAD been released which exists, when it hasn't.

All I know is what was released is what Hawaii considers to be an official birth certificate. The existence of the longer form is speculation.

No, it's not. It's something that everyone had back at the time. It's only been recently that the shorter, digital copies have been used.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Sure. Right now the reason appears as it may not exist anymore.

Then that should be the answer.

Of course, if any resident of the state of Hawaii who was born in the same year as Obama can get a copy of their original birth record released, and Obama's the only one that seems to be lost, that would seem to be a troublesome predicament which would only lead to further speculation.

Of course, we get no answer, which is what someone does who doesn't want something found out.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Also, **** the kooks.

It seems as though Obama (and his supporters here) just can't ignore them. It would be a lot easier to do I'm sure if Obama just authorized the release of all of his official birth records.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Of course, if any resident of the state of Hawaii who was born in the same year as Obama can get a copy of their original birth record released, and Obama's the only one that seems to be lost, that would seem to be a troublesome predicament which would only lead to further speculation.

Once again, you're creating a wild scenario based on nothing but pessimistic speculation.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Of course, we get no answer, which is what someone does who doesn't want something found out.

Or someone who doesn't deem a question worthy of answer.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

It seems as though Obama (and his supporters here) just can't ignore them. It would be a lot easier to do I'm sure if Obama just authorized the release of all of his official birth records.

I usually ignore the kooks on here, but on subjects such as this one, I enjoy debunking what is some obvious tin-foil hat wearing. I don't hear any MSM or Administration Official attention on this subject at all.