The American Spectator

Andrew Hyman| 7.30.09 @ 5:41PM

Hey Quin. Obama was born in Hawaii, so it's strange that the White House refuses to release his original birth certificate. Sunlight is a great disinfectant, so it's hard to understand why there's so much secrecy here.

I don't know the history of whether previous presidents have been similarly reluctant to provide documents, but it's not surprising that President Obama is facing unusual pressure to do so, irrespective of his race. After all, it's very unusual for a president to rely solely on his location of birth for eligibility, as President Obama continues to do (i.e. almost all presidents have had two parents who were U.S. citizens). Additionally, it's been well-established that Ann Dunham and her baby Barack were in Seattle in late August of 1961, which was the same month he was born, and she was telling friends in Seattle that she was on her way to visit her husband at Harvard; that was not true, since her husband was still in Hawaii, and would not go to Harvard until September of 1962. What she was really doing in Seattle was registering to enter the University of Washington as a student. She had left her husband, apparently because she found out that he had another wife (Kezia) in Kenya. All of this is interesting stuff, and so naturally many people (including both fringe nuts as well as reasonable historians and others) would like to see what further info can be gleaned from the original birth certificate. Instead, there seems to be a pointless coverup. It's pointless because he was born in Hawaii and the original birth certificate should confirm that.

Ran| 7.30.09 @ 6:08PM

Mr Hillyer, this is annoying. The central mesage of the "Birthers" is not a statement, but a QUESTION.

The question is straightforward: Did at the time Hawai'i allow certifications for foreign born children, or did it not?

If not, then I believe the official story of Obama's birth. On the other hand, if so, then the exposition of his documents is of significant importance.

You'll find "birthers" who flat out make the claim - in an effort to discredit those who ask the question rationally. You will observe "conservatives" too afraid to ask the question, lest they seem paranoid or worse.

There are a few, like me, concerned that if it turns out that we have a certification of live foreign birth on our hands, a much more capable and dangerous leader in Hillary waits in the wings. The Republican Party hasn't formulated an alternative libertarian-conservative message. We are still leaderless after more than a decade.

While Obama is blowing his cover on and off Prompter, his failure is doing much of our work for us. With someone competent at the Democratic helm, we'd be in deep, er, trouble.

On the other hand, a messy and protracted Constitutional Crisis could work wonders if it simply keeps Congress form enacting more dangerous nonsense in the interim. That prospect alone seems worth pursuing. That's why I'll raise the question once again: Did at the time Hawai'i allow certifications for foreign born children, or did it not?

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 6:13PM

"Lie after lie after lie"?

Like which lie, for instance?

As for the birth certificate, you're still muddling the issue:

He DID provide his birth certificate, the only one available. The longer document birthers claim to be asking for does not exist for anyone born in Hawaii.

The Republic Governor of the state has declared the birth certificate he provided genuine; so has the state's department of health. What he showed IS the document you would use to get a driver's license or passport.

It IS the birth certificate.

O.K. One more time, just in case you haven't figured this out.

Obama provided a birth certificate which states he was born in Hawaii. He provided a birth certificate, he provided a birth certificate, he provided a birth certificate.

Any questions?

Nobama| 7.30.09 @ 6:18PM

Why would we ask questions and expect a truthful answer from a troll who is here to lie? Moron.

Interested Conservative| 7.30.09 @ 6:21PM

I'm completely stumped by this, and could not care less, and haven't paid any attention to it, so I'm inclined to completely agree with LR, but, one question.

What exactly is it that the POTUS won't release? Is there something he won't release, or is this trying to disprove a negative?

Wholly aside - aren't birth certificates public record, and if so, is Hawaii not releasing something?

Again - I understand the kook side of this - he could be alien spawn, Elvis's love child, etc...., but isn't the public document question easily resolved?

Interested Conservative| 7.30.09 @ 6:29PM

OK - I must have commented over the initial comments, which show some of the basic facts, but still - how hard is this?

I recall the hubhub about Sen. Kerry's records, and IIRC he held them forever since they showed his grades at Yale below W's - some people have interesting taste in embarrassment, but so what? As for his military records, again, so what. Embarrassing - sure, but disqualifying, hardly.

The POTUS is similar - it shouldn't matter, and I'd be for ratifying whatever the outcome is, which explains the recent congress actions.

But it sure makes the media look stupid for catching up so late.

Where's Dan Rather with an old typewriter when you need him?

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 6:30PM

Interested --

Good questions.

There is nothing to release. He released the only document available to him to release.

The state of Hawaii's health department evidently has on file a record on microfilm that they don't release to anyone. The form they do release has been released. The health department checked the released form against their own record and certified it as legitimate.

In addition, by the way, their were birth announcements placed by the hospital in two local papers, which have also been widely circulated on television and online.

As Mr Tyrrell has said here and on Chris Matthews show earlier this week, there is just no story here. Obama is, in effect, being asked to prove a negative.

There is not one shred of credible evidence he was born elsewhere; all credible evidence points to his birth in Hawaii.

Interested Conservative| 7.30.09 @ 7:06PM

Thanks LR. Now I've got a gripe against Hawaii - and their confidentiality provisions. Governement confidentiality being hilarious and dubious, and in the POTUS's case all that and ironic, since it was just such a failure of official confidentiality which set in motion the chain of events which put him where he is (see Senate campaign - Jack Ryan - "sealed" divorce records).

Anyway - the leading reason I could see for Hawaii's policy would be related to adoption record confidentiality, which seems to be one of the few areas where the public custodians actually do a good job.

On the other hand, I suppose we're just a idiot state employee away from a leak - maybe Joe the Plumber could explain that better?

Eric Hildebrandt| 7.30.09 @ 7:22PM

http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697…among
interesting reading...any comments? Feel free to email me...I am open minded and not a crazy birther. I do, however, have a few questions. How much has President Obama spent on legal fees fighting this whole "wackadoo birther theory?" It has been going on for a long time. Only he has the power to stop it once and for all with full transparency. What does the Kenyan government say about the birth of President Obama? We know what his Grandmother says. but what about the Kenyan ambassador and his assertions that President Obama is a Kenyan citizen? What about the sealing of all documents involving President Obama? These are all just nagging questions...and the first of many, really. After the question of President Obama's citizenship, there are other things that I should be able to know...University transcripts? Travels overseas? Where is the transperancy?

Andrew Hyman| 7.30.09 @ 7:23PM

There's not a shred of credible documentary evidence that Obama was born in a hospital, as opposed to somewhere else in Honolulu. The original certificate would put that to rest, and would provide other info too that's not on the 2007-laser-printed document that the Obama campaign released. The 2007 document is obviously authentic, and it is obviously based upon a longer document that has thus far remained unavailable to the public. If I were the prez, I'd just release it. Why not? Obviously, Hawaii cannot bar him from getting a copy of it.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 8:00PM

Interested --

I've posted a link here to a discussion on the birthers on On Point, a really good radio show.

The panel included conservative radio talk show host Michael Medved, who speaks unequivocally against the birthers.

Also on the panel is a reporter who investigated the issues related to Hawaii's policies. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's actually a confidentiality issue. At some point, all of the state's records were destroyed when the went online. But they have microfilm records that are used to produce the new documents. (I think. There could be confidentiality concerns, but I'm pretty sure they're logistical.)

Sean| 7.30.09 @ 8:12PM

Liberal Reader is wrong there is a long form certificate that is available.

There are some questions out there that I would like to be answered.

Did Obama's grandmother state that she attended his birth in Kenya in an interview? If so how is that explained? In Hawaii how are certificates granted to those born outside of an hospital and unattended by medical personnel. Are the news of births outside of an hospital run in the local paper automatically based on certificates granted?

Darii| 7.30.09 @ 8:28PM

Liberal Reader, did you read the McCarthy article? Because the "Lie after lie after lie" refers to various times where Obama has embellished his personal history, such as in his speeches to various groups and in his autobiographies.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 8:29PM

Sean --

There is no other form. The GOVERNOR of Hawaii said so, and so did the Department of Health.

What would be their reason for lying?

There is not a shred of evidence suggesting that Obama was born outside the U.S. The "interview" you're referring to -- which could not possibly have the same weight as the official birth certificate -- has been completely debunked.

It's really, really weird how easily people are misled by this nonsense.

The announcements in TWO local newspapers were placed BY THE HOSPITAL, not by the Obama family.

Consider what would have to be true if these "questions" you raise are salient:

If Obama had been born on Pluto, he would have been an American citizen: he was born to an American mother.

The ONLY conceivable reason anyone could have of deceiving anyone on this issue would be to establish birth on American soil so he could be president.

That means that people in 1961 had a look at a 19 year old girl about to give birth and decided to begin faking evidence of his birth in this country.

It's lunacy, Sean, it's absolutely mad. Think, just think for one goddamn minute, and use the sense God gave you. Why, on earth, would anyone do this?

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 8:36PM

Darii --

Wait! No! You're telling me ... Wait. You're saying, a politician exaggerated about something?

I haven't seen any credible evidence to suggest that Obama has "lied" about anything significant from his past -- nothing like Hillary's story about landing under gunfire in Bosnia even.

Unfortunately for you guys, Obama is not Bill Clinton. He's not this big tub of churning appetites, lies, and scandals mixed with occasional flashes of intellectual brilliance.

He's not going to be chasing any interns around the White House (we leave that sort of thing to Republicans these days), and he's not going to tell crazy lies.

You all may well beat Obama in '12. But it's going to be a fight over issues and ideas, not blowjobs and lies.

You're going to have to work for it this time. I know that must be incredibly dispiriting, but it's the truth and it's good for you.

Sheila| 7.30.09 @ 8:53PM

It's true, we're going to have to work for our victories in 2010 and 2012; unlike the democrats we don't have the thugs in ACORN to either steal elections or beat it out of our opponent.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 9:28PM

Sheila --

That's just it. You'll have to have ideas and good arguments, not lame accusations about "thugs in ACORN."

Don't you see? You really will have to work for it, not just dream it up in dreary, burbling laboratories of paranoia.

The race baiting won't work, the conspiracy theories won't work, the shouting won't work, the demented accusations won't work. Even trying to drown people out by screeching the Pledge won't work.

You'll have to actually come up with and explain and defend good ideas.

I know it sounds like hard work. But believe me, you'll be happier for having made the effort.

Shelia| 7.30.09 @ 9:47PM

What good idea do you have, LR? And please don't lie.

Sean| 7.30.09 @ 9:58PM

Liberal Reader

Where has the interview with the grandmother been debunked? I want straight answers not dismissal. Was it not his grandmother? Was the translation wrong? Apparently she has said it mutiple times.

The birth announcements in the papers. Do they come from the hospital or a government agency where the certificate of birth is filed? If someone gave birth outside the hospital and filed for a certificate would that birth announcement be automatically turned over to the papers to print by that government agency?

There are plenty of reasons why someone would lie about a place of birth. First it must be easier to establish US citizenship for your child. Also if the father is a foreigner with a shady character it might be best to have the child not have dual citizenship if there is a chance of a custody battle.

Interested conservative| 7.30.09 @ 10:01PM

On a separate but related note - I concur with LR about the irrelevancy of this to the constitutional issues, but I'm trying to consider Occam on the disclosure issues.

There seems to be a "there" there as far as an undisclosed document goes, and there seem to be two logical explanations.

1 - The POTUS knows what it is, and it's something embarrassing, however trivial or personal, and may go to credibility, trust, etc.... Unlikely, and proving once again the non-disclosure is worse than the underlying fact in question.

2 - Not only is there nothing there, but the POTUS cannot do anything about - not his records, cannot authorize them, doesn't know what it is, etc..., in which case, keeping a useless snipe hunt going serves him just fine, since nothing will ever come of it. Sorta like GWB and the whole air national guard fraud/non-story/irrelevancy. It ends up distracting and dismaying the chronically dismayed and distracted to no purpose.

I'm leaning to option 2, given that the POTUS, of course, like all of us, probably doesn't remember any of the events in question at his arrival.

Still - for a guy who can invite a local cop in for beers from 500 miles away, why not ask the vital records dept. for a document dump?

Interested conservative| 7.30.09 @ 10:01PM

On a separate but related note - I concur with LR about the irrelevancy of this to the constitutional issues, but I'm trying to consider Occam on the disclosure issues.

There seems to be a "there" there as far as an undisclosed document goes, and there seem to be two logical explanations.

1 - The POTUS knows what it is, and it's something embarrassing, however trivial or personal, and may go to credibility, trust, etc.... Unlikely, and proving once again the non-disclosure is worse than the underlying fact in question.

2 - Not only is there nothing there, but the POTUS cannot do anything about - not his records, cannot authorize them, doesn't know what it is, etc..., in which case, keeping a useless snipe hunt going serves him just fine, since nothing will ever come of it. Sorta like GWB and the whole air national guard fraud/non-story/irrelevancy. It ends up distracting and dismaying the chronically dismayed and distracted to no purpose.

I'm leaning to option 2, given that the POTUS, of course, like all of us, probably doesn't remember any of the events in question at his arrival.

Still - for a guy who can invite a local cop in for beers from 500 miles away, why not ask the vital records dept. for a document dump?

Sean| 7.30.09 @ 10:37PM

Here is a picture of the type of document that is asked for as well as an article stating that the paper records are still available. Seems like we are being fed some misinformation.

This certificate of twins born a day after Obama.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/assets/gif/M1139416728.GIF

Article stating paper records are available

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090728/NEWS01/907280345/Hawaii+officials+confirm+Obama’s+original+birth+certificate+still+exists

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 10:51PM

Sean --

There was no reason for anyone to lie "to establish citizenship" for Barack Obama.

His mother was a citizen. It does not matter if his father was a citizen of Atlantis. His mother was a citizen. He was a citizen no matter where or how he was born.

The only distinction in our society recognized by law is that you must be born on US soil to be president.

He was a citizen no matter what; the "issue" (although of course it is NOT an issue), is simply whether he was born on US soil, which he was.

The "interview" with the grandmother is simply besides the point. If I were willing to swear in court that Glenn Beck's mother was a goat, and he father was a pig, it wouldn't make it true.

The birth certificate, already released and everywhere available, puts the matter to rest.

Andrew Hyman| 7.30.09 @ 10:51PM

Someone mentioned above that there were birth announcements "placed by the hospital" in two local papers. That's not correct. The listings came over from the state Department of Health to both newspapers. They were not sent by any hospital. In other words, if an original long-form birth certificate issued, then automatically the notices would appear in the newspapers, whether or not the birth occurred in a hospital.

As far as whether the original long-form still exists, the Honolulu Advertiser reported earlier this week: "Hawai'i's Health Department confirmed yesterday that it has President Obama's original Aug. 4, 1961, birth certificate in storage.... 'We don't destroy vital records,' Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo said. 'That's our whole job, to maintain and retain vital records.'"

So, the original certificate exists, but it's not been made public. If it were made public, it would conifrm that the President was born in Hawaii, and would also provide other interesting historical material that is not available now.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 10:54PM

Sean,

I just read the report on the birth certificate.

It simply confirms everything I've been saying.

What more do you want?

Did you even read the article you posted?

This conversation is silly. I'm not going to argue about whether men walked on the moon, and I'm not going to argue about whether the President of the United States, elected by the will of the people, is a citizen of this country.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 10:58PM

O.K.

Say everything you people is saying is true.

Why would anyone do it?

Why would anyone lie about these things back in 1961. The only reason is that they were conspiring to make this boy grow up to become president.

So ... the 19 year old unwed mother, with no money, scared, alone, travels 5,000 miles from the United States to Kenya!

So that she can slip notices of a birth that didn't take place into a newspaper in Hawaii!

So that she can -- what?

None of it makes any sense. Area 51 makes more sense.

I'm tired and going to bed back on the planet Earth. You guys enjoy yourselves.

Andrewq Hyman| 7.30.09 @ 11:00PM

Incidentally, it's not true that President Obama was a citizen no matter where he was born.
As James Taranto wrote this week, "Obama was born before 1986 to married parents, and his father was an alien. Thus if it were an overseas birth, his mother would have to have lived in the U.S. for 5 years after age 14 in order for her child to be a natural-born American. Mrs. Obama was only 18 when Barack was born, so she had not even lived 5 years after age 14." But this is all kind of moot, since there is no credible evidence that Obama was born overseas.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 11:04PM

Interested --

Option 2 is possible. I think he may have even invited the whole firestorm about Gates.

I don't think some on the right now how badly all this is playing in the white suburbs, where elections are decided.

The white suburbs are not liberal, and they're not conservative: they are changeable. They do NOT like racism, extremism, militia-talk -- any of that stuff scares them and disgusts them.

Reagan won those folks over because he was affable. It's pretty much that simple. He made you feel good. He seemed strong, wise, and kind.

There aren't many people like that around anymore -- and no Republican fits that description.

Obama knows all this. (He is the smartest politician that any of us ever saw.) He knows when Republicans rant about birth certificates and engage in what many moderates see as race baiting, he looks moderate and temperate and calm.

SO -- you might be on to something, although I don't know if it's all so cynical.

Liberal Reader| 7.30.09 @ 11:09PM

Andrew --

It's all moot anyway, since even the Constitutional provision at stake in a million years can't overturn an election. Elections are sacred in this country.

But like I said. It's genuinely moot because it's not an issue because he was born on U.S. soil. That's a fact, it's not an opinion.

Sean| 7.30.09 @ 11:27PM

Liberal Reader
"He DID provide his birth certificate, the only one available. The longer document birthers claim to be asking for does not exist for anyone born in Hawaii. "

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/assets/gif/M1139416728.GIF

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090728/NEWS01/907280345/Hawaii+officials+confirm+Obama’s+original+birth+certificate+still+exists

The birth certificate that is being asked for has not been released. That is the whole point to this. People are asking Obama to release his full certificate. As I linked above a lady who gave birth a day later has managed to show a much more detailed certificate. Also as I linked above his paper copy should be available, unlike how you said that it doesn't exist. Also your answer to his grandmothers interview has been nonsense. So far you have been wrong on the facts.

Andrew Hyman| 7.30.09 @ 11:42PM

Liberal Reader, we agree he was born on U.S. soil. No argument there.

You hypothesize that even if Obama were proven ineligible, he would remain in office. I wish! Elections are sacred in this country, so you would have to look at who got more valid votes. Votes for an unqualified candidate are not valid. They have often been "thrown away and rejected as having no force or operation in law" (as Samuel Chase once put it). But it's irrelevant, because President Obama is qualified, having been born in Hawaii.

Sheila| 7.31.09 @ 2:34AM

Sean, Obama has no intention of releasing his full birth certificate--who is going to make him? LibReader knows this and also knows that even if it were proven that Obama is not a citizen, it would be nearly impossible to overturn the election.

LibReader is a cynic, a liberal troll who acts as our Axelrod Astroturf minder at AmSpec.

I believe it's the ACORN/Democrat mess that could blow sky high and doom the democrats--that's my focus.

jae| 7.31.09 @ 9:48AM

Liberal Reader evidently cannot or will not READ, since all his/her points are completely refuted in many places.

centralcal| 7.31.09 @ 12:31PM

I believe Obama is a U.S. citizen.

However, is he a Natural Born Citizen? That is the constitutional requirement for President. I do not believe he meets that requirement at all.

It is too late to be asking these questions about Obama. The election is over. However, we definitely need to discuss the Constitutional requirement and how to make certain it is met in the future.

Liberal Reader| 7.31.09 @ 6:09PM

centralcal --

Yes, Obama is a natural born citizen. Hawaii is a part of the United States.

Did you not attend grade school? Can you not read a newspaper?

The news is out there for anyone who is not willfully, purposefully blind and ignorant.

If you believe journalists are a part of the liberal conspiracy to destroy America, like most of the jackasses around here, tune into some conservative shows or websites:

Listen to Michael Medved, the conservative radio talk show host, or Bill Cunningham; or, read R. Emmett Tyrrell of the American Spectator. All of these men have denounced as stupid and baseless these conspiracy theories.

Brian B| 7.31.09 @ 6:53PM

It would be nice if Liberal Reader knew as much as he thinks he does.

First, there is an original birth certificate. It is not on microfilm. It was digitally stored by HI when they went digital around 2000. The HI Sec of Health has stated that he/she has checked for and looked at this certificate. The Certification provided by HI is a partial list of info on the original certificate.
And nowhere have I seen evidence nor do I find it plausible that the state of HI will not release to the person in question all of the records it holds of ones birth. The COLB is what it provides as a form for ID purposes. I have seen no citations saying they will not release all of the info on request, especially to the POTUS.

Second, there are other reasons his certificate and/or birth announcent could have been altered at the time besides the liberal red herring that his mother was planning on him being president, among them custody issues with the apparently volatile Obama Sr.

Third, since one of his parents was not a citizen and the other was too young at the time of his birth to automatically convey citizenship to him there is a case to be made, although not too convincing a one, that he is not a 'natural born citizen' as previously defined in some court cases.

Fourth, it is Obama who is not playing well in the white suburbs. It is a liberal canard that this issue has anything to do with race for any but the tiny segment of racist whackos who are on either fringe. This is an issue of holding a politician to his word. He promised utter transparency and has the most opaque background of any president I am aware of and is quite coy about maintaining that opacity.

For the record I believe it is almost a certainty he was born in HI. However, like McCarthy, his repeated desire to obfuscate his past is sufficient reason for me to wonder what his motivations are here. Maybe there's nothing and it's just a Chicago sandbag. If so, that doesn't speak too well of his new kind of politics either.

Liberal Reader| 7.31.09 @ 7:46PM

Brian --

Hilarious.

For the record, you believe he was born in Hawaii?

Why?

IF the questions you raise are legitimate, you'd be forced to be skeptical.

Unless by "believe" you mean you accept it as an article of faith -- sufficient evidence still being absent.

What rubbish.

Patty Anne| 7.31.09 @ 8:05PM

ACORN ACORN ACORN

Know1| 7.31.09 @ 8:32PM

No further action need be taken to "end the discussion" or to "end the questions". The discussion is closed by order of the US Supreme Court, whose Chief Justice administered the Oath of Office of President of the United States, and by order of the Senate of the United States whom confirmed the electoral college voting results.

The discussion is OVER.

Anyone applying for a passport would get a certificate from their state of birth similar to that issued to Barack Obama and the same as publicly circulated and displayed. The Constitution does not require special forms of birth certificates to appease racist subversives undermining the presidency using falsified Kenya documentations and claims.

When it comes down to who do you trust, the STATE of HAWAII is trusted over unknown Kenyan alleged witnesses. STANLEY ANN Obama, Barack's mother, was unable to travel to Kenya for medical reasons, and an infant returning with her would not be admitted into the US for medical reason -- it didn't happen and was medically impossible due to Yellow Fever Virus Vaccination medical requirements.

Pregnant women were not vaccinated and infants under 1-year-old were not vaccinated. It didn't happen.

Stanley Ann was in classes at University of Hawaii before the birth -- there was no prolonged absence from classes. Barack Obama Senior was conspicuous as the FIRST-EVER BLACK STUDENT at University of Hawaii, and was not absent from classes before or after the birth.

The only conspiracy is the criminal fraud conspiracy falsifying documentation purporting that there are witnesses in Kenya who allegedly attended the alleged Kenyan birth. These felony fraudsters need to be punished with severe prison sentences, including those aiding and abetting after the fact, because they have undermined military good order and have already caused at least one officer to refuse orders of assignment caused by the fraud crime. This is not harmless political tug-of-war but actual treason. Traitors must be punished for undermining America's security during a time of war.

Liberal Reader| 7.31.09 @ 8:46PM

Wow. Thank you Know1. Hat's off.

I'm not sure if I follow you all the way in your last paragraph, but the rest of this is well said.

Your first point is most important: the president's the president. Even the Supremes themselves bought the birther claptrap, they could never remove a sitting president -- nor could the Congress. It simply would not, could not, happen.

Brian B| 7.31.09 @ 9:04PM

--Even the Supremes themselves bought the birther claptrap, they could never remove a sitting president -- nor could the Congress.--

Congress can't remove a sitting president. Interesting theory. You might want to let congress in on it.

--For the record, you believe he was born in Hawaii?

Why?

IF the questions you raise are legitimate, you'd be forced to be skeptical. --

Nice tactic. Misquote me then assign a logical conclusion to the misquote.

--What rubbish.--

There's a conclusive argument.

I take it by ignoring the four points I made you have no answer to them.

I do agree with Know1 though. Anyone who questions authority should be imprisoned. That's the mantra of liberals right?

Jeremiah| 7.31.09 @ 9:38PM

Brian B: Anyone who questions "Liberal Authority," should be imprisoned, otherwise it's speaking truth to power--you know? That's the fascist liberal way.

Interloper| 7.31.09 @ 9:48PM

Yeah, like liberals give a sh!t about America's security during a time of war--don't make me puke! Screw you know1--dumbazz.

Andrew Hyman| 7.31.09 @ 11:45PM

Since I corrected some errors above, I'll correct another one. Someone wrote in this thread that, "it didn't happen and was medically impossible due to Yellow Fever Virus Vaccination medical requirements." That's incorrect.

Up until 2004, the U.S. did not "require arriving travelers to have any vaccinations for entry or return to the United States," according to the Textbook of Pediatric Infectious Diseases by Ralph Feigin (2004). Also, a pregnant woman who received the yellow fever vaccine would have been at "no risk," and the risk to the fetus would have been "very low or negligible," according to Travelers' Vaccines by Elaine Jong and Jane Zuckerman (2004).

Anyway, the reason we know that President Obama was born in Hawaii is not because of any bogus arguments about vaccines. It's because the state of Hawaii has officially said so.

Nobama| 8.1.09 @ 12:21AM

Andrew, have you noticed the more lies you expose the more lies they tell? It's like peeling an onion.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 1:21AM

Brian B --

In effect you wrote that a) there are legitimate questions about where Obama was born; and b) you believe he was born in Hawaii.

Not surprisingly, you're imitating the sneaky move being performed by Lou Dobbs, that poisonous weasel, and several Republicans in the House: you're acknowledging what you know to be true as if it were just a personal belief.

It doesn't MATTER whether you believe the moon is made of cheese or no, Bub.

It ain't. The president was born in Hawaii. The Republican governor confirmed this; the Health Department validated the birth certificate that Obama released.

There just isn't any legitimate question.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 1:30AM

This week in the House there was a resolution commemorating the anniversary of Hawaii.

In that resolution, there is an article recognizing that Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States, was born in Hawaii.

How many Republicans voted for this resolution?

100% of those present!

100%!

When it came time for a vote, every Republican in the House affirmed the president is a citizen of this country.

And by the way, the branches of government are co-equal.

Without impeachment and a trial in the Senate, Congress cannot remove the president.

By the way, even if there were a trial in the Senate, it's not clear that Congress can remove the president from office. That's a test of the Constitutional division of powers we've never undergone.

And you can be damn sure the United States of America -- the greatest democracy that ever existed -- is not going to have a constitutional crisis because a couple of retarded hicks heard a rumor on the radio.

We're still a lot better than that in this country.

Murphy| 8.1.09 @ 1:39AM

Calm down, Jeremiah; I swear your eyes are bugging out of your head over this issue. Don't you have a life, troll?

We'll get rid of your beloved leader the old-fashioned way--we'll kick him out of office in 2012--after we've stripped him of his democrat congress in 2010.

Sleep tight, little libtard.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 1:46AM

That'll be the day, Murphy.

In the mean time, 40% of Republicans now say they don't believe the president was born in this country.

This is like the 65% of Republicans who believe Iraq attacked us on 9.11.

And the majority of them who look forward to being united with childhood pets in heaven after the rapture.

T. Paine/Marcell/Jeremiah| 8.1.09 @ 2:50AM

You stupid truthers didn't hold your party back in 2008, so what's your beef? I don't care about this birther thing--Obama's probably not a citizen, but you liberals are good at sneaky stuff and it will be hard to prove.

I'd rather blow your crappy party apart by exposing ACORN. Now, that's doable. Toodles.

Sybil| 8.1.09 @ 2:57AM

Jeremiah, I read tonight that the old folks have heard about and are starting to freak out about the mandatory every five years after 65 death counseling clauses in ObamaCare. They are majorly pi$$ed off!

When you libtards lose the elderly folks vote, you're absolutely screwed. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of fascist liberals, stinker.

Sean| 8.1.09 @ 8:38AM

Liberal Reader is your typical leftist. When confronted with facts he changes the subject and attacks implied motives. Facts

1. There is a long form copy of Obama's birth certificate.
2.People want to see this copy made public.
3. Obama will not release this copy.
4. Obama released an abstract version of the certificate of live birth.
5. People still have not seen the long form copy.
6. Liberal Reader is wrong on all the facts on the case and implies people think the moon is made out of cheese in answer to any questions.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 2:12PM

Sean, you missed a few important facts.

1. You are a jackass.
2. The only copy of the birth certificate that the state of Hawaii gives out is the birth certificate available to anyone who is not a jackass on the internet, in newspapers, on news programs all over the country.
3. Obama DID release a copy of a birth certificate that has been validated by the governor of Hawaii and the Health Department. In addition, birth notices, placed in two papers by the hospitatal, are readily available for anyone to see.
4. See above.
5. See above.
6. My point was that your attempt at sounding reasonable, "I believe Obama was born in Hawaii," is actually -- perhaps unwittingly -- a way of claiming -- falsely -- that the matter is somehow debatable. "The moon is not made of cheese" has the same truth value as "Obama was not born in Kenya." You try to make it sound like a reasonable opinion: "I believe Sean is a jackass" is not a fact like "The moon is not made of cheese is a fact." Although I'm beginning to wonder.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 2:14PM

7. There is no such thing as a "typical leftist," and I'm not one of them.

8. You are a typical jackass. You manage to be irrational and boring at the same time, a feat at which many of us marvel.

Jeremiah| 8.1.09 @ 3:05PM

Liberal Reader is a typical Marxist--a heartless monster. Not real bright, either.

Liberal Reader| 8.1.09 @ 4:04PM

Jeremiah --

That's a fascinating argument. You have such insight, and your ability to illustrate your point with crisp, well-articulated reasoning suggests a sharp intellect and massive erudition.

Have you ever thought of becoming a writer? You have a way with language: your diction is exuberant, your phrasing vigorous, and your wit well honed.

Or maybe you've thought of just becoming a philosopher? Your ability to wrestle with complicated topics and see both sides of an issue will come in handly, as will your overall humane world view.

Give it some thought, Socrates.

Jeremiah| 8.1.09 @ 4:32PM

Have you ever thought of becoming a decent human being, liar troll?? Guess not, it's above your pay grade.

Why don't you take a whack at that rolling donut, loser?

Nobama| 8.1.09 @ 8:28PM

I don't debate trolls because you are dishonest clowns who don't argue in good faith. I berate and ridicule you because you are sociopaths who have betrayed your country. I have no respect for you.

Andrew Hyman| 8.7.09 @ 1:52AM

I just read a news article where the President's press secretary says: “A pregnant woman leaves her home to go overseas to have a child -- who there’s not a passport for -- so is in cahoots with someone…to smuggle that child, that previously doesn’t exist on a government roll somewhere back into the country and has the amazing foresight to place birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers?"

As mentioned above in this thread, the birth announcements were not placed in Hawaii newspapers by anyone in the Obama family, or even by any Hawaii hospital. They were placed there by the Hawaii Department of Health automatically whenever that Department issued a birth certificate, either for a hospital birth or a home birth.

Gibbs is also way off about the passport requirements in 1961. No smuggling would have been required.

Prior to 1952, a passport had never been required to cross a U.S. border in peacetime. Even after 1952, the President had to declare a national emergency in order to trigger the passport requirement, and the passport requirement did not become permanent until 1978.

As of August 1961, federal regulations stated that no passport was required for travel between the U.S. and "any country or territory in North, Central, or South America (including Cuba)." And I doubt that any passport was required for travel between Canada and Kenya, both of which were then part of the British Empire.

Once again: the reason we know that President Obama was born in Hawaii is not because of any bogus arguments about vaccines, or passports. It's because the state of Hawaii has officially said so.

Andrew Hyman| 8.7.09 @ 2:06AM

Slight correction: on January 16, 1961, the State Department excluded Cuba from the passport exception. However, the exception remained in place for the rest of the western hemisphere.