And please look at how poor the photoshop on that document is. The bottom third that is supposed to be the certification, is wider than the top two thirds, and the white border just dissapears on the left side of the copy.
I also submit for your review this picture of Obama from the NYT.
It's part 1 of a pair of certificates given out to twins born the day after the greatest president in the United States since Roosevelt.
Being raised a pirate is not against the law. I say let the brother breathe.
My question is why would unknown twins go through the trouble of having the State release these documents and how did they become accessed by the general public??
By the way as an Indiana resident, most people in the state believe that Mitch Daniels will run for President. Look for a decision either way by the end of this month or early next month (once the state house session ends)
I'm certainly open to hearing an argument as to why releasing it would do more harm than good beyond why capitulate to dumb-ass people.
This argument suffices, IMO. He doesn't have to release any more info. Where would it stop? What other baseless allegations does he have to "prove" are wrong?
The President of the United States should neither have the time nor the inclination to answer to every baseless allegation against him. He's got a job to do.
I'm certainly open to hearing an argument as to why releasing it would do more harm than good beyond why capitulate to dumb-ass people.
This argument suffices, IMO. He doesn't have to release any more info. Where would it stop? What other baseless allegations does he have to "prove" are wrong?
The President of the United States should neither have the time nor the inclination to answer to every baseless allegation against him. He's got a job to do.
Obama's spent considerable time and money to avoid revealing his birth certificate and it would take about 30 seconds (and no money) to allow it's release, so your argument really makes no sense. If he's so busy it would be far easier to make it public.
I have no doubt that Obama was born here, but I do wonder if there is something on his OG birth certificate that he doesn't want the world to see. I have no idea what that may be, though.
Obama's spent considerable time and money to avoid revealing his birth certificate and it would take about 30 seconds (and no money) to allow it's release, so your argument really makes no sense. If he's so busy it would be far easier to make it public.
I have no doubt that Obama was born here, but I do wonder if there is something on his OG birth certificate that he doesn't want the world to see. I have no idea what that may be, though.
Pure bullshit. How has he "spent considerable time and money" on not doing something? He has released his official birth certificate and it has satisfied every sane non-racist in the country.
The "time and money" crap is being pushed by Trump, and by repeating it you're just being daffy.
I'm certainly open to hearing an argument as to why releasing it would do more harm than good beyond why capitulate to dumb-ass people.
This argument suffices, IMO. He doesn't have to release any more info. Where would it stop? What other baseless allegations does he have to "prove" are wrong?
The President of the United States should neither have the time nor the inclination to answer to every baseless allegation against him. He's got a job to do.
Obama's spent considerable time and money to avoid revealing his birth certificate and it would take about 30 seconds (and no money) to allow it's release, so your argument really makes no sense. If he's so busy it would be far easier to make it public.
I have no doubt that Obama was born here, but I do wonder if there is something on his OG birth certificate that he doesn't want the world to see. I have no idea what that may be, though.
Why do people think that Obama has spent considerable time and money avoiding this issue? This is a giant myth that is perpetuated by the political right. Can you show any documentation to back up this claim, other than anecdotal evidence or allegations?
I ask again, Why is Obama held to a different standard than every other President in the history of this country? Obama has produced a document that is satisfactory to the State Department of the US, and the existance of his "real birth certificate" was verified by the Republican Director of the Hawaii Department of Health. IMO opinion, anything short of making copies of Obama's "real birth certificate" and turning it into rolls of toilet paper so the GOP can wipe its collective ass with it won't be enough for these people.
IMO opinion, anything short of making copies of Obama's "real birth certificate" and turning it into rolls of toilet paper so the GOP can wipe its collective ass with it won't be enough for these people.
That wouldn't be enough. A film of his actual birth with Don Ho and Jack Lord attending wouldn't be enough. There are two kinds of birthers - crazy, stupid racists and politically conniving racists. They're not going away and they're not going to change no matter what you give them.
I think it's going to be a Bachmann-Pawlenty ticket. You take your pick on which one is going to be the VP. Actually, that's way too Minnesota-centric, no?
You know what would really be awesome? A Ron Paul-Rand Paul ticket, a little father-son for that azz.
Why do people think that Obama has spent considerable time and money avoiding this issue? This is a giant myth that is perpetuated by the political right. Can you show any documentation to back up this claim, other than anecdotal evidence or allegations?
Quote from one of Obama's lawyers, in the article Bob posted above:
"In the interview with Roll Call, Sevugan confirmed that some of the legal fees were needed to defend the campaign against what he called "unmeritorious" lawsuits, including one that challenged Obama???s citizenship"
Bon Vivant said:
I ask again, Why is Obama held to a different standard than every other President in the history of this country?
He's not. Most people born before 1930 don't have any birth certificate at all. I think Clinton and Bush Jr are the only previous presidents who would have had them. We are now entering the era where all citizens born in the U.S. have birth certificates and ten states are already moving to require Presidential candidates to reveal them, not the copies.
In the next election candidates will most likely have no choice if they want to run.
IMO opinion, anything short of making copies of Obama's "real birth certificate" and turning it into rolls of toilet paper so the GOP can wipe its collective ass with it won't be enough for these people.
That wouldn't be enough. A film of his actual birth with Don Ho and Jack Lord attending wouldn't be enough. There are two kinds of birthers - crazy, stupid racists and politically conniving racists. They're not going away and they're not going to change no matter what you give them.
You may be right......nothing may satisfy the fringe lunatics.
But I promise you there are non-fringe lunatics, who voted for Obama, have NO doubt about whether or not he was born on American soil and who like Horseleech above are thinking "Hmmm...I wonder if there is anything on that Birth Certificate that he doesn't want us to see"?
I don't think those who think that are crazy, racist or even slightly off-centered.....they voted for "Transparency" and this can appear as the opposite to normal folks.
Yeah....I get the "Why should he bow down to these idiots" angle and how doing so would seem irrational but if the Governor of Hawaii spent the time and effort, HE must have seen a value in it too.
Again, If I were him I'd do it and I see no downside to doing so.
Why do people think that Obama has spent considerable time and money avoiding this issue? This is a giant myth that is perpetuated by the political right. Can you show any documentation to back up this claim, other than anecdotal evidence or allegations?
Quote from one of Obama's lawyers, in the article Bob posted above:
"In the interview with Roll Call, Sevugan confirmed that some of the legal fees were needed to defend the campaign against what he called "unmeritorious" lawsuits, including one that challenged Obama???s citizenship"
"Some" of the legal fees. So what? You said "considerable time and money," not "some money."
And there's no evidence that Obama has spent "considerable time" on this bullshit at all.
We are now entering the era where all citizens born in the U.S. have birth certificates and ten states are already moving to require Presidential candidates to reveal them, not the copies.
In the next election candidates will most likely have no choice if they want to run.
Obama has provided his birth certificate, so it's not an issue.
And not a single one of those state statutes that I've seen comes even close to being Constitutional.
Even the dipshit Arizona governor wouldn't sign the bill in her state into law:
But I promise you there are non-fringe lunatics, who voted for Obama, have NO doubt about whether or not he was born on American soil and who like Horseleech above are thinking "Hmmm...I wonder if there is anything on that Birth Certificate that he doesn't want us to see"?
I don't think those who think that are crazy, racist or even slightly off-centered.....they voted for "Transparency" and this can appear as the opposite to normal folks.
Yeah....I get the "Why should he bow down to these idiots" angle and how doing so would seem irrational but if the Governor of Hawaii spent the time and effort, HE must have seen a value in it too.
Again, If I were him I'd do it and I see no downside to doing so.
The governor of Hawaii thought he'd be doing a favor to Obama - he knew him as a child. So he took the "time and effort" to make a couple of phone calls. Big deal.
What are your concerns about what "might" be on the birth certificate? That he's a space alien?
The "transparency" argument strikes me as ridiculous. If next week the nuts are demanding that Obama provide a plaster-cast of his unit will you and Horseleech start saying "maybe he's got something he doesn't want us to see" and "he's spent considerable time and money trying to avoid a plaster-cast"?
Claiming the original document would satisfy these people is laughable.
And claiming that lawyers defending his eligibility in court constitutes some sort of nefarious "effort" on his part is also pure comedy. The existence of the newspaper announcements should be enough to prove that documents and facts mean exactly nothing in this "debate".
"What might he be hiding? He could end this tomorrow!". Please be serious.
I also don't see any reason why he'd want this issue to go away. It clearly divides the Republican party in a strategic way, and the people who buy into this issue are almost certainly not voting for Obama anyway. I genuinely don't see how these flimsy insinuations swing a single vote to the R's.
Claiming the original document would satisfy these people is laughable.
And claiming that lawyers defending his eligibility in court constitutes some sort of nefarious "effort" on his part is also pure comedy. The existence of the newspaper announcements should be enough to prove that documents and facts mean exactly nothing in this "debate".
"What might he be hiding? He could end this tomorrow!". Please be serious.
I also don't see any reason why he'd want this issue to go away. It clearly divides the Republican party in a strategic way, and the people who buy into this issue are almost certainly not voting for Obama anyway. I genuinely don't see how these flimsy insinuations swing a single vote to the R's.
Exactly. And who would the "original" be provided to for examination? If every last teabagger in the country got a chance to hold it, sniff it, lick it and run his or her naughty parts on it nothing would change. If anything it would give them MORE quibble ammunition. Can you imagine if there's a typo on it, or a crushed gnat? It would give them the fucking vapors.
Considering the document says "August 5, 1961", and the poaster said "day after", I think the question is do you even look at these things?
Not that it matters but if you look at the bottom of the document you can see it is dated 1966.
Haha! Yes, I see that. However, the DOB states August 5, 1961, and the poaster clearly said that the document was for a person "born the day after Obama". Obama was born on August 4, 1961. Sabadabada was trying to call dude out on the carpet and failed, IMO. But, yeah, not that it matters. ;)
Why do people think that Obama has spent considerable time and money avoiding this issue? This is a giant myth that is perpetuated by the political right. Can you show any documentation to back up this claim, other than anecdotal evidence or allegations?
Quote from one of Obama's lawyers, in the article Bob posted above:
"In the interview with Roll Call, Sevugan confirmed that some of the legal fees were needed to defend the campaign against what he called "unmeritorious" lawsuits, including one that challenged Obama???s citizenship"
Bon Vivant said:
I ask again, Why is Obama held to a different standard than every other President in the history of this country?
He's not. Most people born before 1930 don't have any birth certificate at all. I think Clinton and Bush Jr are the only previous presidents who would have had them. We are now entering the era where all citizens born in the U.S. have birth certificates and ten states are already moving to require Presidential candidates to reveal them, not the copies.
In the next election candidates will most likely have no choice if they want to run.
You may be right about the lack of BCs for people born before 1930, but Wikipedia (not the greatest source, I know) says 1900. But that's not the point. I am unaware of any President in US history whose citizenship status has ever been questioned, particularly after they have already been elected. That, to me, means that Obama is being held to a standard that no other President has.
However, your other claim, I have to respectfully disagree with. "Some" is not equal to "Considerable", IMO, particularly when allegations of millions of dollars are being tossed around. Unless you can point to a dollar figure, and so long as the description of the amount of money spent remains "some", I stand by what I said.
Considering the document says "August 5, 1961", and the poaster said "day after", I think the question is do you even look at these things?
Not that it matters but if you look at the bottom of the document you can see it is dated 1966.
Haha! Yes, I see that. However, the DOB states August 5, 1961, and the poaster clearly said that the document was for a person "born the day after Obama". Obama was born on August 4, 1961. Sabadabada was trying to call dude out on the carpet and failed, IMO. But, yeah, not that it matters. ;)
Again... you are incorrect sir....the initial poster said the document was "Issued" in 1961 and it clearly wasn't.
Claiming the original document would satisfy these people is laughable.
And claiming that lawyers defending his eligibility in court constitutes some sort of nefarious "effort" on his part is also pure comedy. The existence of the newspaper announcements should be enough to prove that documents and facts mean exactly nothing in this "debate".
"What might he be hiding? He could end this tomorrow!". Please be serious.
I also don't see any reason why he'd want this issue to go away. It clearly divides the Republican party in a strategic way, and the people who buy into this issue are almost certainly not voting for Obama anyway. I genuinely don't see how these flimsy insinuations swing a single vote to the R's.
Exactly. And who would the "original" be provided to for examination? If every last teabagger in the country got a chance to hold it, sniff it, lick it and run his or her naughty parts on it nothing would change. If anything it would give them MORE quibble ammunition. Can you imagine if there's a typo on it, or a crushed gnat? It would give them the fucking vapors.
If the logic is that not producing whatever the hell document that the childhood friend Governor was doing a favor and releasing is to divide the Republican Party and that it's a plan to help in Obama's re-election....and it works....then I'm all for it.
Considering the document says "August 5, 1961", and the poaster said "day after", I think the question is do you even look at these things?
Not that it matters but if you look at the bottom of the document you can see it is dated 1966.
Haha! Yes, I see that. However, the DOB states August 5, 1961, and the poaster clearly said that the document was for a person "born the day after Obama". Obama was born on August 4, 1961. Sabadabada was trying to call dude out on the carpet and failed, IMO. But, yeah, not that it matters. ;)
Again... you are incorrect sir....the initial poster said the document was "Issued" in 1961 and it clearly wasn't.
Not that it matters....but that is the fact.
Haha! Ok, I stand corrected. I'm not above admitting when I'm wrong. Thanks.
during the 08 election, hawaii's republican governor was campaigning with mccain and the director of health at the time was appointed by her. if something wasn't legit, best believe it would have been brought up then. current governor is an idiot for bringing it up later but if it's as rock said, then uh yeah i guess so.
Comments
I also submit for your review this picture of Obama from the NYT.
Obama. Raised as a Somali pirate.
Being raised a pirate is not against the law. I say let the brother breathe.
My question is why would unknown twins go through the trouble of having the State release these documents and how did they become accessed by the general public??
This argument suffices, IMO. He doesn't have to release any more info. Where would it stop? What other baseless allegations does he have to "prove" are wrong?
The President of the United States should neither have the time nor the inclination to answer to every baseless allegation against him. He's got a job to do.
Obama's spent considerable time and money to avoid revealing his birth certificate and it would take about 30 seconds (and no money) to allow it's release, so your argument really makes no sense. If he's so busy it would be far easier to make it public.
I have no doubt that Obama was born here, but I do wonder if there is something on his OG birth certificate that he doesn't want the world to see. I have no idea what that may be, though.
Pure bullshit. How has he "spent considerable time and money" on not doing something? He has released his official birth certificate and it has satisfied every sane non-racist in the country.
The "time and money" crap is being pushed by Trump, and by repeating it you're just being daffy.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/12/donald-trump/donald-trump-claims-obama-has-spent-2-million-lega/
Why do people think that Obama has spent considerable time and money avoiding this issue? This is a giant myth that is perpetuated by the political right. Can you show any documentation to back up this claim, other than anecdotal evidence or allegations?
I ask again, Why is Obama held to a different standard than every other President in the history of this country? Obama has produced a document that is satisfactory to the State Department of the US, and the existance of his "real birth certificate" was verified by the Republican Director of the Hawaii Department of Health. IMO opinion, anything short of making copies of Obama's "real birth certificate" and turning it into rolls of toilet paper so the GOP can wipe its collective ass with it won't be enough for these people.
That wouldn't be enough. A film of his actual birth with Don Ho and Jack Lord attending wouldn't be enough. There are two kinds of birthers - crazy, stupid racists and politically conniving racists. They're not going away and they're not going to change no matter what you give them.
You know what would really be awesome? A Ron Paul-Rand Paul ticket, a little father-son for that azz.
Not that it matters but if you look at the bottom of the document you can see it is dated 1966.
Quote from one of Obama's lawyers, in the article Bob posted above:
"In the interview with Roll Call, Sevugan confirmed that some of the legal fees were needed to defend the campaign against what he called "unmeritorious" lawsuits, including one that challenged Obama???s citizenship"
He's not. Most people born before 1930 don't have any birth certificate at all. I think Clinton and Bush Jr are the only previous presidents who would have had them. We are now entering the era where all citizens born in the U.S. have birth certificates and ten states are already moving to require Presidential candidates to reveal them, not the copies.
In the next election candidates will most likely have no choice if they want to run.
You may be right......nothing may satisfy the fringe lunatics.
But I promise you there are non-fringe lunatics, who voted for Obama, have NO doubt about whether or not he was born on American soil and who like Horseleech above are thinking "Hmmm...I wonder if there is anything on that Birth Certificate that he doesn't want us to see"?
I don't think those who think that are crazy, racist or even slightly off-centered.....they voted for "Transparency" and this can appear as the opposite to normal folks.
Yeah....I get the "Why should he bow down to these idiots" angle and how doing so would seem irrational but if the Governor of Hawaii spent the time and effort, HE must have seen a value in it too.
Again, If I were him I'd do it and I see no downside to doing so.
"Some" of the legal fees. So what? You said "considerable time and money," not "some money."
And there's no evidence that Obama has spent "considerable time" on this bullshit at all.
Obama has provided his birth certificate, so it's not an issue.
And not a single one of those state statutes that I've seen comes even close to being Constitutional.
Even the dipshit Arizona governor wouldn't sign the bill in her state into law:
http://blogs.ajc.com/cynthia-tucker/2011/04/19/arizona-birther-bill-too-dumb-even-for-brewer/?cxntfid=blogs_cynthia_tucker
The governor of Hawaii thought he'd be doing a favor to Obama - he knew him as a child. So he took the "time and effort" to make a couple of phone calls. Big deal.
What are your concerns about what "might" be on the birth certificate? That he's a space alien?
The "transparency" argument strikes me as ridiculous. If next week the nuts are demanding that Obama provide a plaster-cast of his unit will you and Horseleech start saying "maybe he's got something he doesn't want us to see" and "he's spent considerable time and money trying to avoid a plaster-cast"?
What's the difference?
And claiming that lawyers defending his eligibility in court constitutes some sort of nefarious "effort" on his part is also pure comedy. The existence of the newspaper announcements should be enough to prove that documents and facts mean exactly nothing in this "debate".
"What might he be hiding? He could end this tomorrow!". Please be serious.
I also don't see any reason why he'd want this issue to go away. It clearly divides the Republican party in a strategic way, and the people who buy into this issue are almost certainly not voting for Obama anyway. I genuinely don't see how these flimsy insinuations swing a single vote to the R's.
Exactly. And who would the "original" be provided to for examination? If every last teabagger in the country got a chance to hold it, sniff it, lick it and run his or her naughty parts on it nothing would change. If anything it would give them MORE quibble ammunition. Can you imagine if there's a typo on it, or a crushed gnat? It would give them the fucking vapors.
Haha! Yes, I see that. However, the DOB states August 5, 1961, and the poaster clearly said that the document was for a person "born the day after Obama". Obama was born on August 4, 1961. Sabadabada was trying to call dude out on the carpet and failed, IMO. But, yeah, not that it matters. ;)
You may be right about the lack of BCs for people born before 1930, but Wikipedia (not the greatest source, I know) says 1900. But that's not the point. I am unaware of any President in US history whose citizenship status has ever been questioned, particularly after they have already been elected. That, to me, means that Obama is being held to a standard that no other President has.
However, your other claim, I have to respectfully disagree with. "Some" is not equal to "Considerable", IMO, particularly when allegations of millions of dollars are being tossed around. Unless you can point to a dollar figure, and so long as the description of the amount of money spent remains "some", I stand by what I said.
Again... you are incorrect sir....the initial poster said the document was "Issued" in 1961 and it clearly wasn't.
Not that it matters....but that is the fact.
If the logic is that not producing whatever the hell document that the childhood friend Governor was doing a favor and releasing is to divide the Republican Party and that it's a plan to help in Obama's re-election....and it works....then I'm all for it.
Haha! Ok, I stand corrected. I'm not above admitting when I'm wrong. Thanks.