Monday, August 9, 2010 79 Comments

Open thread for all birthers

A fin or two has broken the surface. But I am still very busy. I have a very hard deadline somewhere in the middle of September.

So it occurs to me that UR readers might enjoy discussing that great chestnut of our age - B.H. Obama's life records. Dear UR reader, are you a birther, or an anti-birther?

If you are a birther (ie, you believe USG should release B.H. Obama's vital records, including original birth documents, college transcripts, medical files, Man's Country gift certificates, etc, etc, to the public for historical study), what do you feel the historical meaning of this debate is? Can you think of any parallels in the past?

If you are an anti-birther, I refer you to the official statement of Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health. According to USA Today, Dr. Fukino claims to have "seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."

Of course, anyone can claim to have seen anything. A lot of people claim to have seen Bigfoot. Am I a Bigfoot believer? I would not be surprised to learn that Bigfoot exists, or that he doesn't. I can say much the same for a 1961 B.H. Obama birth document with nothing to hide.

Bigfoot is a puzzling riddle. But no painstaking detective work is needed in the case of B.H. Obama - philosophy will suffice. Deductively, we can assert that either Dr. Fukino is lying, or she is telling the truth. If she is lying, or even trying to mislead (note how carefully parsed her syntax seems), the birther case is proven by definition. Therefore, let's assume she is both honest and sincere.

If Dr. Fukino is honest and sincere, she has seen a 1961 B.H. Obama birth document. (With or without something to hide.) Therefore, B.H. Obama and his associates are actively withholding this historical document (which should not be confused with a database printout on fancy paper) from the public in the face of substantial public interest. Remember, this is a best-case scenario.

Therefore, we can reframe the question of "birther" versus "anti-birther" into a less loaded and more symmetrical structure. You are a "sealer" if you think B.H. Obama's life records should remain sealed, and an "opener" if you think they should be opened.

As a sealer, you can reasonably be expected to answer three questions. First: why do you think B.H. Obama is withholding his birth documents and other vital records? Second: why do you feel these records should remain sealed? Third: if B.H. Obama's records should remain sealed now, at what point should they become accessible to historians? The end of his term? The end of his political career? The end of his life, plus 100 years? The end of the Solar System?

The problem, for the student of history, is that the identity of B.H. Obama (unlike the existence of Bigfoot) is an important historical question. Without access to B.H. Obama's sealed life records, no historian can write a history of 2008-10 which is both definitive and true.

When these records are released, assuming they are ever released, they will reveal one of two realities. Either (a) B.H. Obama had nothing to hide; or (b) B.H. Obama had something to hide. Beware the historian who writes the definitive true history of one of these realities, then finds out he lives in the other.

79 Comments:

Blogger wtanksley said...

OR, Obama has something to _gain_, without necessarily having something to hide, by drawing off opposition energy on a case that most Americans see as crazy.

By making his most committed opposition look crazy, he gains something and loses nothing.

So why would he want to release something he's not under any obligation to release anyhow?

As long as there's no person or institution responsible for checking these things (IMO a huge oversight!), and as long as "birthers" look bad (which is forever), Obama would be a fool to release the documents.

August 9, 2010 at 11:27 AM  
Anonymous EoT said...

Good point wtanksley, I always wondered why B.O. didn't just show his birth certificate and get it over with.

August 9, 2010 at 12:00 PM  
Blogger cata said...

I oppose any further discovery or investigation of the records because I believe the request is totally disingenuous. The purported rationale is to find out if Obama is a U.S. citizen, and I think that the evidence already supplied (newspaper notice, certification of live birth, doctor testimony) is more than sufficient to establish that he's almost certainly a citizen.

The continued demand for these records is just a reflection of the most paranoid segment of society cooking up the most accessible paranoid theory about Obama. If more evidence is supplied, then it will just be found lacking somehow (similar to the initial claims that the certification was a forgery.)

I don't think that it's possible possible to appease "birthers" to the point where they will say, OK, Obama is a legitimate president who was elected in a lawful election. As such, I think that treating the whole thing as a real investigation is just feeding trolls and distracting from actual policy debates. If there were some substantial reason these records were supposed to be interesting, I might say, reveal them anyway, but I haven't heard one.

August 9, 2010 at 12:09 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

By releasing the birth certificate, he'd be acknowledging the question as a legitimate one. Even if he turns out to get the correct answer, entertaining the question makes him look less regal.

As long as he has nothing to lose by inaction, inaction is his most rational strategy.

He could even be using it as a sort of attempt at political judo, to time the release of his documents so as to make his opponents look stupid.

And considering the core facts on the ground (1. He's in office. 2. Short of a civil war or an assassin, nothing's going to get him back out of that office until at least January of 2013, whether he was born in America or not.) "stupid" would, as a term for the "birthers" at this point, be plausibly accurate, if perhaps unduly rude.

Compared to the list of shameful things he's _proud_ of, the question of where he was on the planet at the moment he popped out of his mother's body almost 50 years ago is...rather moot, I'd think.

August 9, 2010 at 12:18 PM  
Anonymous Leonard said...

I agree with wtanksley. Let me also plug what Matt said.

Even if, in fact, there is no underlying paper record, what effect would that really have? Hawaii would just say they somehow lost it. The official Hawaiian electronic record exists, and would stand. Maybe some judge would have to judge the case, but there is no way a guy like Obama who looks, walks, thinks, and talks pure American (albeit progressive-American), will be declared a non-American. And that goes double after serving this long as President.

August 9, 2010 at 12:26 PM  
Blogger cata said...

(Sorry, my previous comment meant "to establish that he was born in the U.S.," not "to establish that he is a U.S. citizen." Just to head off any correction.)

August 9, 2010 at 12:32 PM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

I am a meta-birther, a term I coined less than five minutes ago, but a position I firmed up back during the election: I believe that Obama almost certainly has nothing to hide but is deliberately withholding the records to distract the opposition and get them stuck on an issue that is easy to make them look like nutjobs about. The precedent would be Kerry's service records.

I suppose I'm an opener, but only because my anarchist streak says that government officials don't have a right to privacy. Formalism says that if Obama can get elected and stay in office without ever showing anyone his birth certificate, he deserves to do so, doesn't it?

August 9, 2010 at 1:26 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

The exact same argument can be made for releasing the footage, from dozens of separate surveillance cameras, of flight 77 impacting the pentagon. 9 years on, no videos.

August 9, 2010 at 2:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The exact same argument can be made for releasing the footage, from dozens of separate surveillance cameras, of flight 77 impacting the pentagon. 9 years on, no videos."

And in that case, a lot of people, all of whom I trust more than Dr. Fukino, actually saw it happen.

August 9, 2010 at 8:31 PM  
Blogger TGGP said...

"Deductively, we can assert that either Dr. Fukino is lying, or she is telling the truth"
Elizabeth Loftus disagrees. Yet again, philosophy fails to contribute.

I suppose I'm an "opener" in that I don't see any reason why not to (information wants to be free!), but I'm an "anti-birther" in that I think the whole thing is retarded and exactly what Obama wants to distract his detractors from WHAT HE'S ACTUALLY DOING IN OFFICE. Of course, nobody in the White House is aware of U.R, but I find this oddly reminescent of a previous incident which led Mencius down the rabbit hole for a short time.

There are apparently also an offshoot of "birthers" who call themselves "dualers" and claim Obama is disqualified by dual citizenship with Britain. One of them argued that Chester A. Arthur was similarly disqualified by his Canadian father, but picked judges who would create precedent in a different immigration case to legitimize him (before any controversy had actually arisen).

August 9, 2010 at 9:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the whole thing is retarded and exactly what Obama wants to distract his detractors from WHAT HE'S ACTUALLY DOING IN OFFICE.

Meh. Anyone who thinks there's anything behind the birth certificate issue both knows, and cares, about what he's actually doing in office. They are more than capable of detesting him for more than one reason at a time.

August 9, 2010 at 9:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dude his birth was reported in the newspapers at the time. GTFO with the birther crap. And yes I oppose Obamunism. You lose on the facts. 'tards the lot of you.

August 9, 2010 at 10:02 PM  
Anonymous Stirner said...

I completely agree with the "meta-birther" perspective. The birther controversy was likely cooked up by Axelrod as a brilliant means to discredit Obama critics.

Ask about his Columbia grades? What are you a birther?

Look into whether William Ayers was the ghostwriter for Dreams from My Father? Birther!

Obama seems to have massive amounts of crooked and dirty dealings from his rise as a politician. The birther controversy as a blanket strategy to marginalize all Obama muckrakers has proven to be all too successful.

August 9, 2010 at 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MM, I am no Obamabot, but I am disappointed in you. A scholar of history like yourself should be aware of the origin of why the presidency is restricted to "natural-born citizens" - the founders' desire to limit 'foreign influence' in government - and how irrelevant the prospective candidate's birthplace is in actually limiting foreign influence in government. A rational, reasonable policy on presidential eligibility would be on their abilities and relevant experience, not on the stars under which they were born.

I care little about Obama's birthplace, and while I disapprove of his administration I find it distasteful to rely on a ridiculous, archaic triviality to oppose him. It makes a mockery of my real, legitimate concerns about his policies. Birthers do our cause no favors and I wish they would direct their energies to a more productive channel.

August 10, 2010 at 12:24 AM  
Anonymous Reinhart said...

I am an anti-birther; he's an American, born in Hawaii. But I do wonder if he has something to hide nonetheless, perhaps that his religion was listed as "Muslim" on the original certificate. It is verified, I believe, that he attended some madrassas during his youth at one point. He is clearly not a Muslim now, but he may have been in the past, and perhaps he feels that is too much of a liability, like he seems to feel that seeming too black is too much of a liability.

August 10, 2010 at 2:08 AM  
Anonymous David said...

I have a thread on "Barry Soetoro" on my site which attracts birthers by the thousands, just a few of gems from the last two days -

http://www.indonesiamatters.com/2952/barry-soetoro/cp-18/

Barrack Obama is also Hebrew for ‘Fall like Lightning from Great Heights’ which is how Jesus desribed Lucifer.

______________________

How can this guy control and manipulate Congress and all these Goons in his administration, plus this whole country? Not only is he not quaified to be President. He is not even a citizen. Outside of the bailouts this is the bigest fraud in History!

______________________

This is a direct attack on our Constitution, just like everything has been from day one of our Independence, but especially since 911.

911 was an obvious Inside Job and they wanted us to know.

VERBALMILITIA
marc27


______________________

barrack obama is a plant by the globalist to facilitate there end game. whether he is or isnt a citizen is irrelevant at this point. while you people worry about country of origin, this puppet is letting his people purposely collapse the economic structure of this country, posoin our food and water, and take away the grass roots way of life that keeps this country growing strong.

______________________

this f*cking bastard obama makes me sick! i'd believe that the american n*ggers feel that their race is not so bad at all that they chose obama to be their president and guess what? this f#cking n*gger muslim obama sure is defending the terrorist, rapist, killer muslims from the beginning and will make the US filthy with his pigheaded brain! if i could make this bastard out from the presidency, i would give all i've got!

____________

http://www.indonesiamatters.com/2952/barry-soetoro/cp-18/

August 10, 2010 at 6:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i'm with reinhart. i believe one of the reasons he might still be interested in hiding that birth certificate it is because of the religion part in it. i'm guessing, as many are, he was registered as a muslim d00d.

but, apart of the birth certificate thing, i'm more interested in how he entered in pakistan when no american citzens were allowed. and even more interested in the guys who funded his harvard education. that kind of stuff.

August 10, 2010 at 8:30 AM  
Blogger baduin said...

The question is simple: Who rules USA? The Elite, or the Cattle? If the Cattle, it must see the evidence before taking decision. If Elite, the Cattle must simply trust its better.

And when we know the correct question, the anwer is obvious.

August 10, 2010 at 8:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WRT how Obama entered Pakistan, he simply got a visa and went there. In fact, he could have gone there without a visa and got one at the Karachi airport. I know this from personal experience, having gotten a visa in the Karachi airport at about the same time Obama travelled to Pahk-i-stahn.

The claim that Americans could not travel to Pakistan in 1981 is patently ridiculous ... even more ridiculous than birther claims.

wtankley has it right: Team Obama knows that sane people find their policies maddening. Their seemingly inexplicible withholding of the BC and other mundane documents has obviously been successful in pushing some of their opponents over the edge.

Of course, such documents might reveal other information regarding religion or academic performance that would be embarrassing. Thus, Obama would only stand to lose by releasing documents and gains by withholding them.

August 10, 2010 at 10:16 AM  
Blogger elladeon said...

The problem with the "it's a scheme to make the opposition look crazy" is that 58% of people believe that he wasn't born in the US. So, um, mission accomplished?

The other problem is that my aunts were both born in Germany. They were born in German hospitals. (Because my grandparents were US Army, there's no question of their citizenship.)

However, both of my aunts had birth announcements in the Bradley, Oklahoma, newspaper and both of them have Oklahoma state-issued certificates of live birth.

Because, see, my great-grandparents were in Bradley and ran a notice. My grandparents moved back to the US and got my aunts local BOC. The reason is that anyone can get those things simply by being residents of a state.

There have been Rathergate-style arguments that B.H. Obama's short form was lightly doctored so that the place of birth shows Honolulu, and everything else could be legit.

I think Obama is a liar. As in, his legal name through college was Barry Soetoro. If he lies about his name, why wouldn't he lie about something else? Who his father is, where he was born, whatever. He's a liar.

August 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM  
Blogger elladeon said...

I am a birther to a degree. Mainly, I assume Obama is lying about something that all those records would show.

(BTW, US citizens may have been able to travel to Pakistan in 1981, but they didn't do it with Indonesian passports.)

August 10, 2010 at 10:51 AM  
Blogger Anthony said...

I believe, based on the evidence so far, that Obama was born in Hawaii, and is therefore a natural-born citizen. I also believe that any state election official had the right to request examination of the original birth certificate to verify that Obama is a natural-born citizen before allowing him to appear on the ballot.

August 10, 2010 at 12:05 PM  
Blogger Anthony said...

Unrelatedly, this week's Economist brings us two articles on a case of good government becoming undemocratic, and catching flak for doing so:

Efficiency versus freedom
President Paul Kagame under scrutiny

Care to comment?

August 10, 2010 at 12:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"OR, Obama has something to _gain_, without necessarily having something to hide, by drawing off opposition energy on a case that most Americans see as crazy.

By making his most committed opposition look crazy, he gains something and loses nothing.
So why would he want to release something he's not under any obligation to release anyhow?

As long as there's no person or institution responsible for checking these things (IMO a huge oversight!), and as long as "birthers" look bad (which is forever), Obama would be a fool to release the documents."

Such antilogic is easily defeated. It's a simple matter of chicken and egg. Which came first, the secreting away of his birth documents, or the birthers? Since the obvious answer is A, they couldn't have been hid in order to make birthers look crazy, since birthers didn't exist at that time. Simple as.

Or are you suggesting Obama predicted the rise of the birthers? That would be a neat trick, predicting the future.

August 10, 2010 at 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Rob S. said...

Right... no aspect of the future can possibly be predicted, even probabilistically, in any way.

August 10, 2010 at 4:57 PM  
Anonymous Stirner said...

David Axelrod is the king of creating "Astroturfed" public support/outrage.

He doesn't have to predict that the birthers are going to emerge, he just has to get the ball rolling.

This kind of thing is his specialty, only his typical MO is to gin up a bogus groundswell of public support for a utility rate increase, or the siting of some new facility.

It would be a stretch to think most other campaign operatives could pull off such an operation, but fueling the creation of a "birthers" type movement is exactly the sort of thing Axelrod did while he was in the private sector.

August 10, 2010 at 5:00 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

"The exact same argument can be made for releasing the footage, from dozens of separate surveillance cameras, of flight 77 impacting the pentagon. 9 years on, no videos."

And in that case, a lot of people, all of whom I trust more than Dr. Fukino, actually saw it happen.

That's all well and good, but has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. This is a question of LOGIC. The same logic mencius employed in his argument can be applied to the unreleased footage. Interjecting press-reported hearsay claims of "witnesses" has no bearing on the logic of the statements in question. Hundreds of people may claim to know the place of Obama's birth; this would not be a factor in the logical statement made by mencius.

Of course, there are also eyewitnesses who saw military jets, cruise missiles, and jetliners on alternate trajectories of those claimed by the government regarding 77 and the pentagon. Eyewitness claims do not prove or disprove, or negate the logic involved in arguing that this footage, or, BO's birth cert, should be released.

August 10, 2010 at 6:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interjecting press-reported hearsay claims of "witnesses" has no bearing on the logic of the statements in question.

The number and quality of witnesses absolutely bears on the credibility of the statements in question. As a matter of LOGIC we should attach more weight to a larger number of credible witnesses than to a smaller number of not-credible witnesses.

August 10, 2010 at 7:34 PM  
Anonymous Steve Johnson said...

logicus:

"That's all well and good, but has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. This is a question of LOGIC. The same logic mencius employed in his argument can be applied to the unreleased footage. Interjecting press-reported hearsay claims of "witnesses" has no bearing on the logic of the statements in question. Hundreds of people may claim to know the place of Obama's birth; this would not be a factor in the logical statement made by mencius. "

Here's the difference:

Obama has not released his birth certificate (or maybe he has) because it either (a) shows something he doesn't want public because it's politically damaging or (b) disqualifies him from the office of the president or (c) it makes his most strident opponents look nuts in the eyes of the undecided.

Now, the plane hitting the Pentagon:

We already know that 2 planes hit the WTC. There are thousands of eye witnesses (including me). We know that there were civilians on the planes (funerals and such). While this conspiracy to hijack 2 planes and crash them into buildings was going on, something blew a giant hole in the side of the Pentagon.

What's the logical inference here? Muslims hijacked 2 planes and Delta force hijacked a 3rd (because the knew what was happening in advance and they're suicidal?) Delta operators hijacked all three? Someone took the opportunity granted by the WTC event to get rid of the excess dynamite being stored near the outer wall of the Pentagon?

Obama wanted to be President: that's enough motive to hide evidence of the fact that he's not qualified.

Knowing that there were 2 planes crashed into buildings, there's absolutely no reason to doubt that a third was also crashed into another building even without seeing footage.

August 10, 2010 at 11:56 PM  
Blogger RJ Moore II said...

You should write something about the crazy people, like www.erichufschmid.net . Those guys are beyond Alex Jones.

August 11, 2010 at 10:20 AM  
Blogger misha trotsky said...

I found an authentic Kenya BC (Obama's?).

Hope this helps.

August 11, 2010 at 1:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Knowing that there were 2 planes crashed into buildings, there's absolutely no reason to doubt that a third was also crashed into another building even without seeing footage.

And there's absolutely no reason to doubt that a plane didn't crash into WTC Building 7 which collapsed since, um, we saw the footage and no plane crashed into WTC Building 7.

August 11, 2010 at 3:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BHO, Born British no matter how you slice it.
God Save the Queen.

Pink Lion

August 11, 2010 at 4:31 PM  
Anonymous Rum said...

If Obamas birthcertificate had anything on it which would have kept him from running for President the Clintons would surely have known about it and used it - though perhaps without their fingerprints on the knife.
I have heard on good authority that the B.C. in Hawaii represents young Barack as "White" in the box for race. It sounds highly plausible and would explain the obvious desire of his campaign to keep it out of sight.

August 11, 2010 at 6:31 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

I wanna see a fuckin video of a 757 impacting the pentagon. Until I see such a video, and many must exist, I remain skeptical and reserve judgment. Twist the facts and logic as you may, its a simple fact that there should be plenty of such footage available to the public...

August 11, 2010 at 7:30 PM  
Anonymous Rum said...

Logicus
The surveliance systems around the Pentagon were NOT set up and designed to provide full visceral, gina-tingling satisfaction for those wanting final, perfect truth of what happened. They were like one frame per second. Bezerker driven 737s easily can travel thru 10 empty frames before that specified second is expired. Your pussy camera might see 2 of them.
You bore even me, who is a hard core believer in right and truth. And behind me are the hordes of blood-crazed white nationalists who have no sense of porportion

August 11, 2010 at 8:01 PM  
Blogger xlbrl said...

The most effective place to hide a deception is within another deception. Ignore the head fake that he might not be a natural born American citizen and then ask what could be so troubling as to hide the facts of his birth: any father can be created for a birth certificate, but any mother cannot.
Stanley Ann's lack of devotion to Obama may not reflect on her so badly if that is the case, or his to her for that matter. Happy families are not all alike; communist families are unhappy in arranged ways.

August 11, 2010 at 10:16 PM  
Anonymous Steve Johnson said...

9 years after 9/11 a plane crashed into the Hudson River in NYC.

9 years of increasing ubiquity of video cameras in the hands of the public as well as on stationary installs and what do we see? Basically nothing conclusive. A sort of grainy streak in the distance followed by a splash. Probably anyone competent with video editing could whip it up in a few minutes.

Conclusions? A plane still crashed into the Hudson River.

Other conclusions? No video footage that is likely to exist will make you happy. Hint - no one told the Pentagon that a plane was going to strike that exact spot so go set up the high speed cameras. Any footage that realistically could have existed would be easily duplicated by fake footage.

The simple fact is that we know that people hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings. Concluding that a giant hole in another likely target on the same day wasn't done by a plane crash is insane.

Re: the 7 WTC guy. The reason you're nuts is because you believe that someone planted explosives in buildings (that had already been the target of bomb plots) and - instead of simply detonating the bombs (in the buildings that had already been bombed in the past) - then crashed planes into nearby buildings, which may or may not also have have bombs planted in them. That plan is so insane that the only people who would plan a stunt like that are the people who run the evil corporations in video games.

August 12, 2010 at 5:29 AM  
Anonymous Leonard said...

Logicus, you can see quite a bit of eyewitness testimony of the Pentagon strike on youtube. All the people who saw it say it was an airplane. These are most straight-arrow military men, but many other kinds as well. Good witnesses. Many of those testimonials were recorded on the same day, or a day or two later.

August 12, 2010 at 6:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Twist the facts and logic as you may"

Um, given that we have credible evidence, including witnesses, that the plane was hijacked, and credible witnesses to the plane hitting the building, and credible physical evidence of aircraft wreckage in/near the building, it is the person who insists the aircraft did NOT hit the building who is twisting facts and logic.

August 12, 2010 at 9:02 AM  
Anonymous dearieme said...

I think you chaps are all missing the point. Suppose that the full form birth certificate contains something that O would find embarrassing. The question isn't "What is that something?" The question is "Who knows what that something is?" In other words, who has got O by the goolies?

August 12, 2010 at 2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: the 7 WTC guy.

http://www.infowars.com/bombshell-silverstein-wanted-to-demolish-building-7-on-911/

From a Fox News article in April 2010 by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro that has since been taken down:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/04/21/jeffrey-scott-shapiro-jesse-venture-book-lies-truthers-ground-zero-sept-shame/

“Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.”

“A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy,” writes Shapiro.

August 12, 2010 at 2:10 PM  
Anonymous dearieme said...

You blokes may all have known, but I've just learned from Wikipedia that Hawaii has form on faking birth records: "In March 1904, he obtained a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,[9] issued by the Territory of Hawaii, stating he was born on November 24, 1870 in Kula, Maui.[10]". That was about Sun Yat-sen, the indubitably China-born Sun Yat-sen, who is a rather more considerable historical figure than O.

August 12, 2010 at 2:18 PM  
Anonymous Chris said...

If you're stupid enough to believe in God, then why couldn't you be stupid enough to believe in the birther conspiracy?

August 12, 2010 at 7:07 PM  
Anonymous Birth First! said...

For reasons rooted in racism, paranoia and plantation paternalism, The Advertiser opposed statehood until it was inevitable. For much of its first 100 years in business, the newspaper was elitist, often unreliable, a mouthpiece loyal only to the haole business interests who were its readers and advertisers. Its slanted coverage of the Massie case in the 1930s, its dishonest accounts of strikes and labor issues, and its partnership with the government to "expose" communists in the 1940s and '50s are all enough to make any 21st-century journalist cringe.

August 12, 2010 at 8:32 PM  
Anonymous Friends of the Birth said...

The time has come when the attempt shall again be made, when the reading, thinking, laboring portion of the community, who are the life and soul of the nation, shall have an organ adapted to their necessities, breathing their thoughts, carrying the spirit of enterprise to every portion of the kingdom and breaking through the crust of indolence and lethargy which is fast burying this nation and must soon seal its fate, like the mighty stream of lava rolling down the sides of Mauna Loa, which turns the hitherto impenetrable forest into a dreary waste.

August 12, 2010 at 8:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl

Mencius was being opaque in his post, but now I see that the issue revolves around the distinction between a "Certification of Live Birth" (a database printout which Obama has posted) and a "Certificate of Live Birth" (the original paper). Evidently some Hawaiian programs (like the link above) make a point of distinguishing the two.

August 13, 2010 at 12:59 AM  
Anonymous rosettasister said...

Recent polling suggests that many, if not most, Americans believe Obama has something to hide.

A certain portion of those who believe Obama has something to hide are not sure if this “something” would make him ineligible.

I believe Obama has something to hide. And this lack of openness makes me distrustful of him.

So we’re back to the trust deficit.

I should qualify that. If Obama had governed more like Bill Clinton did, this lack of openness wouldn’t have bothered me as much as it does.

August 13, 2010 at 10:49 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

"Recent polling suggests that many, if not most, Americans believe Obama has something to hide."

...and in other news, an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that water is wet.

Of course he's got something to hide. He's a politician. And a Chicago politician at that. The only Chicago politicians with nothing to hide are the ones who are already wearing prison jumpsuits...and I wouldn't be sure that even THEY haven't managed to keep a few things secret.

But there's pretty much no way that what's on his birth certificate could be as harmful to his credibility as obsession with his birth certificate is to the credibility of his opponents.

August 13, 2010 at 10:55 AM  
Anonymous elladeon said...

Matt, 58% percent of people don't think he was born in this country. Regardless of whether he actually was, it is impossible that believing or talking about something that 58% of people thing is true is not going to seriously damage anyone's credibility.

August 13, 2010 at 3:00 PM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

Chris,

I assume you're trolling, but since neither Aquinas, Dante, nor Goethe were dolts, I don't think your analogy holds water.

August 13, 2010 at 4:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is an overwhelming misconception out there that has completely muddied the waters: "natural born citizen" has nothing to do with whether you were born inside the territory of the USA, or not. It has to do with who your parents are. If you are born of parents who are citizens of the USA, you are a "naturally born" citizen even if you were born on the Moon.

The problem is that there have been several federal laws passed over the last two centuries attempting to define the exact circumstances that makes one a natural born citizen when circumstances are ambiguous (born outside the USA, born of only one citizen parent, disputed parentage, etc), and the laws don't all harmonize, and they haven't been tested in court, so this would be a huge mess for the courts to straighten out if a case of disputed "natural born citizen" status for a President or presidential candidate ever made it to court.

Naturally the courts don't want to touch this. Even if you could prove Obama was born in Kenya, that would not be the end of the matter. He still has an American mother, and depending on the laws Obama may or may not still be a "natural born citizen" depending on a number of residency and other factors which the courts would have to decide on. No wonder the Establishment would prefer to see this issue go away: taking the assurances/paperwork from Hawaii at face value makes a lot of really messy stuff go away.

Should the laws be clearer? Should presidential candidates be properly vetted long before the political campaigns begin? Sure. And there should be lots of other reforms too, such as electoral law reform to prevent things like the "hanging chad" election of 2000, but this won't happen. Our elites like legal ambiguity and confusion: it gives them more room for maneuver, the better to fool and manipulate us peons.

Do I think Obama is an "illegitimate" president due to his birth? The entire system of government in the USA is so far gone into a state of decay that the question is meaningless. The government won't enforce its own laws in regards to border security or illegal aliens, and prevents states from enforcing these same laws. We are in a state of "Anarcho-tyrancy" where the State perversely tyrannizes its citizens while encouraging a state of anarchy in regards to the foundation laws of its own security. Since it does not respect its own laws, no one else is obligated to respect these laws either, so the question of "legitimacy" is moot: even if Obama were proved to be Constitutionally a non-legitimate president, the courts would simply overrule, same as they do with any other law that our lords and masters disagree with.

When the very roots of the State are rotten, what is the use of quibbling over Constitutional obscurities? "Who? Whom?" is all that counts.

August 13, 2010 at 9:58 PM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

I think MM's hope is that posts like these will encourage the emperor has no clothes feeling.

But they won't. Entire fields of study are now dedicated to clothing naked emperors with words and horseshit.

I have little faith that a solution will come from the people.

Perhaps, however, MM just posts these to find out who the crazies are.

August 13, 2010 at 10:30 PM  
Blogger nazgulnarsil said...

they can't let out that Obama's conception was really immaculate.

August 13, 2010 at 11:58 PM  
Anonymous OneSTDV said...

OT @ Mencius:

Blogroll exchange?

August 14, 2010 at 1:44 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

Its not that interesting a topic because there isn't enough to speculate about and overgeneralize. The Ayers-writing-Dreams thing is a bit more interesting, though just a bit. What he did in his Columbia years is also a bit more interesting.

August 14, 2010 at 6:16 AM  
OpenID purpleslog said...

The Six Million Dollar Man / Bionic Women showed the world that Bigfoot was really a robot.

Are you suggesting Obama is a robot?
Hmm...robots do not have birth certificates...

August 14, 2010 at 7:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm a Birther.

Nothing personal, Mr, Obama, but the burden is upon you to prove that you are natural-born citizen and therefore Constitutionally qualified to hold the Office of POTUS.

FWIW, I think that he IS a natural born American citizen, (although not necessarily of Hawaii).

I speculate thet the reason he is keeping his papers under wraps is that in the box marked "Father", it reads either "Unknown" or something less exotic than "Barack Obama Sr."

Going through life as "Barack Hussein Obama Jr.", with an absent Kenyan father certainly would imbue a little more cachet than drudging through life as "Leroy Washington Jr.", would it not?

Bilgeman

August 14, 2010 at 12:49 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

lol... anyone who believes a plane can hit the pentagon more than an hr after 2 planes hit the wtc is a fuckin idiot. anyone who thinks the pentagon isn't under constant massive surveillance is an idiot. anyone who thinks flight 77 flown by an incompetent pilot could have maneuvered a 757 along the course taken by flight 77 is a moron. anyone who thinks bldg 7 was not demolished is an idiot. anyone who thinks 2 crashed planes caused large amounts of molten iron, and chemical residue of nanothermite throughout the wtc dust, is an idiot.

August 14, 2010 at 2:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

lol... anyone who believes a plane can hit the pentagon more than an hr after 2 planes hit the wtc is a fuckin idiot. anyone who thinks the pentagon isn't under constant massive surveillance is an idiot. anyone who thinks flight 77 flown by an incompetent pilot could have maneuvered a 757 along the course taken by flight 77 is a moron. anyone who thinks bldg 7 was not demolished is an idiot. anyone who thinks 2 crashed planes caused large amounts of molten iron, and chemical residue of nanothermite throughout the wtc dust, is an idiot.

Check out Dimitri Khalezov's analysis of 9/11.

August 14, 2010 at 6:35 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

i've seen no evidence of this retarded nuclear detonation claim. it's utterly retarded.

patriotsquestion911.com

thousands of high status respectable experts and professionals sign petition and make statements on need for new 9/11 investigation.

ae911truth.org

1100+ architects and engineers claim demolition and demand new investigation.

journal for 9/11 studies, scholarly articles presenting the evidence against the official story.

google journal for 9/11 studies.

August 15, 2010 at 8:31 AM  
Anonymous logicus said...

Here are the facts of 9/11/01:

1. It took 9 months for George W. Bush to finally call for an investigation into 9/11/01, and only after extraordinary efforts by family members (such as “The Jersey Girls”) to persuade him.

2. Bush then chose Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 Commission, but Kissinger resigned after protests by 9/11 victims’ family members about his obvious conflicts of interest.

3. Though former Governor (Republican) Tom Kean then officially replaced Kissinger, Philip Zelikow, who was strongly connected to Bush, Karl Rove, and Condi Rice, actually guided the Commission’s direction.

4. Former Senator Max Cleland resigned from the 9/11 Commission, charging it with a “cover-up”.

5. The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton and Tom Kean, stated years later that they were lied to by the Pentagon.

For details of points 3, 4, and 5, see the following:

“The White House Has Played Cover-Up”– Former 9/11 Commission Member Max Cleland Blasts Bush http://www.democracynow.org/2004/3/23/the_white_house_has_played_cover

Louis Freeh Charges 9/11 Commission Cover-Up http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/11/17/122900.shtml

9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR200608...

9/11 panel distrusted Pentagon testimony http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/02/9-11panel.pentagon/index.html

New Book Alleges 9/11 Commissioner Philip Zelikow Minimized Scrutiny of Bush Admin Failure to Prevent al-Qaeda Attack http://www.democracynow.org/2008/2/5/new_book_alleges_9_11_commissioner

The 9/11 Commission Doesn’t Believe It: Why Do You?
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/12/they-dont-believe-it-why-do...

6. The Taliban who ruled Afghanistan on 9/11/01 offered to give up Osama bin Laden to a third party nation if Bush provided proof that bin Laden was behind the 9/11 terrorism. Bush refused. To this day, the FBI does NOT list the 9/11/01 terrorism as one of bin Laden’s many crimes because the FBI does NOT have strong enough evidence that he was involved.

See http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm and Osama bin Laden, among the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives”: Why was he never indicted for his alleged role in 9/11? http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3246

7. World Trade Center Building 7, which was NOT hit by an airplane, collapsed into its own footprint at free fall speed (finally acknowledged by NIST).

See Left-Leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do You Really Believe in Miracles?

8. Evidence of nanothermite, an explosive used in controlled demolition, was discovered in WTC dust.

See Video: Danish Scientist Neils Harrit On TV: Nano-Thermite Behind Collapse of WTC Buildings On 9/11, Not Planes – 6th April 2009 http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/04/14/video-danish-scientist-neils-...

August 15, 2010 at 9:01 AM  
Anonymous logicus said...

9. The following credible, respected progressives (among others) have doubted the “official conspiracy theory” contained in the 9/11 Commission Report:

Howard Zinn, in a blurb for 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out (edited by Prof. David Ray Griffin), stated:

“Official versions of historical events should always be questioned. This book, dealing with 9/11 and much more, does just that, and from various points of view.”

Mark Crispin Miller said, in 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out:

“For far too long, the very reasonable questions raised by 9/11 have been ignored and even ridiculed by America’s press and politicians, who treat the subject with the sort of willful blindness that suggests a wish not to find out unpleasant truths. We, the people, therefore owe the editors of this important new collection our warm thanks for their intelligent and unrelenting work.”

Ray McGovern, praising 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, said:

“It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: THAT THE 9/11 ATTACKS WERE THEMSELVES ORCHESTRATED BY THIS ADMINISTRATION PRECISELY SO THEY COULD BE THUS EXPLOITED [emphasis mine]. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole ‘war on terror’ was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people-indeed the people of the world as a whole-with an issue second to none in importance and urgency.”

Paul Craig Roberts, a conservative and a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury during the Reagan administration, states about David Ray Griffin’s book Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory, that:

“This new book destroys the credibility of the NIST and Popular Mechanics reports and annihilates his critics.”

Jack Keller, emeritus professor of engineering at Utah State University and member of the National Academy of Engineering, said this about the book 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press by Prof. David Ray Griffin:

“This book describes in very straightforward and non-technical terms some major inconsistencies to the government’s official story about the events on September 11, 2001. It points out many attempts in the 9/11 Commission’s report to cover-up evidence… As an engineer, I am especially troubled by the cover-up of evidence relevant in the collapse of the three major World Trade Center buildings. I hope that Congress and the public will heed this call for a full and impartial investigation to determine what really did happen on that fateful day.”

10. As of this writing, 1227 architectural and engineering professionals and 8853 other supporters, including Architectural & Engineering students, have signed the petition demanding Congress conduct a truly independent investigation of 9/11/01.

See http://www.ae911truth.org/

11. The nine-year war on Afghanistan is now opposed by a growing majority of Americans, especially since the recent Wikileaks’ release of 92,000 documents showing all the failures in that war, despite President Obama, Congress, and the corpstream media. Because the 9/11/01 terrorism was the initial justification for this illegal, endless, unwinnable, budget-draining war, it is vital, more than ever, to finally have a true investigation of that day. All opponents of the Af/Pak quagmire should be demanding a new, thorough, independent investigation of the alleged pretext of that quagmire.

August 15, 2010 at 9:02 AM  
Anonymous logicus said...

Volume 25 - May 2009

Controlled Demolition at the WTC: An Historical Examination of the Case
Dr. Frank Legge

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/LeggeCDatWTC.pdf

August 15, 2010 at 9:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are a fucking idiot. I saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Take your "Truther" facts, fold them until they're all corners, and pound them up your ass.

August 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are a fucking idiot. I saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Take your "Truther" facts, fold them until they're all corners, and pound them up your ass.

Nobody really cares about the Pentagon.

WTC 7 was obviously a controlled demolition though.

August 15, 2010 at 7:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Nobody really cares about the Pentagon."

Moronicus, I mean, Logicus, obviously does since he poured scorn on the idea that a plane hit it.

Of course, he doesn't even know that his own credibility is utterly destroyed by, among other things, referring to Howard Zinn as "credible" and "respected". WTF does Howard Zinn know about building collapses? NOTHING. Zinn's opinion about it is worthless, not least because he is a Leftist imbecile.

August 15, 2010 at 9:51 PM  
Blogger elf2006real said...

Oh Moldbug...help me start the fire..

I can see it becoming a Holy Site of Islam. A place for Muslims from all over the world come (that's the Ground Zero contemplation Room - a room where you can contemplate ground zero). From the Rubble: A call from Ground Zero - a call to the faithful. Easily the Holiest site for Islam in all of the Western Hemisphere. Just as you would make the Haj to Mecca, if in the caliphate of Cordoba you would visit the Grand Mosque, if in the far East the Great Mosques of Tashkent, if they take back "Palestine" the Dome of the Rock, if visiting Turkey the Hagia Sophia.

Come and see the sight of our great victory over the Great Satan. Here in his heart Allah smote him. And now he is humbled before God.

And Islam.

August 16, 2010 at 1:28 PM  
Anonymous logicus said...

logicus never said a plane didn't hit the pentagon. merely that the numerous videos of attack on pentagon are being held in gov't custody for no apparent reason. anyone who doubts that there are dozens of clear videos of the pentagon being impacted are just clueless. whatever hit the pentagon was permitted to do so by cheney and norad, as testified to by treasury secretary norman mineta before the 9/11 commission. there is some reason the videos are being withheld. never said it wasn't flight 77. and the case for controlled dem of wtc 7 and also 1 & 2 is so airtight as to be beyond criticism. who cares if howard zinn isn't a building expert. 1200+ building professionals are already signed up at ae911truth. stop with the "no experts" nonsense. that may have flown 5 years ago but not anymore. get a new line.

August 16, 2010 at 2:34 PM  
Blogger TGGP said...

Zinn says the book criticizes the official version of "9/11 and much more", and from various perspectives. He doesn't actually say whether any of the criticism is accurate. So that makes for an awfully weak argument.

Also, Paul Craig Roberts went off the deep end a while back. Walter Block (by no means a mainstream figure, he wrote "Defending the Undefendable" and recently spent a few months battling academic diversicrats) demolished one of PCR's idiocies (unrelated to the current discussion) here.

August 16, 2010 at 10:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"logicus never said a plane didn't hit the pentagon."

At August 14, 2010 2:24 PM, you said, "lol... anyone who believes a plane can hit the pentagon more than an hr after 2 planes hit the wtc is a fuckin idiot. anyone who thinks the pentagon isn't under constant massive surveillance is an idiot. anyone who thinks flight 77 flown by an incompetent pilot could have maneuvered a 757 along the course taken by flight 77 is a moron."

So that was not you saying a plane didn't hit the Pentagon? Are you so busy spewing horseshit you can't even remember your own horseshit?

August 17, 2010 at 4:02 AM  
Anonymous logicus said...

i stand by the statement. obviously something hit the pentagon. whether a plane or something else, it was permitted to do so. it could not have happened otherwise. anyone who thinks a plane can fly cross country for over an hour after two planes have been crashed into the wtc, and fly into the pentagon without being shot down, is a fool. unless it is permitted.

August 17, 2010 at 4:35 PM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

nice to see grepping loons are alive and well…

August 17, 2010 at 7:46 PM  
Anonymous Pontius Pilot said...

Centuwion, do we have anyone of that name in the gawwison?

August 18, 2010 at 12:20 AM  
Blogger Albert E. said...

Bert says:

1. Does anyone else find it very strange that to this point there has not been EVER a mechanism to certify at state level when "filing papers" to run Pres that the person "filing papers" is eligible to run. Natural born and age both.

2. NOT just a citizen but a natural born citizen.

3. Goldwater and Romney both had questions about their natural born status and both produced the paperwork immediately without any quibbling or questioning the question.

4. This whole episode started WHEN A GADFLY QUESTIONED THE ELIGIBILITY OF MC CAIN TO RUN. And indeed there were questions about the eligibility of Mc Cain to run. Tribe said he "thought" Mc Cain was good to go!

5. There is NOT a "body" of case law exactly defining what is a natural born citizen is? How can that be?

6. You would think the whole matter would be a slam-dunk. And it is not only the birth cert. It is medical records, educational records, passports, etc. All of that too for some reason is OFF LIMITS? What is that. Post Watergate I thought all that stuff was more or less mandatory to make public.

7. NOT for O.

August 18, 2010 at 8:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"anyone who thinks a plane can fly cross country for over an hour after two planes have been crashed into the wtc, and fly into the pentagon without being shot down, is a fool."

Anyone who thinks the government can get off its ass in time to do anything effective before it hit the Pentagon is a fool.

August 18, 2010 at 11:47 PM  
Anonymous Zaphodora Beeblebrox said...

"Without access to B.H. Obama's sealed life records, no historian can write a history of 2008-10 which is both definitive and true."

History is not defined solely by facts; beliefs -- right or wrong, create an atmosphere, even if they don't create an actual circumstance, that historians must interpret.

To be honest I'm not very concerned over the whole debate; he's president now, it's over with.
But how is it "not a legitimate question," I'm not understanding? (I don't see it as politically valuable question, and it's pretty paranoid, but that is not the same thing......)

August 20, 2010 at 8:03 AM  
Anonymous Perry said...

The Obama birth newspaper announcement traces back to his GRANDparent's address.

Obama's parents could have been overseas while he was born. He didn' t live at that mysterious address, so the announcments really don't solve the problem of where it happened.

Also, Hawaii statutes allow for Obama having been born overseas and get an Hawaiian birth certificate. The database printout on fancy paper won't show that. The latest official Hawaiian computer printout proves almost NOTHING regarding why the original was issued or evidence supporting natural born citizenship. ONLY the original form inputted to create the computer output will show how the original Obama birth record was created, the dataset recorded, who caused it to be issued under what facts and circumstances.

August 30, 2010 at 2:20 PM  
Anonymous WiseCaveOwl said...

Zero was born in Coast Province Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya, on 4 August 1961, at 7:24 PM. As if it matters.

November 21, 2010 at 9:01 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home