"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Don Klipstein wrote:

Why should this matter? The courts and snopes.com accept that Obama
was born in Hawaii. There's even the birth announcement in a Hawaii
newspaper, published at a time when Obama was a newborn baby and not
having any political aspirations.

To re-enter this country, you have to prove you're a citizen.
To register to vote, you have to prove you're a citizen.
To get most government jobs, you have to prove you're a citizen.

But to get elected president?

You have to prove you're a citizen, and obviously Obama did. He also proved
it numerous other times. If the birth certificate is forged, a U.S. senator
and his presidential campaign have perpetrated a vast, long-term fraud. They
have done it with conspiring officials at the Hawaii Department of Health,
the Cook County (Ill.) Bureau of Vital Statistics, the Illinois Secretary of
State's office, the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the
Supreme Court of Illinois and many other government agencies. It's as
incredible a charge as those who believe 9/11 was an "inside job."

Yet many do believe because no amount of proof is enough for them, or
legitimate enough in their eyes to convince them that they are out of gas on
the issue. As with most "nutters" the more proof they are presented with,
the more conspiracy they see. So I think Obama's being quite wise to let
them fume, at least until 2012. Would you really want a president so weak
that he felt he had to give in to the demands of nutcakes? I don't.

It just seems odd.

Yes, the Birthers do seem like a very odd bunch and arguing with them is
like trying to throw a potato chip: No matter how hard you try, you just
aren't going to get very far. I've seen people claim he was born before
Hawaii became a state (not true) along with loads of other rubbish that
would bring a tear to the eye of any dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorist.
So far, no birthers have described what they believe is being hidden from
them in the magical document that's being denied their review. What do you
think is on the original that's not being divulged?

--
Bobby G.

Robert Green wrote:

Yes, the Birthers do seem like a very odd bunch and arguing with them
is like trying to throw a potato chip: No matter how hard you try,
you just aren't going to get very far. I've seen people claim he was
born before Hawaii became a state (not true) along with loads of
other rubbish that would bring a tear to the eye of any
dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorist. So far, no birthers have
described what they believe is being hidden from them in the magical
document that's being denied their review. What do you think is on
the original that's not being divulged?

I don't know what I don't know. If the birthers knew what they don't know,
they would know.

Me personally? I have no clue as to what the president is keeping
confidential, but I have two plausible theories.

* Obama has a predilection to keep all his personal stuff under wraps. He's
never released medical records, college transcripts, and so on. Staying as
private as possible is just his unique phobia. In large measure, I subscribe
to the same philosophy.

* There might be something on the birth record that could prove
embarrassing: "Race: White," Mother's Marital Status: Unmarried," "Father:
Unknown," "Additional treatment(s): Syphilis," or any number of
medically-pertinent factors. None of these have any effect on his
citizenship and none would be his fault - but they still might provide
tawdry grist to his enemies' mill.

Whether the public has a "right" to know is irrelevant; a significant
percentage "want" to know. In the absence of hard data, creative (possibly
demented) minds will invent something to fit the (few) known facts ("Obama
was a co-joined twin! His brother had to die in order to separate
them!...)."

In this latter case, Obama may feel the public kookiness is a price he has
to pay to protect his privacy. Or he may feel that the conjectures put forth
are not as bad as the reality.

Why do YOU think he's taking the Fifth on the birth certificate issue?

"HeyBub" wrote:

-snip-

Why do YOU think he's taking the Fifth on the birth certificate issue?


1. He isn't. He's shown the proof multiple times. [as have TPTB in
HI]
B. Why would he? The whack jobs are getting all the press by talking
about it & it will help Obama in the election by splitting the right
between the 'politically opposed' and the 'just plain crazy'.

Jim

Jim Elbrecht wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote:

-snip-

Why do YOU think he's taking the Fifth on the birth certificate
issue?


1. He isn't. He's shown the proof multiple times. [as have TPTB in
HI]

He hasn't shown the "long form." Until he does, there will be people
questioning the circumstances of his birth. Even if he does produce the long
form, the attending physician, three nurses, and a holy father, there will
still be those who have unanswerable questions. All he can do is reduce the
number who are unconvinced.

B. Why would he? The whack jobs are getting all the press by talking
about it & it will help Obama in the election by splitting the right
between the 'politically opposed' and the 'just plain crazy'.

Why would he?

A poll was taken just last week: "...in the USA TODAY poll, only 38% of
Americans say Obama definitely was born in the USA..." Less than two out of
five people are convinced he's a "natural born citizen."

That's why.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...ident-poll.htm

On 4/26/2011 8:00 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Robert Green wrote:

Yes, the Birthers do seem like a very odd bunch and arguing with them
is like trying to throw a potato chip: No matter how hard you try,
you just aren't going to get very far. I've seen people claim he was
born before Hawaii became a state (not true) along with loads of
other rubbish that would bring a tear to the eye of any
dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorist. So far, no birthers have
described what they believe is being hidden from them in the magical
document that's being denied their review. What do you think is on
the original that's not being divulged?

I don't know what I don't know. If the birthers knew what they don't know,
they would know.

Me personally? I have no clue as to what the president is keeping
confidential, but I have two plausible theories.

* Obama has a predilection to keep all his personal stuff under wraps. He's
never released medical records, college transcripts, and so on. Staying as
private as possible is just his unique phobia. In large measure, I subscribe
to the same philosophy.

* There might be something on the birth record that could prove
embarrassing: "Race: White," Mother's Marital Status: Unmarried," "Father:
Unknown," "Additional treatment(s): Syphilis," or any number of
medically-pertinent factors. None of these have any effect on his
citizenship and none would be his fault - but they still might provide
tawdry grist to his enemies' mill.

Whether the public has a "right" to know is irrelevant; a significant
percentage "want" to know. In the absence of hard data, creative (possibly
demented) minds will invent something to fit the (few) known facts ("Obama
was a co-joined twin! His brother had to die in order to separate
them!...)."

In this latter case, Obama may feel the public kookiness is a price he has
to pay to protect his privacy. Or he may feel that the conjectures put forth
are not as bad as the reality.

Why do YOU think he's taking the Fifth on the birth certificate issue?



Because absent any legal relevance, it's none of their damn business? It
ceased having any legal relevance when his candidacy was accepted and he
made it onto the ballot, and even more when he was elected and sworn in.

I always thought Bill Clinton should have taken a similar tactic- 'None
of your business- next question?' (Before he got before a grand jury, of
course.)

--
aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:

Why do YOU think he's taking the Fifth on the birth certificate
issue?

Because absent any legal relevance, it's none of their damn business?
It ceased having any legal relevance when his candidacy was accepted
and he made it onto the ballot, and even more when he was elected and
sworn in.

I agree with you but, unfortunately, it's not up to Obama (or anyone else)
to decide what's my business. That decision belongs to the me.


I always thought Bill Clinton should have taken a similar tactic-
'None of your business- next question?' (Before he got before a grand
jury, of course.)

Grand jury? President? You may have found the solution to the birther
business !