On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:54:16 -0700, Winston_Smith
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 02:59:12 +0000 (UTC),(Edward A. Falk) wrote:
Winston_Smith wrote:

I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I find it very
curious that he could release it an put and end to a lot of
speculation and debate.

Because he *did* release his birth certificate and the birthers just
started ranting about how they wanted to see the *other* birth certificate
too.

He released a modern computer printout saying there was a certificate
of some sort buried in the state archives. The modern computer
printout didn't give a clue what facts were or were not on the old
certificate. It didn't even specify what kind of a certificate it is.

And he released his passport and the birthers started ranting about
how that wasn't good enough either, and now they want to see his *other*
passport.

Again, shows new, hides old. Why?

Not to mention the college records and so on and so forth.

Which he has not yet released.

He's even had the Republican governor of Hawaii herself go public and
say that yes, she's seen the records and can attest that he was born
there and they're *still* not letting it go.

Why not just let us see what she supposedly saw? What's the problem?
The problem is a goodly number of ungovernable idiots that wouldn't
know or accept the truth if it kicked them square in the teeth.