Posted on 12/30/2010 9:24:48 AM PST by Kaslin
I believe that the president was born in Hawaii. But am I the only curious cat who thinks it's rather odd for that state's newly-elected governor, plus Chris Matthews of MSNBC, both liberal Democrats, to have just forced the "Birther" issue to rise again?
Am I the only curious cat in America who thinks it rather odd that the newly elected governor of Hawaii — a liberal Democrat — has just forced the “Birther” issue to rise again?
Not only has Hawaii’s governor-elect, Neil Abercrombie, just announced that he is on a mission to bury the “Birther” issue, but Chris “Obama-sends-a-tingle-up-my-leg” Matthews now wants to know why President Obama doesn’t release the darned document and put this relentlessly pursuing ghost to rest once and for all.
If Abercrombie and Matthews were utterly desperate Republican operatives, hog-tied to a sinking political ship, I might understand the newly reincarnated brouhaha. But both these men are as-liberal-as-liberal-gets Democrats. And Republicans, at this juncture, are anything but desperate. They are set to begin the 112th Congress with the clout of a mid-term election landslide not seen since 1938.
So, what on earth would motivate a governor-elect with more real problems than any sane man would want on his plate to go fiddling around in an issue which for all intents and purposes is as dead as a doornail?
It simply makes no sense in the real world, where real unemployment still hovers at double-digits, where the president is about to face a real hostile Congress, and in an atmosphere where the season’s holly- jolly spirit is about to melt faster than snow on the ground in Atlanta.
If you ask me, this folderol of reincarnating the “Birther” issue by two prominent liberal Democrats just smacks of orchestrated political psy-ops. Hoping to get a prominent and public rise out of Republicans and/or conservative pundits, these two utterly loyal-to-the-president guys — Abercrombie and Matthews — are simply creating a diversion in the hopes that their party can regain some of the traction it’s lost over the past 2 years.
Now, I’ve never fit the standard, press-defined definition of a “Birther.” I do believe that the president was born in Hawaii. I’ve written only one column on the “Birther” controversy and that was back in August 2009. As I opined back then, the whole controversy has legs because of the complete dearth of documentation regarding this president. No presidential candidate of the past 30 years has been permitted the level of secrecy and non-disclosure that President Obama received.
To date the following are all undisclosed:
1) 1961 long-form, original, signed birth certificate
2) Marriage license between Obama’s father (Barak Sr.) and mother (Stanley Ann Dunham) — not found, not released
3) Obama’s baptism records — sealed
4) Obama’s adoption records — sealed
5) Records of Obama’s and his mother’s repatriation as U.S. citizens on return from Indonesia — not found, not released
6) Name change (Barry Sotero to Barack Hussein Obama) records — not found, not released
7) Noelani Elementary School (Hawaii) — not released
8 ) Punahou School financial aid or school records — not released
9) Occidental College financial aid records — not released.
10) Columbia College records — not released
11) Columbia senior thesis — not released
12) Harvard Law School records — not released
13) Obama’s law client list — sealed
14) Obama’s files from career as an Illinois state senator — sealed
15) Obama’s record with Illinois State Bar Association — sealed
16) Obama’s medical records — not released
17) Obama’s passport records — not released
In my opinion — as a civics-minded citizen — Obama’s as yet unreleased original long-form birth certificate from the state of Hawaii is merely the tip of a mysterious iceberg when it comes to the 44th president of the United States. Any journalist worth an ounce of salt would be curious as to why any presidential candidate would conceal nearly every documented item from his own past. Obviously, America does not have many remaining curious journalists.
For the entire campaign season of ’07-’08, the nation witnessed hordes of “journalists” hot on the trail of Sarah Palin’s wardrobe costs, her final pregnancy and childbirth, and her unwed daughter’s pregnancy. We American voters were privy in ‘08 to seeing the complete, suicidal destruction of a once-heralded media enterprise. Rather than take the responsible position of delving into the very, very important and pertinent non-disclosures of a presidential candidate, these media buffoons chose to lampoon the lady from Alaska with adolescent-styled mischief. The campaign coverage was so bad, so childish, so without real substance that on election day, voters still knew next to nothing of substance about the man who would be their next president.
Which brings us back to the original question as to why on earth the Democrat duo of Abercrombie and Matthews would want to raise the all-but-dead “Birther” issue. The country has beyond-huge problems on its plate and Obama has two years to go before his reelection bid.
As much as I detest Chris Matthews, he makes a very salient point, when he asks why on earth the president hasn’t just released the darned document. Barack Obama has been the defendant in more than a dozen eligibility lawsuits since 2008. He has employed legal counsel to answer every one of them; lawyers do not serve free for millionaires like Obama. The cost of supplying the long-form, original birth certificate, which has been said by many officials to be on file in Hawaii, is approximately $15. No matter how one does arithmetic, $15 is bound to be less than Obama has paid lawyers to prevent the release of said document.
Now, we have the governor-elect of Hawaii saying that he will take pains to have state law revised which will enable him to legally release “certain details” contained on the original birth certificate — presumably prior to the 2012 presidential election. It is possible, I suppose, that there are details on that birth certificate which belie the Obama narrative, details that might prove a substantive embarrassment of some sort.
A president elected on the strength of a narrative must protect that narrative at all costs. Abercrombie and Matthews are merely carrying water for the Obama narrative and attempting to divert the public’s attention from more substantive issues, namely the remaining dearth of real background data on the 44th president of the United States.
Journalism certainly isn’t what it used to be. Nor is it even a shade of what it’s supposed to be. Shame is too mild a word.
For all the modern press notables that slam Sarah Palin’s lack of intellectual curiosity, there isn’t a single American journalist who has demonstrated even a speck of the stuff when it comes to Barack Obama. It’s a purely disgusting state of affairs.
You may be right. The other thing I was thinking is this: They finally have the ink dry on all their documents and the "package" is ready for public scrutiny. They have their supporting witnesses, people who now suddenly "remember" x, y, or z about hussein etc. They've also tracked down and bought-off or scared-off into silence anyone who could refute the contents of their "package." So now they are ready to make it an issue again, and shortly, with great fanfare, the "package" will be released, the MSM will lap it up...
So yeah, either they are ready, or as you say, someone is pulling the chain, tightening the choke-collar on hussein, reminding him of his "obligations." We'll know soon - see if hussein keeps pushing his un-American and anti-America agenda and more un-Constitutional expansion of government, union payoffs, etc.
It may very well designate his father as “unknown.”
A theory we have seen before but I like your reason best.
IMHO that is the best theory. The LFBC shows something that contradicts is “story”. That said all the other stuff that is not available still puzzles me also.
Not really, if the name Barack Obama is an alias then his records may disclose his real legal name (and paterinty & maternity). If you recall, the 2nd (legitimate) swearing in of Obama was done in private. We are not privy to the particulars of that ceremony.
Kinda go along with that. thats why clinton is quiting her sec of state job, I dont think obama will be the candidate. however I highly doubt there will be ANY proof that he was born in kenyan...even if that were the case I think Frank Marshall davis was his daddy, the guy is total fraud and if you open his college records you probably would find out he enrolled as a foreign student to get "aid"
It could also be BOTH, and that would make things VERY INTERESTING.
The last election gave the pubbies a super majority in both state houses and the governorships of many states. pubbies from several state houses have said already that after the first of the year —they will introduce legislation to
make it mandatory that every presidential candidate
present a valid birth certificate.
Yes, but I believe it is WND that pointed out that the newspapers gave Urkel’s parents address as his grandparents address, while Urkel’s dad had another address on the island. Yet the governor’s accounts contradict that. I’m taking just one snippet.
Thing is, if you are going to fabricate a very complex lie, don’t be surprised if you forgot something. And because this is a young president, people that were around at the time are still alive.
I think Albercromie is using this as a means to blackmail the president into giving Hawaii federal funding to get it out of its financial crisis.
True. There is some dark secret that needs to be sanitized by sunlight.
Ok...so explain to me how they can create a forged document that fits in with existing dates and consecutive serial numbers....?
Remember there have been several authentic long form birth certificates posted from around the same date....
I seem to recall the BC's of twins born almost at the same time as 0bambi.
They want to see if they can kill it before 2012 election. A lot of people know the truth and were in on the coverup including Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi; etc.
I think you hit it on the head....he’s probably had such a
sham of a life, he has to hide everything he really is...
The father may not be known, it’s true, but that may be cuz
his Mom couldn’t remember things. My semi-paranoid guess is
that since he is destroying the cred of the Democrats, it is
really a preemptive strike by Hillarys team to constantly
degrade him, to the point where the Dems have to go for
HIllary next election cycle. I think the Dems did the same
to both Bushes...constantly attacking till the public perception of
the attackee takes on the words of the attacker. They are also
going after the not quite ready to vote crowd and influencing
them to dislike ‘Bama, and be ready to let a real politician(ha!)
Hillary take over...It’s all pretty well calculated...
What a presidential failure...only took about 6-8 months to
prove his incompetence...
good summary
“...the all-but-dead “Birther” issue.”
Incorrect. The wheels of justice grind slowly. It has taken 2 years for several cases to reach the Supreme Court. Two more are slated for January 7th and 14th. The issue was never all-but-dead and it is not going away.
“The country has beyond-huge problems on its plate and Obama has two years to go before his reelection bid.”
Obama at some point will need to decide whether he is running for re-election and then place his name on the State ballots (there are deadlines involved in order to do so). In the meantime several States are asserting their rights since Congress failed on January 8, 2009 to verify Obama’s consitutional eligibility.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=144909
My take is that crissy is trying to geta a bit of credibility and abercrombie is going for the clinton tactic of a “limited hangout.” (I think that is what they called a confession to somethinng minor and a call to move on - when in fact there was something deeper and more damning at the next level.)
The limited hangout is intended to control the investigative process, and make sure that the damning material never sees the light of day.
My take is that crissy is trying to geta a bit of credibility and abercrombie is going for the clinton tactic of a “limited hangout.” (I think that is what they called a confession to somethinng minor and a call to move on - when in fact there was something deeper and more damning at the next level.)
The limited hangout is intended to control the investigative process, and make sure that the damning material never sees the light of day.
They are going to produce a “forged” BC or some record, trying to get him on the ballot in 2012.
Several of the States will “demand proof” the next time of his “Natural Born Citizenship”. He cannot produce such proof if BH Obama Sr. is his father. BHO Sr. was an English citizen when Obozo was born, hence is not a NBC if BHO Sr. is the father.... End of story. (may be)
will no $10 certified birth certificate rid us of these troublesome evasions?
When the proof finally comes out it will be thrown over the fence by DEMOCRATS frightened that their commie president will destroy their Party and keep them in the minority for decades.
From another thread, applicable here:
I see the setup. After much ballyhoo, the actual, real long form will be revealed, and there will be a media-wide blitz to inform everyone everywhere that it proves that Barry was born in Hawaii and the Birthers have as much cred as the Truthers and the Grassy Knoll theorists.
I think you pretty much summed it up. They believe this issue can be used to discredit conservatives.
Of course, they may also regret going down this road. Obama has been the most secretive politician in memory when it comes to his personal history. Even minor things like which classes he took in college (we’re not even talking grades or teacher’s here, just the names of the classes) haven’t been revealed. He may just be that way out of habit, or there might really be something there.
As others have pointed out on this thread, the most likely reason his actual birth certificate hasn’t been revealed is there is something on it that contradicts the story he has created around himself. The mother is listed as unmarried; a different father is given; the race is listed as white; he was given a different name at birth; there are a number of things that might be on there that he wants to keep hidden.
Overall the (imho) the push should be less on his birth certificate, and more on his other records. What other candidate can get away without even releasing their college records? None I can think of.
BTW, they have let one item slip out. Obama graduated from Harvard Magna Cum Laude. Sounds impressive until you think about the scales (these are Harvard’s definitions).
Cum Laude - with honor (75% on the general scale).
Magna Cum Laude - with great honor (80% on the general scale)
Summa Cum Laude - with highest honor (90% on the general scale)
What we know from this is that Obama was nowhere near the top of his class at Harvard. Hardly the the super-genius he is made out to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.