Media Mischief, the Obama Eligibility Issue and the “Dispositive Fact”

Australia ^ | July 26, 2009 | Zach Jones

[RobinMasters]

Last week, the media was forced into reporting on the Obama birth-certificate/eligibility issue. It had little choice because respected CNN Journalist Lou Dobbs had the audacity to suggest that Obama should produce his long-form birth certificate to put to rest the doubts of millions of Americans who believe Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as President. Immediately and predictably, much of the reporting from the main stream media was in the form of vicious attacks, seeking to discredit Mr. Dobbs and others looking for clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Obama is or is not a “Natural Born Citizen” entitling him to serve as President of the United States. Left-wing bloggers and those in the media who have been carry Obama’s water this past year circled the wagons, and calls that Lou Dobbs be fired rang out. I have to salute Lou Dobbs for his courage and sense of ethical responsibility in addressing this issue at all. Of all the CNN commentators, Lou Dobbs is the one who consistently tries to be fair to all sides.

Yesterday, the Los Angeles Times reported that “CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein told staffers at the cable news network Thursday night that the supposed controversy regarding the legitimacy of President Obama’s birth certificate is a “dead” story.” The article went on to report:

…The website TVNewser reported today that Klein sent an e-mail to staffers of “Lou Dobbs Tonight” just as the program went to air, informing them that CNN researchers had determined that Hawaiian officials discarded all paper documents in 2001. A long-form birth certificate with details about the doctor who delivered Obama no longer exists, they reported. The shorter Certificate of Live Birth noting Obama’s birth on Aug. 4, 1961, that has been made public is the official record.

[Servant of the Cross]

I know that and know that you know that. My issue with you is that you ridicule the folks at FR who are asking a legitimate question, "Barry, why won't you release the B.C.?"

You don't believe he has to and you have actually worked (taking you at your word) to enact state laws that would actually require the candidate to file actual proof of their 'live birth' in future elections. I get this but I don't get why you continue to ridicule the asking of a very legitimate question. You just don't believe it will go anywhere which is probably the same position that Ann Coulter has taken too.

[Red Steel]

Thanks BBC. Please gives us a report when you get it. ;-)

[Star Traveler]

You asked — What is wrong with that?

—

Nothing wrong with that... perhaps we should ask if he would show it to one reporter while maintaining confidentiality on the rest of the information — just state if he’s born in Hawaii... according to his birth certificate.

And then maybe we should be asking if he would show several Senators and House members so that they could testify that they have confirmed he was born in Hawaii...

You think that would work for everyone here? It would be okay by me...

—

But, actually, I’m still pressing for the state law to require showing a birth certificate or else a candidate cannot be on the ballot. That’s my thing.. and I’ve been on that one since the election... :-)

[fr_freak]

Because the issue originally arose during the Democratic primaries and Hillary was presumably behind the issue, her fingerprints are on it. However, if there was anything to the story, I don't think she would have gone down in defeat like she did.

Why not? It's not as if Hillary has integrity, or love for this country. If she knew his questionable status, but Obama had an even higher card to play against her, then she would not mention it. She's an anti-American bitch, but she's not stupid.

[fso301]

Why not? It's not as if Hillary has integrity, or love for this country. If she knew his questionable status, but Obama had an even higher card to play against her, then she would not mention it. She's an anti-American bitch, but she's not stupid.

True but now we are adding theories on top of theories.

[Star Traveler]

No, I’ve never ridiculed them for *asking* for it. That’s because I’ve been asking for it. What I ridicule them about is not recognizing that there is no legal requirement for showing a birth certificate and that no other candidate has that requirement either.

I’ve posted elsewhere that I don’t mind if people holler and scream about seeing the birth certificate, as long as they know that they have no legal authority to see it. You’re simply talking about a “political matter” of whether a candidate thinks he should or not. And Obama obviously thinks he shouldn’t

But, Obama has qualified the exact same way all the other candidates have...

—

And I’ve also ridiculed some for not *recognizing* that the *easiest way* to get a birth certificate is to get a state law that demands it under that state’s laws or else a candidate cannot get on the ballot...

And... there’s a lot of other stuff that goes on with the birth certificate issue that is *easy* to ridicule — like people saying that we need to get tanks surrounding the White House and have the military do a coup on Obama... LOL...

[fr_freak]

True but now we are adding theories on top of theories.

We are? I thought you were presenting theories as to why we should dismiss the birth certificate question outright, and I was refuting those theories.

[Bhoy]

1) “When an entity transfers their documents to an “electronic” format, it is not unusual to discard the original documents. HOWEVER, you simply print out a hard copy of the new electronic file document ...”

2) Why was the records-discarded-scenario not tendered last year? This is a new excuse unheard before this announcement last week. Last year Hawaii said they had the records but they weren’t for pulic view. They did not say: “We tosssed them.”

[ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY]

“TRUTH OR FICTION takes a neutral position.”

Not on the Occidental College Records issue they didn’t; they report it as “Fiction-Possible April Fool’s Joke”

What they took an “Unproven” position on was another issue about his place of birth.

[353FMG]

“..prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.”

.
Then there should be no problem — millions of Americans have a tangible interest in the vital record.

[fso301]

We are? I thought you were presenting theories as to why we should dismiss the birth certificate question outright, and I was refuting those theories.

No because you introduced a new theory that Hillary knows but is kept quiet by Hussein blackmailing her into silence.

[Star Traveler]

You said — Then there should be no problem — millions of Americans have a tangible interest in the vital record.

—

And so..., why is it that you don’t have it right now?

[... ummm... could it be that the legal system doesn’t define it the same way you do... :-) ...]

[Servant of the Cross]

You said

It doesn’t contradict it …

You also said …

Sure they can provide a certified copy of the birth certificate.

CNN said …

In part, Klein writes, “It seems this story is dead- because anyone who still is not convinced doesn’t really have a legitimate beef.” Klein asked CNN researchers to dig into the question of why Obama couldn’t produce the original birth certificate. The researchers contacted the Hawaii Health Dept. and confirmed that paper documents were discarded in 2001 when the department went paperless. That reportedly includes Pres. Obama’s original birth certificate.

They CAN produce the electronic version of the original which is perfectly acceptable as the original by any state law. Therefore, this CNN “excuse” directly contradicts the statement by the Health Commissioner, unless you’re debating what the meaning of “is” is.

[Nevermore]

CNN researchers had determined that Hawaiian officials discarded all paper documents in 2001. A long-form birth certificate with details about the doctor who delivered Obama no longer exists, they reported.

I smell another dodge: anyone care to bet whether they have retained microfiche of everything?

[ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY]

“However, if there was anything to the story, I don't think she would have gone down in defeat like she did.”

You forget (as I did for awhile) that Hilliary has a lot of skeletons in her closet, and I'm sure 0bama’s Chicago thugs have the goods on her.

They obviously have a quid pro quo relationship.

[353FMG]

Any reporter with brass could become world famous if he were to display the truth about Obama’s BC. Even if it turns out that Obama is a bona fide natural born US citizen, he/she is still assured of a Pulitzer price.

[Star Traveler]

You said — They CAN produce the electronic version of the original which is perfectly acceptable as the original by any state law. Therefore, this CNN “excuse” directly contradicts the statement by the Health Commissioner, unless you’re debating what the meaning of “is” is.

—

When I read it, I understood right away, that they had the original as a digital image, that they had data entry from the birth certificate and that it all was very understandable and that nothing had changed in terms of getting a certified copy of anyone’s birth certificate in Hawaii...

So, I don’t see a problem with them switching over to a digital system in Hawaii and it certainly has no effect on Obama or anyone else...

[Servant of the Cross]

You aren’t related to Yogi Berra are you?

[fr_freak]

No because you introduced a new theory that Hillary knows but is kept quiet by Hussein blackmailing her into silence.

A new theory? I could swear you said this:

"Because the issue originally arose during the Democratic primaries and Hillary was presumably behind the issue, her fingerprints are on it. However, if there was anything to the story, I don't think she would have gone down in defeat like she did."

To me, this seems to be a statement whereby you are claiming that Hillary's failure in the primaries logically implied that there was nothing to the birth certificate issue. I then refuted your conclusion by offering a scenario in which Hillary has the goods, but still doesn't use them, and still gets defeated in the primaries. The expected affect of this refutation would be that we both then agree that Hillary's failure was not, in fact, a logical implication that there was nothing to the birth certificate issue, and then we would throw that statement right out and continue our discussion. However, it just didn't work out that way.

[Star Traveler]

Never kept up with the guy... :-) Not really a fan of his..., actually...