State programmer identifies template for Obama 'forgery'

Just to let you know, you are arguing with a very odd duck here.

You're right about that. Of course I regard anyone who wants to defend the lyingest liar of the land as an "odd duck." We have a veritable raft of odd ducks around here!

I just thought a little history might help.

Very interesting. I'm not terribly surprised. Cognitive dissonance is something I discover with many of the people I argue with. For some reason, I just can't seem to fool myself about stuff. When the evidence becomes convincing that I am wrong about something, I just admit it. Oh, by the way, someone asserts that curiosity is female. Perhaps that makes it easier to understand? :)

Agreed! Cognitive dissonance is inextricably linked to and essential to liberalism. I speak as a former liberal. As soon as I began to contrast reality with the lies of liberalism, my conversion began. Some people are unable to make that transition. They are too emotionally committed to liberalism, so they operate in a permanent state of cognitive dissonance. That’s what makes them impossible to reason with. If they could reason, they wouldn’t be liberals.

Is curious a woman or a man? I don’t know. Here’s what I do know. If you dig far enough back in his/her posting history, you’ll see some very liberal comments. He/she used to claim we are asking for more documentation from Obama than has ever been asked of any president—and it’s just so mean and unfair! It’s there in his/her posting history, so he/she can’t deny it. [You have to go a long way back to get to those posts, however.]

Another early curious post I recall was even sillier. He/she claimed we conservatives are so consumed with hatred for Obama, even if he did something right, we couldn’t give him credit for it. I responded at the time, ‘Why are you so emotionally invested in defending Obama?’. I got no reply. I recall thinking, though, that liberalism alone wouldn’t account for that level of inanity. There HAD to be an emotional investment. Pretty spooky stuff.

Fwiw, those are two of my earlier encounters with the party in question. I’m glad old posts can’t be deleted. I’d be called a liar, or a shader of the truth, for sure. But it’s all there, if anybody takes the time to dig deep enough, so I’m in the clear. ;)

Your quibbles are silly.

Residency:

If Obama were born in Canada, as you allege, entering the US legally would not be an issue as the law at the time allowed any US citizen parent of a non-citizen child to obtain a resident visa for the child. See Title I, section 101 and Title II section 205 of the law in my previous post. And even if she didn't bring him to the US right away, she had until age 18 to do so in order to apply for his citizenship.

SAD's alleged Communism:

First, this is 1961 we're talking about. The red scare, which was in full force in 1952, when the law was written, was over by then. McCarthy had been censured, and scrutinizing people's comomunist associations was a thing of the past by 1961. Second, the law only mentions the person to be naturalized, not his mother. Furthermore, law explictly states that a child of "tender years" can be assumed to be of good moral charcter, which includes not being communist. Third, even if the mother's politics were relvant (and they weren't), there's no evidence to even suspect SAD was a member of any communist organization. And no, the fact that she held lefty political views, was an atheist, and studied Russian isn't evidence that she was a member of the communist party or other communist organization, which is what the 1952 law was talking about (and no one cared about by 1961, anyway).

The need for Stanley's cooperation:

You are right, Obama's mom would be the one who would have to apply to get Obama his naturalized citizenship. You allege that because she managed to get herself knocked up her first semester in college, we have good reason to suspect she might not do the responsible thing and get her son citizenship.

I'm sorry, but your argument is absurd. Not every womam who has an accidental pregnancy is an idiot. Accidents happen to intelligent people. Condoms can fail. Sexual desire has a way of clouding people's judgement. It doesn't make people decide not to get US citizenship for their child. SAD's subequent successful academic career proves she was no idiot.

And no, flying to Seattle after the birth was not irresponsible or dumb. She obviously wanted to get away from her husband, and fleeing to a city where she had a network of friends from her high school days was an eminently sensible thing to do.

BTW, why do you say it is "dumb" or "irresponsible" to study Russian in college?

At the end of the day, it is you who have the "big maybe," not me.

Just look at what you are alleging. You are claiming, without a shred of evidence, that Obama was born in Canada. Then his mother somehow snuck him accross the border, despite the fact that she could have brought him over legally on an immigrant visa, and then his mother or grandmother committed document fraud in order to get him US citizenship, despite the fact that it would have been relatively easy to get it for him legally.

And no, getting him US citizenship legally was not a "big maybe," your quibbles (debunked above) notwithstanding.

On the other hand, you have asolutely no evidence to support this BC fraud scenario of yours. None at all.

All you can say is that I can't prove it didn't happen, and I agree, I can't. But I can't prove the government didn't fake the moon landing, either. Doesn't mean it's pluasible.

If you think anyone not already emotionaly invested in birtherism would consider your secenario even remotely plausible, then you are deluding yourself.

No, it is not impossible, but it's about as plausible as the conspiracy theory that the US government faked the moon landing.

Have a nice day.

Your quibbles are silly.

Yeah, I think I said that. Two of them were silly. I actually thought you would find them funny rather than take it seriously. Citizenship refused because his mom is a Communist and because he is an illegal immigrant from Canada? You didn't find that amusing?

You are right, Obama's mom would be the one who would have to apply to get Obama his naturalized citizenship. You allege that because she managed to get herself knocked up her first semester in college, we have good reason to suspect she might not do the responsible thing and get her son citizenship.

Are we talking about the same woman? She ran off from home (according to the "official version") right after he was born, she eventually takes him to Indonesia where the other kids picked on him, she eventually abandons him to her parents in 1970, and she then takes off and seldom sees him after that. His needs never seemed to be uppermost in her mind. You say she would do it because that's what any mother would do, but this woman was a liberal nutcase. She did a lot of things sensible women wouldn't do.

I'm sorry, but your argument is absurd. Not every womam who has an accidental pregnancy is an idiot. Accidents happen to intelligent people. Condoms can fail. Sexual desire has a way of clouding people's judgement. It doesn't make people decide not to get US citizenship for their child. SAD's subequent successful academic career proves she was no idiot.

Given all the "Academics" which are running things now, I think there is a direct proportionality to Academics in non Hard Sciences and idiotness. Her getting pregnant was no Accident. She was enthralled with this movie called "Black Orpheus" and felt she was not only doing something wonderful and beautiful she was also doing her part for reparations to the black race for slavery. Read enough of the interviews with people that knew her and you will find out that she was an idyllic dreamer idiot, and her Idiot son comes by his idiotness naturally.

And no, flying to Seattle after the birth was not irresponsible or dumb. She obviously wanted to get away from her husband, and fleeing to a city where she had a network of friends from her high school days was an eminently sensible thing to do.

A network of friends would be more useful in taking care of a child than her mother an father? Also, paying rent when she had a free home? Seriously, how was she to support herself? No doubt long distance from mummy and dahdy. I would like you to explain how you can consider ANY of her actions to be Sensible? They are just about the stupidest things a young girl could have done.

BTW, why do you say it is "dumb" or "irresponsible" to study Russian in college?

Nowadays it would be quite benign. In 1960 it would appear completely subversive. You may think the communist scare was over, but J.Edgar Hoover was still head of the FBI, and they had agents watching her buddy Frank Davis. It is virtually certain that anyone studying Russian in 1960 either worked for the US Government, or immediately aroused the scrutiny of the US Government, and it would not have been a benign scrutiny. Getting an immediate FBI file was Not a good way to start out your life.

Just look at what you are alleging. You are claiming, without a shred of evidence, that Obama was born in Canada.

There appears to be some circumstantial evidence to support it.

Then his mother somehow snuck him accross the border, despite the fact that she could have brought him over legally on an immigrant visa,

As I mentioned, sneaking someone in from Canada is a nothing deal.

and then his mother or grandmother committed document fraud in order to get him US citizenship, despite the fact that it would have been relatively easy to get it for him legally.

Not necessarily. As I've mentioned, Hawaiian law lets you create Hawaiian birth certificates for children not actually born in Hawaii. I think you know the section I am referring to. The Grandmother may simply have exercised her daughter's right as a resident to get a Hawaiian birth certificate.

And no, getting him US citizenship legally was not a "big maybe," your quibbles (debunked above) notwithstanding.

The main one wasn't really debunked as I have shown above.

On the other hand, you have asolutely no evidence to support this BC fraud scenario of yours. None at all.

How do you know what evidence I have? I have circumstantial evidence for a scenario that actually makes more sense than what is being put forth as the official version.

All you can say is that I can't prove it didn't happen, and I agree, I can't. But I can't prove the government didn't fake the moon landing, either. Doesn't mean it's pluasible.

I can prove the government didn't fake the moon landing and I can do it quickly. The Apollo missions left behind reflective mirrors on the moon. Observatories all over the world have bounced laser pulses off of these mirrors to measure the distance to the moon. The Mirrors didn't get up there by themselves. Also, other nations have sent satellites orbiting the moon and they can SEE the remnants of our stuff down there.

If you think anyone not already emotionaly invested in birtherism would consider your secenario even remotely plausible, then you are deluding yourself.

I think if an ordinary person were asked to choose which story is likely to be more plausible, they would choose the "Pregnant girl sent off to live with relatives" as being far more likely. It's not even a close contest. The only way the "Official" story makes sense is if Stanley Ann never told her parents who the father was, and when they found out the child was black they freaked out! Stanley Couldn't take the pressure, and her parents couldn't take the embarrassment, (Grandma never told her coworkers she had a Grandson.) so she went to Seattle to save them all a lot of drama. I simply do not see a couple raised in Kansas during the 1920s as being Okay with their daughter having a black child. People just weren't that tolerant in the 1960s. They may have grown more tolerant, but it must have taken some time. (A year separated from their Daughter perhaps?)

No, it is not impossible, but it's about as plausible as the conspiracy theory that the US government faked the moon landing.

The problem for you is that the theory is QUITE plausible, but you are so heavily invested in making the "birthers" go away that you are blind to the fact that the story seems inherently consistent. It even makes BETTER sense than the "Official" story. *I* at least have not completely dismissed the "official" story, though I think that if it IS true, it has been shaded and massaged.

If you want to disprove the "Canadian" birth theory, see if you can find a hole in it. Possible "Holes" in it include the lack of Knowledge as to where Uncle Ralph Dunham or Aunt Eleanor Birkebele were living in 1961. If you can pin that down and it wasn't Canada or Northeastern Washington, you will have pretty much destroyed the theory. Alternatively, if you can prove that Stanley Ann was in Hawaii in August of 1961, then THAT would pretty much demolish the theory as well. Saying that supposedly smart people don't do stupid things is an argument proven wrong on a daily basis.

go pursue the issues that are important to you - do your best - good luck

(Just don’t try to undermine these efforts to get to the truth about Obama - it is not helpful.)