As I said, at the blog level, controversies never end. And as long as they stay down at the blog level, no one else to speak of knows anything about them, so in the larger scheme of things, they're not a problem for the campaign.
However if the campaign did anything to address these blog level controversies, in doing so, they couldn't help but to draw wider attention to them. And why would they want to do that? That would indeed be some "back@ss" thinking.
No, that's not the honest thing to do. It's disingenuous and deceptive, and at the worst, it may cover up for wrongdoing, but I should expect that behavior from your side.
An honest person would let reporter pools inspect the document(s) in question, and not use biased websites like Annenberg.org "FactCheck" and the DailyKos.
Oh please. Dispense with the melodrama.
And what's this "your side" stuff? It has absolutely nothing to do with any "sides." It's called "politics." And no campaign would jump into action and respond every time someone on some blog hatched some theory or other.
An honest person would let reporter pools inspect the document(s) in question, and not use biased websites like Annenberg.org "FactCheck" and the DailyKos.
And what unbiased reporter(s) have shown up at Obama's Chicago campaign headquarters (where the certificate is supposedly kept) and asked to inspect the document(s) in question but have been refused or otherwise turned away?
Are you aware of any? I'm not.
You say that Obama's campaign shouldn't publish scans and photos of the certificate on biased websites, but yet they're expected to address those who are unabashedly biased against him and post on similarly biased websites?
What's up with that?
k