Why does it matter to Ms. UnCurosity? She implies as a matter-of-fact that since UPI says it was writer's error that it could not be someone in the Obama family who is the source for Hussein being born at Queens hospital. How did the writer make the error? Did UPI just pull that factoid out of the thin ether, or does UPI think their source is in error, or is that UPI is just covering for Obama?
He could have been legitimately born at either. And Curiosity makes a pretty sound case that this was just a simple error in reporting that has been corrected.
She places her supposition as fact - that doesn't fly. More than one article, not just UPI, has said Obama was born at Queens hospital. Even if the articles were taking their cue from the same template, there is still the matter of original source, which could have been the Obamas. No one should give Obama a pass on anything he says whether it's from the sycophant press or his other minions. Picking and choosing what Obama says that 'are facts' makes you the fool.
He leaves it out because no court has ever asked Obama to present such documents. Courts aren't some free authentication service.
And she's leaving out that Obama could rectify the matter by easily submitting his real birth certificate and other related documents held by the state of Hawaii to one of the many suits that are arrayed against Obama. Imaging if Bush did the same thing as Obama here - LoL. The stinky press would be yelling at him 24/7.
They don't accept and evaluate documents they haven't asked for. There is a legal process in each of these suits that has terminated them before they would ever get to such a request.
Not much transparency from Obama is there? Obama's obstinacy doesn't persuade anyone that he is innocent since he could easily pay $12.50 to the state of Hawaii to send his birth certificate to a court of law. Again, the inCurious have NOT made their case that Obama was born in Hawaii, or have they proven that he is a natural born citizen in accordance with the United States Constitution.
This is a good example of why the cases never get anywhere. “I think someone is a liar so the same rules that apply to anyone and the same benefit of the doubt for state documentation given to anyone shouldn't apply to him” isn't an argument that will ever go anywhere in court.
Obama controls much of the facts about his life under lock and key, and he is a proven liar on a daily basis. Hang in there, I would not be saying never because Obama may eventually get his comeuppance in court. They are not going away.
First of all, I'm a "he." Second of all, if the writer got the hospital name from a member of the Obama family, then it wouldn't be his error. Since UPI admits it was his error, it follows that he did not get this piece of misinformation from the family member.
If you can't follow that argument, I suggest you take formal logic 101.
How did the writer make the error?
By trusting an unreliable secondary source, such as Wikipedia, that he had no business trusting and should have verified but didn't. That is usually how reporters make errors in fact. This wouldn't be the first time misinformation on Wikipedia has made it into a mainstream news outlet.
More than one article, not just UPI, has said Obama was born at Queens hospital.
I am aware of only two: the UPI article, and an article in a high school student newsletter. If you are aware of others, please do point them out. Otherwise, kindly stop claiming that multiple news outlets were made this error.
Insanity of "AFTER-BIRTHERS" seems lately to have hijacked the threads. Lord have mercy!!!