Obama 'Birther' Row Rears Its Head Again 12:21pm UK, Saturday February 27, 2010 Greg Milam, US correspondent
One of the more bizarre rows in American politics has resurfaced as the country prepares for crucial mid-term elections this year. The so-called 'birthers' movement, which questions whether Barack Obama was born in the US and is therefore a legitimate president, has cropped up on the campaign. A representative in Arizona's state senate has even introduced a 'birth certificate bill' because she says constituents are so worried.
The White House has consistently dismissed the issue. Authorities in Hawaii have provided an electronic record of Obama's birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state's archives. But J D Hayworth, who is running against former presidential candidate John McCain in the race to be Arizona Senator, questioned Obama's credentials on a radio show. McCain, who lost out to Obama in 2008, criticised Hayworth for giving oxygen to the 'birther' debate. And supporters at one of Hayworth's rallies openly questioned the president's right to be in office. Alan Becker said: "If it was in question and someone questioned me about my birth certificate I would give it to them and say 'Here it is'. "Why can't he do that?
Jimmy Carter: 'Claims racist' Democrats in Arizona have dismissed the bill, introduced by Representative Judy Burges. Kyrsten Sinema said: "This bill is what I would call patently ridiculous and offensive. "The truth is that he was born in the United States and has provided that proof time and time again." The 'birthers' are perhaps the most bizarre of the protest movements against the president. Genuine concerns in the US are often being drowned out by more extreme voices. Former president Jimmy Carter has suggested that much of the opposition to Barack Obama is based on his race.
But Hayworth, who says the Obama issue is now settled, believes questions remain. He said: "We require voters to demonstrate they are who they say they are, I think everyone on the ballot should do that."
WND didn't make it up. It's in the original article.
"The White House has consistently dismissed the issue. Authorities in Hawaii have provided an electronic record of Obama's birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state's archives."
“Authorities in Hawaii have provided an electronic record of Obama’s birth because the paper copy was destroyed in a fire which wiped out much of the state’s archives.”
Authorities — that’s the same as saying, “anonymous sources/source”.
It could be ‘fubar’, but do you know of any other ‘fubar’ report where WND falsely quoted ‘authorities’ or an anonymous source? They’ve been on the web for a long time. The only “mistake” I’ve personally ever seen is them reporting on foreign superstitious beliefs.