Obama Laughs About 'Crazy' Birth Certificate Questions

President Barack Obama reminisced about the conspiracy theories surrounding his birth certificate during a speech at the National Action Network convention in New York City Friday afternoon. Obama referenced the doubts about his citizenship that led him to release a copy of his birth certificate in 2011, while criticizing voter I.D. laws that require people to present documentation like passports and birth certificates to vote.

"You remember that? That was crazy," said Obama. "Haven't thought about that in a while."

It is just fine with me that you have your beliefs about the literary agent’s statement. Its your belief versus her statement.

I’ve already made my point, “Obama born in Hawaii” was in major newspapers in profiles where he was actually interviewed as new President of Volume of the Harvard Law Review a year before the publisher’s blurb. That’s my point and its an indisputable fact since anyone can read those profiles online.
It is my opinion that folks in the “Obama is ineligible movement” are unwitting dupes for Obama due to chronic cases of Obama Derangement Syndrome.
The birther issue helped Obama get elected and reelected. Liberals love victimization and Obama gets to play the victim, as recently as earlier this week in the incident that this thread is concerning.

It is Obama who solidifies his base by pointing out how those evil, racist conservatives don’t believe that he was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961 and it has worked like a charm for him for seven years now (Obama announced his candidacy in February, 2007). No one has presented probative evidence of an alternative scenario to any Trier of Fact, anywhere in the United States.

There have now been 335 lawsuits and appellate rulings on Obama’s eligibility. The “Obama is eligible” position has prevailed in every single one of those judicial rulings.

I’m with Sarah Palin on this issue. She speaks for me: “I don’t question Obama’s faith and his citizenship and those are distractions. What we (conservatives) are concerned about is the policies coming out of his administration in terms of big government versus private sector. So the faith, the birth certificate...others can engage in that kind of rhetoric. Its distracting, it gets annoying and let’s just stick with what really matters.”

Amen, Sarah, amen. You are now free to call Governor Palin an unintelligent Obot for disagreeing with your opinion.

‘It is just fine with me that you have your beliefs about the literary agent’s statement. Its your belief versus her statement.’

It would be, if her statement made any sense. I demonstrated that it doesn’t. It was put out solely for the benefit of Obots, who will believe anything and pass it along. Even the intelligent Obots, however, know her statement is stupid. Otherwise she would have been asked where she got the original ‘fact’ that she forgot to fact check. The reason she’s never been asked that pathetically obvious question is because even Obots—the ones who are still able to think their way out of a wet paper bag—know it’s an idiotic excuse for which there is not and can never be any realistic or believable answer.

I’m sorry to find out you’re this deep in the Kool Aid pitcher. That is very sad.

Now, here is the situation.

The situation includes the context; namely, that the year or so prior to the literary agent's arrival on the scene, there had been national media coverage about Obama being the first black Harvard Law Review president and noting his Hawaiian birthplace. Nero twice reminded you of this; twice you ignored it in your desire to apply tunnel vision to the agency's author pamphlet.

Obama did not approach this literary agent. She approached him and pitched a book proposal. The working title was Journeys in Black and White. Here is the idea in a nutshell:

A boy is born in Kenya to mixed race parents.

You show there is no significance to the pamphlet/bio when you posit the agent was the source of the "born in Kenya" phrase. When the national media (NY Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune) reported that Obama was Hawaii-born the year prior, clearly the source for that was Obama. If the agent came to the table believing "born in Kenya," the agent was mistaken -- at odds with what Obama had just earlier stated.

He is raised in Indonesia and HI. He ultimately rises to become the first ‘African-American’ president of the Harvard Law Review.

Isn't that the narrative? That a person with his mixed racial background and non-traditional upbringing ends up president of the HLR? "Born in Kenya" isn't necessary to that. "Dreams" itself doesn't state BHO II was born in Kenya, which is an odd omission if that was such a key element to the book concept.

So both of them were well aware of the crucial element re: the starting point of these ‘Journeys in Black and White’ - Kenya.

How can you label that "crucial" when the year prior Obama had told the Times, Post, and Tribune he was born in Hawaii and when the actual book contents of "Dreams" say nothing of him being born in Kenya? Your thinking is rather muddled.

Now what exactly are you saying? That the agent made the entire pitch, both to Obama and to the publisher, on the basis of a fact check error? Can you honestly believe that? Really???

One can sincerely believe that the pamphlet/bio -- which was not part of the book nor even part of the "dust cover" book description, but rather was written by the agency for distribution just to other publishers -- was done in error. Obama's bio was just one of many listed in that pamphlet, and given he was hardly a prominent author at the time, it was a detail easily overlooked.

The only possible scenario is that the agent knew of Obama’s Kenyan birth prior to approaching him originally.

And on what basis would the agent "know" this? Again, try to explain that "knowledge" in light of the national media reports the year prior that state Obama was born in Hawaii. If you say she was misinformed, then how do you explain Obama’s going along with her.

Again, that bio was not part of "Dreams" at all, neither in the book contents nor even as part of any dust jacket description. The book-buying public wouldn't even be aware of it when electing to purchase the book (that is, until recently when that bio got circulated all over the web). There's no evidence that Obama knew what the agency wrote in a pamphlet (his being one bio among several dozen)the agency was sending out to other publishers.

I love that all the known Obot-Trolls are responding to me. This is a point I’ve been trying to make with the Mal-Val crowd. No known Obot-Troll ever, EVER challenges their bizarre theory. Instead, they have to make-believe (as indeed their entire theory is make-believe) that staunch conservative birthers—diehard birthers, no less—are Obot trolls. That tells you what you need to know about Mal-Val.

Now, dear Obot Troll, lets try to get our facts straight. The born-in-Kenya/out-of-Africa book was not entitled Dreams. How many times do I have to correct you Obama-lovers on this point? It’s simple enough. Obama was recruited to write a book that hinged on his Kenyan birth. He accepted a six figure advance on said book. He choomed it all away and wrote nothing—squat. [Which comes as no surprise to anyone who’s ever actually examined his writing. It sucks beyond all possible belief on the paragraph level. He couldn’t have written a coherent book if his life depended on it.]

So, having failed to write the born-in-Kenya book, Obama then accepted a second large advance. He choomed this one too. Michelle finally took matters into her own hands, gathered all the material—a “trunkload”, as recorded—and dropped it all on Ayers. He wrote an entirely different book. A book of fiction. A book of lies.

So now, Mr. Obot, if you can’t even keep your books straight, why should I bother with you? I’ve got less and less time and patience for Obots. Your guy has wrecked it all. He’s an incompetent leftist radical who runs on hate and denial. He’s a disaster. Why do you shill for him? Why not find an Obot site, where you’ll be more at home?

Video recreation of the moment that CpnHook realized he was a liberal on a conservative site:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O1hM-k3aUY

No known Obot-Troll ever, EVER challenges their bizarre theory.

Right. Because it's just that: a bizarre theory. I suppose I could delve into the threads which dredge up lots of old photos as people give opinion who looks more like whom. Some here seem mesmerized by that. It's just not my thing. (I didn't delve much into the "Fuddy had her death staged (or was she killed?) by stealth ninja divers" threads either.)

Instead, they have to make-believe (as indeed their entire theory is make-believe) that staunch conservative birthers—diehard birthers, no less—are Obot trolls.

In other words, they try to paint you as an Obot, in the same manner you try to paint me as an Obot, when the reality is that Birtherism isn't a left-right, Conservative-Liberal issue.

The born-in-Kenya/out-of-Africa book was not entitled Dreams. How many times do I have to correct you Obama-lovers on this point? It’s simple enough. Obama was recruited to write a book that hinged on his Kenyan birth.

And that book didn't get written along those lines, right? Now, let us ask what might be a prime reason why the book concept you're suggesting this agent was pitching didn't get written from the "born in Kenya" angle. Here's an obvious answer: because BHO II wasn't born in Kenya!! And proof of that is found in the year-prior media reports (Times, Post, Tribune) stating that the President of the HLR was born in Hawaii.

Why do you shill for him?

I don't. Though I do criitque the very flawed Birther theories. There's a difference between being anti-Birther and pro-Obama (though Birthers seem to continuously conflate these concepts).

Why not find an Obot site, where you’ll be more at home?

Birtherism is a minority view even on F.R. I'm finding plenty of like-minded persons here.

(And, btw, my Feb. 4 prediction to you that the CCP would kick the can down the road from March towards the summer is proving correct.)

“In other words, they try to paint you as an Obot, in the same manner you try to paint me as an Obot, when the reality is that Birtherism isn’t a left-right, Conservative-Liberal issue.’

You’re making this too easy. No, the Obot designation is not the same. I have a long history of advancing conservatism and criticizing liberalism and Obama. They call me an Obot simply because they don’t think clearly/all that well. Unable to defend their theory on a factual basis, they fall back on the only thing they know: smears.

In your case, I’m willing to be persuaded. Lets see your top three or four pro-conservative/anti-liberal posts. Followed by your top three or four take-downs of the liar in the Oval Office. If they’re sufficiently convincing, I will retract the Obot tag.

‘And that book didn’t get written along those lines, right? Now, let us ask what might be a prime reason why the book concept you’re suggesting this agent was pitching didn’t get written from the “born in Kenya” angle. Here’s an obvious answer: because BHO II wasn’t born in Kenya!! And proof of that is found in the year-prior media reports (Times, Post, Tribune) stating that the President of the HLR was born in Hawaii.’

Do you advance this because you’re an Obot shill, or because you genuinely can’t think clearly. Obama accepted the $ to write the book. So your theory is he swindled the publisher, intending from the beginning not to write a single paragraph because he knowingly promoted a fraud? Is this really the best you’ve got?

Face it. Obama took the $ to write the book. Not only that, but he took a second large chunk of $ to write the same book. The reason it didn’t get written is not because, having banked all that cash, Obama sat around day in and day out thinking, ‘I can’t possibly write the book I’ve been paid to write; I wasn’t born in Kenya.’. Do you have any idea how STUPID this is?

I’ll say it one more time. He took the $. He took the $ to write the born-in-Kenya book. If he couldn’t write it because it wasn’t true, he wouldn’t have taken the $. That would be fraud. The reason he didn’t write is because he’s lazy [as per his fellow lecturers at the UoC], dysfunctional, and a drug user. He doesn’t think well enough or write nearly well enough to pull off such a project. [Trust me, you don’t want me to demonstrate w examples just how disastrously Obama writes. You just don’t.]

What did they spike your Kook Aid with, CpnHook? You’ve gone beyond not making sense. You’re in an alternative universe.

Here’s a real shocker, Hook. I can tell the difference between conservative anti-birthers and Obot anti-birthers. This is the point Obots just cannot grasp. Like Obama, like progs in general, they assume birthers are very, very stupid. Too stupid by far to grasp the concept that there are Obot anti-birthers and conservative anti-birthers. I have a long history of recognizing the latter. Actually, I have a very long history of recognizing BOTH. I’ve expressed where I think you fit on the scale. However, I’ll await your passionate pro-conservative posts & your scathing Obama critiques before reiterating my views. Perhaps the ‘auuthenticity’ [good liberal word, no?] of your (prior) staunchly conservative posts will win me over.

Yes, “anyone can read those profiles online.” Can you, however, point anyone to where they can read these profiles in original paper format? Not in ANY digital form, such as a photo purported to be of an original document?

As we all know, photos can be photoshopped. Microfilm can be cut, spliced, and even recreated without the splices showing. Online profiles can easily be edited using ubiquitous software. Where can “anyone” go to see an actual decades-old newspaper or magazine?

Re: your prediction. Did it escape your notice that the date set for the CCP presentation was an Obot hoax?

The March date at inception came out of the Zullo-Gallups camp itself. Mike Shoesmith of PPSimmons wrote in January:

"Today, Gallups revealed that the long-awaited details of this investigation will be made public in March of this year, a mere two months from now".

The "hoax" only had credibility because it was grounded in statements previously made by the Gallups organization.

So on the basis of one such lie you made a prediction to me.

Rather, I correctly predicted that the CCP-Zullo-Gallups act would change the March timeframe which had already been floated even before the alleged "hoax."

My prediction was based on 15 months of CCP hype and promise -- every example of which has proven to be B.S. If you wish to assert the CCP has the least credibility at this stage, be my guest. There are many prior instances of Zullo/Gallups "fail" you'll need to explain.

I need to explain exactly squat to any and all Obama defenders. I posted on a thread in Feb, unaware that the entire discussion hinged on yet another Obot lie/deception. Why, once you learned it was an Obot LIE, are you not ashamed even to bring it up?

Anything to trash the CCP, right Hook? You’ll even stoop to gloating over the fact that the integrity-challenged—strike that; the lying liar Obot shills—lied yet again. Just how proud are you of their mendacity? Proud enough to pop?

I’ll let you in on a little sekrit. Conservatives are disgusted by Obot troll lies and deceptions. They make us sick. We don’t sit around figuring out new ways to lie. Obots do. It’s nauseating. If you had a conservative bone in your body you wouldn’t preen yourself for building on a naked Obot lie. You wouldn’t strut around bragging about it.

You’re in a hole, Mr. Troll. Why not stop digging now? Or do you really want to see just how low you can go?

Then similarly, “when the national media reported that Obama” (AP, LA Times, iirc) left for Indonesia when he was two years old, then by the same token “clearly the source for that was Obama.”

Perhaps. Though on that point Obama DID leave for Indonesia after his parents divorced and his mother remarried. Age 8 versus age 2 is a bit of a minor quibble. It seems more likely here the reporter mixed notes about the dates of Dunham's separation/divorce from BHO Sr and remarriage to Soetoro. A lot was going on in those years.

By contrast, it is an error of much greater magnitude for "born in Kenya" to end up being reported as "born in Hawaii," especially given the former stood to make the story all the more compelling.

In any event, the "born in Hawaii" line reported by the Times, Post and Tribune has much by way of corroborating evidence (e.g., see Nero Germanicus's listing at Post #48). One can't say the same for "moved to Indonesia at age 2."

Why, once you learned it was an Obot LIE, are you not ashamed even to bring it up?

As I just pointed out to you, the "will be released in March" claim first came from the CCP inner circle. Here it is again:

"Today, Gallups revealed that the long-awaited details of this investigation will be made public in March of this year, a mere two months from now".

You have a remarkable ability to pretend that information put under your nose that vitiates your argument just isn't really there. There must be some magic Birther glasses you wear.

Anything to trash the CCP, right Hook?

The CCP's dismal track record of repeated hype with failure-to-deliver does more to demolish its credibility than my words ever could. I realize you're desperate to go ad hominem and make this discussion be about me, but the evidence of the problems with CCP credibility is all about you.

Unable to defend their theory on a factual basis, they fall back on the only thing they know: smears.

Oh, the irony . . .

Me: And that book didn’t get written along those lines, right? Now, let us ask what might be a prime reason why the book concept you’re suggesting this agent was pitching didn’t get written from the “born in Kenya” angle. Here’s an obvious answer: because BHO II wasn’t born in Kenya!! And proof of that is found in the year-prior media reports (Times, Post, Tribune) stating that the President of the HLR was born in Hawaii.’ You: * * * Obama accepted the $ to write the book.

Yes, but why is it to be supposed "the book" had as some central premise or key fact that Obama was born in Kenya? You assume this without proof. Why on earth would Obama in 1991 -- having it just been reported by major media the year prior that he was born in Hawaii -- be discussing some book proposal that pitches a contrary birth narrative? The book Obama wrote was a memoir about Obama's childhood and life influences. None of us bloody remembers anything about our birth or the first few years of life. Kenya versus Hawaii is irrelevant to the thrust of the narrative, which takes importance only from the start of Obama's recollected years.

So your theory is he swindled the publisher, intending from the beginning not to write a single paragraph because he knowingly promoted a fraud?

So in addition to heaping lot of ad hominem, you are good at erecting Strawman Arguments.

My theory is that no one in 1991 -- Obama, agent, publisher in particular here -- is discussing a book proposal which has "born in Kenya" as a key component, given that in 1990 "born in Hawaii" was reported.

I’ll say it one more time. He took the $. He took the $ to write the born-in-Kenya book.

You can say it all you like. The claim that it was ever meant to be a "born in Kenya" book exists in your mind only.

You’re in an alternative universe.

I'm in a universe where major media reported in 1990 that Obama was born in Hawaii. And in that universe that 'born in Hawaii' statement is corroborated by the statement made by Obama's [step]parents in 1968 when they applied for his Indonesian schooling. And that is further corroborated by the INS files on BHO, Sr. And that is further corroborated by the Hawaiian newspaper birth announcements. And all of this is most certainly corroborated by the statements of officials of the State of Hawaii attesting that Obama was born in Hawaii. And under the Full Faith & Credit Clause of the Constitution of the U.S. (which also exists in the universe I inhabit) the latter pretty much definitively answers the birth question.

‘Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.’

The ‘Journeys’ depend on the Kenyan beginning. If you can’t read the above blurb and figure that out, you just aren’t...perceptive.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.