Culture of conspiracy: The Birthers (mainstream decides to cover)

Politico ^ | 3-1-09 | Ben Smith

[Kansas58]

My objective is to embarrass Obama.

I know that forcing Obama to show us his Birth Certificate will embarrass Obama.

I know this because Obama told us this was true, in his legal briefs.

Can you multitask? The political world is designed to give us ammunition and laws to use in Court.

Our Court Room strategy is to force publication of documents that we can use in the political world.

I want to hurt Obama, any legal way that I can.

If Obama shows us that he lied about his past, lied in his autobiographies, lied in his college admissions, lied on his passport and lied to the American Voters we can defeat him.

If Obama’s father is Communist Frank Marshall Davis, and he hid this fact from us, we can defeat him with that issue.

Whatever Obama is hiding, we know he is not telling the truth.

And, this will, eventually, hurt him.

[Kansas58]

You are wrong.
The truth is, there is no credible evidence that the document posted by Obama is authentic.

Furthermore, even if that document is authentic, it does not prove anything, it is entirely possible to get a birth certificate from most states, even if you were not born in that state, under certain circumstances.

Also, what was posted was NOT a Birth Certificate, it was a Certificate of Live Birth, which is not a vault copy birth cert copy.

[Kansas58]

You are wrong.
The truth is, there is no credible evidence that the document posted by Obama is authentic.

Furthermore, even if that document is authentic, it does not prove anything, it is entirely possible to get a birth certificate from most states, even if you were not born in that state, under certain circumstances.

Also, what was posted was NOT a Birth Certificate, it was a Certificate of Live Birth, which is not a vault copy birth cert copy.

[Michael Michael]

The man is a usurper to the office of the President of the United States.

Does this not bother you?

***Obama’s lawyers in these motions, argued that revealing the information (birth certificate, citizenship in other countries, etc.) would “cause a defined and serious injury” to Obama and/or the DNC. They say revealing these documents raises a “legitimate privacy concern” and the above mentioned risk that “particularly serious embarrassment will result from turning over the requested documentation.” ***

It doesn't bother me because I can't find any of those quoted phrases in any of the motions filed by Obama and/or the DNC.

It appears that Israel Insider is simply quoting claims made by Berg rather than anything in the motions filed by Obama and/or the DNC.

The closest thing I can find is in the motion for a protective order staying discovery pending a decision on the dispositive motion. It reads:

Rule 26(c)(1) authorizes the Court to enter a protective order to protect a party “from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,” including an order forbidding the discovery or specifying terms for discovery.

Would you care to tell me which motion contains the phrases quoted by Israel Insider? Here, you can download them from Berg's own website:

All of the Court Documents Filed in This Case

Otherwise, it seems you were grossly mislead, either by Berg, Israel Insider, or both.

[Michael Michael]

False. when you pay for a certified copy, it has an official seal on it...

As Obama's did.

[Michael Michael]

Obama’s lawyers have argued:

....revealing these documents raises a “legitimate privacy concern” and the above mentioned risk that “particularly serious embarrassment will result from turning over the requested documentation.”

Again, show us where they argued that. The court documents are all publicly available. Show us the motion where Obama's lawyers used those words.

[El Gato]

So what exactly makes you think that in 2009, Hawaii wouldn't already have had most, if not all of their birth registrations in a digital database?

They did, and they do. But I don't think that is was meant by "everything", meaning images of the original certification of birth, or even of all the information contained on it. That will come, probably pretty soon, but I think what SERE_DOC was saying is that they only have the information reflected in the Certification electronically on file.

There is much information, at least some of it relevant, that is not on the Certification.

[Michael Michael]

I think calling one side “birthers” is a personal attack so I’ll just hit the abuse button.

But you don't think calling one side "Obots" is a personal attack?

Hypocrite.

[Michael Michael]

The “certificate on file” might very well state that Obama was born in Kenya or Canada or at sea.

If that's what the certificate on file said, then that's what the certification would say. The certification is, after all, and as per Hawaii statute (HRS 338-13), a certified copy of the certificate on file.

[Kansas58]

You do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

[Kansas58]

I suggest you do a little research:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html

The document that Obama and Kos produced where different from each other.

Also, neither document said anything that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii.

A Certificate of Live Birth means that he was born, and was registered in the state of Hawaii.

It does NOT prove that Obama was born in Hawaii.

[Michael Michael]

As for Constitutional Authority to enforce the Art. II section 1 , "natural born citizen" requirement, try this section:

Section. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; — to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; — to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; — to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; Art. III Section 2.

It's really sad to see people quoting the Constitution who have obviously never actually read the whole document.

Once Obama received the requisite number of electoral votes, and those votes were certified by Congress, and he was sworn into the office of President, the only means under the Constitution by which he can be removed from office of President is by impeachment in the House of Representatives and subsequent conviction in the Senate.

Article II, Section 4.

[Polarik]

Here's an observation of the more encompassing issue with Obama and his Obamanites under which the BC issue is germane as well:

Birthers literally scare the Hell out of Obamanites. They will never admit to you publically, but they have to be wondering themselves why it is that Obama is refusing to release his BC.

They can't say that he has already done so, because he hasn't. If Obama actually has a valid COLB, there is nothing to gain by hiding it from everyone except two people from Factcheck. He has never shown anything to other members of Congress, or even to the mainstream media who would probably keep it a secret if it listed his birthplace as Kenya.

The problem for Obama is that there are no gray areas. If what he said on one day contradicts what he said on another, he will always find an excuse for the discrepancy that will satisfy his flock who cannot imagine or reconcile in their minds an Obama who does not always speak the truth. Obama's comments on the surge and keeping troops in Iraq, before and after the election are a perfect example.

Obama also created this problem for himself because he cannot be anything less than perfectly truthful in his own narcissistic mind. Evangelicals will say that Jesus was the perfect Man. Muslims will say that Muhammed was the perfect Man. Jews will say that, "Nobody's perfect!" and they got that right!

Remember the old saying, "To err is human, to forgive, Divine." Well, Obama is "None of the above."He will never admit to making any errors of jugdment without a cover story nor does it seem that he has the capacity takes and his followers are living a lie.

The stonewalling on the birth certificate issue is sowing more seeds of doubt, not less, but the only way for Obamanites to deal with the discrepancy is to heap more abuse on the birthers.

They've run out of new things to say, so they are simply recycling them. They still think that Obama is going to pull his magic BC out of a hat and say, "Gotcha!"

Only problem is that we've heard the same claim for nine months running.

They can contiune to recycle their trash talk all they want. It changes nothing. Obama is an ineligible and illegal President, He knows it. He's always known it.

[El Gato]

Furthermore, even if that document is authentic, it does not prove anything, it is entirely possible to get a birth certificate from most states, even if you were not born in that state, under certain circumstances.

While that is true, the document says he was born in Honolulu, so if it is completely authentic, then he was born in the US, and was at minimum, a citizen at birth. But we know he was also a British subject at birth. Again, no court has ruled on that aspect of "natural born", as opposed to "native born" citizenship.

[Michael Michael]

FACT:

bama’s lawyers have argued in court documents:

....revealing these documents raises a “legitimate privacy concern” and the above mentioned risk that “particularly serious embarrassment will result from turning over the requested documentation.”

Once again, let's see the court document that includes those quoted phrases.

[TruthWillWin]

I suggest you do a little research:

I suspect research is not something he is interested in. This new member has an agenda and facts concerning the BC issue is not part of it.

[Michael Michael]

We even have Geraldo Rivera, who firmly believed that there was something in Capote's vault.

Well no wonder he didn't find anything! He was looking in CAPONE'S vault! ;)

[Peter Libra]

I believe it was your post #60 that mentioned the COLB being unsigned. You are technically right. However, on the back was a statement to the effect that the certificate was a copy of an original document or abstract. "Signed" Alvin T Onaka Ph.D the registrar.

That statement was made from a manufactured rubber stamp. This included a copy of the gentleman's signature. Cos' that is what it is, just a copy. A dozen people could have wielded that rubber stamp, not saying they did though.

[Michael Michael]

Let’s see your rebuttal of Polarik’s analysis.

Sure. What in particular would you like me to rebut? I don't have a week to spend addressing every last bit of nonsense in the "report." But I'll be happy to address anything specific you'd like to bring up.

[Kansas58]

Read this, before you lecture anyone. You are very weak at research, law, facts or argument:

----- “Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 6 of 10

II. Discussion
Rule 26(c)(1) authorizes the Court to enter a protective order to protect a party
“from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,” including an
order forbidding the discovery or specifying terms for discovery. “While the court should
not automatically stay discovery because a motion to dismiss has been filed, ‘a stay is
proper where the likelihood that such motion may result in a narrowing or an outright
elimination of discovery outweighs the likely harm to be produced by the delay.’” 19th
St. Baptist Church v. St. Peters Episcopal Church, 190 F.R.D. 345, 349 (E.D. Pa. 2000),
quoting Weisman v. Mediq, Inc., 1955 WL 273678, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5900 *2 (E.D.
Pa. 1995). “Where a pending motion to dismiss may dispose of the entire action and
where discovery is not needed to rule on such motion, the balance generally favors
granting a motion to stay.” Weisman, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at *5.”

----- We know it is not oppression. The man is the POTUS.
We know it is not expense, it would be cheaper to produce the documents than to fight this thing in court, if the documents exist.

Therefore, Obama has admitted that he will be embarrassed by releasing the documents requested!

And, therefore, you don't know what YOU are talking about!