Posted on 02/16/2011 7:38:10 AM PST by Rational Thought
A new poll shows just over half of likely Republican primary voters question where President Obama was born. What’s up with “birtherism” and why does it have such staying power?
The evidence shows Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama released a “Certification of Live Birth,” a document produced by the state of Hawaii certifying the state holds records that a person was born there.
Further, two Hawaiian newspaper announcements from 1961 tell of Obama’s birth. Janice Okubo, a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health, told the Honolulu Advertiser in July 2009 that such newspaper announcements were based on notifications from the Health Department, which received information directly from hospitals.
The certification of live birth Obama released is legally sufficient documentation to apply for a U.S. passport, but it’s not the same thing as a “long form” birth certificate, called a “Certificate of Live Birth” in Hawaii. That document is issued by hospitals and includes additional information not on the certification.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Anecdotal. I’ve also seen comments from a few prominent Democrats on the topic.
You can pretend that this controversy is restricted to the right fringe of the Republican Party, but you’re just sticking your head in the sand. Many, many people now believe that something is wrong here.
I dont know where you live, but I now see quite a few Birther bumper stickers
If she said she saw it, then maybe she should tell the current governor where it is?
He seems to think it cannot be found.
WOW! I'm honored (I think)? And believe it or not, when you said, "0 doesn't equal 0" it made sense...even to me! The ghost that is B0 is a big, black cloud hanging over us (pun intended).
LOL! Did you see Rove on with BOR? Rove was talking about the “birth announcements” in the papers and BOR told him that he got that info fom him. Rove said he got the info elsewhere and BOR said that HE was the first one to report it!! What a guy!! A$$hole.
Just a quick glance of quotes from jamie...
“Hawaii only releases short form COLBs since they digitized their records in 2001.” (LIE)
“Last I heard, there’s a bill in the Hawaii legislature to release copies of Obama COLBs at $100 a pop.” (Exposed)
“You’ll get another shot in November, 2012.” (not “we” will get another shot?)
“Issa has tried to draw a line separating events that he considers appropriate subjects for investigation and those which he deems inappropriate.” (exposed)
“If there are no records, then how can anyone ever prove that Obama held Indonsesian citizenship?” (lie)
“Abercrombie is probably loath to have to ask a Republican anything.” (Exposed) (who thinks like this?)
“Wouldn’t it be the job of the conservative investigative media to ferret out the truth in the same way that John Kerry was “Swiftboated” not by the mainstream media but by the conservative media?”
This just says it all. How many people here refer to “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth”, telling it like it was, as unfair to Kerry or refers to those telling the truth as “Swiftboating” or Kerry was “Swiftboated”? It is very telling.
Makes one wonder how much Jamie gets paid? Learning to skip most of the posts of Jamie containing the usual spam crap, that has been destroyed by many Freepers, has been a learning process for me. At least we can see the best he can acquire from Dr. Conspiracy and the other Obots. :0)
He wasan avowed comunist and hated America!
We’ll never know.
Thank you for your post; no surprise there as to the true nature of the legal system. I work with a lot of lawyers. Some very good. Some Obamabots. Remarkable really, the extent to which IQ is no insulation against moral collapse/blindness.
While the Good Lord will sort it all out in the end, I just wanted to applaud you two in your fight for right. Curiosity and his/her fellow travelers have no idea how wrong they are or the ultimate penalty for that wrongness.
Blessings on You and Your Houses.
M
You ole commie, you—you gave me the biggest laugh I’ve had all day. Good post—but your sense of humor is too keen for a leftie. I suspect you, too, of being a conservative.
There’s goes your tenure, prof. ;)
Good Lord, you’re like a broken record. Do you have any new, more compelling arguments? You seem to just continually spew the same crap on every thread.
Tenure is for life. Don't you ever call me a Conservative. What does this obscene word mean anyway? Don't call me a lefty either. The only one to my right is Uncle Joe!
Again, you flunk on both counts!
Third strike and yer'out! Oops another expression only used by ugly Americans! I must be slippin'!
Papa Alinsky, Mad as hell!
Did it get too “hot” in the kitchen for the gipper???
I just loved the videos I watched of Yuri Bezmenov. “get the bananas out of your ears” is hauntingly familiar to today.
I saw the C-Span re-broadcast of back-to-back debates between Keyes and the usurper’s Senate race, and no one can tell me otherwise.
Have you ever noticed how it is our Father’s children that can see this all so clearly?
It’s more like hot under the collar!
Jonathan Strong must live under a cabbage leaf.
If your boyfriend, Mr. Obama, was even half a man, he would release his own records to the press and quell the controversy—as many other politicians have done.
>> “You can pretend that this controversy is restricted to the right fringe of the Republican Party, but you’re just sticking your head in the sand.” <<
.
And that is all curiosity has ever done here.
Curiosity is not one of us; curiosity is a troll or a shill.
Are you just stupid DemBOt? A definite rhetorical question since the answer is obviously yes.
Red Steel informs us that all grand juries are “runaway grand juries,”
No you dingbat, I cite a source that is case study about the history of grand juries in particular of a rule change that you apparently did not comprehend. I’ll let you try to figure out which is which.
Here it is again in a larger excerpt. It looks like some guy named Orfield made up the term “runaway grand jury” to justify his federal rule change that helps corrupt government officials get away...
A “runaway” grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s “runaway” grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact “runaways,” according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself.[7]
Before the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — which made independently-acting grand juries illegal for all practical purposes — grand juries were understood to have broad powers to operate at direct odds with both judges and prosecutors.[8] One recent criminal procedure treatise sums up the inherent inconsistency of the modern grand jury regime:
In theory, the grand jury is a body of independent citizens that can investigate any crime or government misdeed that comes to its attention. In practice, however, the grand jury is dependent upon the prosecutor to bring cases and gather evidence. Except in rare instances of a “runaway” grand jury investigation of issues that a prosecutor does not want investigated, the powers of the grand jury enhance the powers of the prosecutor.[9]
Thus, while the grand jury still exists as an institution — in a sterile, watered-down, and impotent form — its decisions are the mere reflection of the United States Justice Department.[10] In practice, the grand jury’s every move is controlled by the prosecution, whom the grand jury simply does not know it is supposed to be pitted against.[11] “ “The term “runaway grand jury” did not appear in legal literature until the mid-twentieth century.[12] The reason for this is that the term would have been inapplicable in the context of previous generations: every American grand jury known by the Constitution’s Framers would be considered a runaway grand jury under modern criminal procedure. Constitutional framers knew criminal law to be driven by private prosecution and did not contemplate the omnipresence of government prosecutors.[13] Additionally, early American common law placed far more power and investigative judgment in the hands of grand juries than does the criminal procedure of the twentieth century.” And in particular OBot that supports my statement above,
According to Professor Lester B. Orfield, who served as a member of the Advisory Committee on Rules of Criminal Procedure, the drafters of Rule 6 consciously decided that the term “presentment” should not be used in the Rules — even though the term appears in the Constitution.[94] “Retention,” wrote Orfield, “might encourage the use of the ‘run-away’ grand jury as the grand jury could act from their own knowledge or observation and not only from charges made by the United States attorney.”[95]
Again dingbat, read for comprehensions:
“Thus, Rule 6 represented a monumental — and deliberate — change of grand jury practice.[97] Orfield’s peculiar use of the term “runaway” grand jury in the committee notes may mark both the advent of this term into the legal lexicon[98] and the loss to history of true grand jury independence.[99]
It’s time for you to give up your bullcrap.
So I guess all that verbiage boils down to RedSteel STILL telling us that it’s a waste of time to formally investigate whether Obama committed any criminal acts that would be impeachable offenses because of flaws in the Grand Jury system.
In lieu of a criminal investigation by a skilled prosecutor, let’s roll out a few more civil suits with plaintiffs who don’t have standing so that a few more judges can summarily dismiss those lawsuits. We’re at ninty dismissals as of now.
Who knew that Grand Juries are “one size fits all?”
Nice find!
Mike Evans claimed he had never spoken to Abercrombie nor even claimed to speak to Abercrombie. But the audio is available for anybody to hear. He clearly says he spoke to Abercrombie, and this is a direct quote from Evans: “And he said, ‘Mike, there is no Barack Obama cer, birth certificate.’”
So show me the place where Mike Evans admits that he LIED when he said he spoke to Abercrombie and Abercrombie told him there is no Barack Obama birth certificate.
Somebody who could hear those words from Mike Evans’ mouth and not blink or think twice when Evans later denies that he ever even CLAIMED to have spoken to Abercrombie reminds me of a description that Yuri Bezmenov gave of a demoralized person:
“The result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the sixties, dropped out or half baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind.
Even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you cannot change the basic perception and the logical behavior. In other words, these people, the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible...As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter any more. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures.
Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it until he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom. When the military boot crashes his (edited out) then he will understand, but no before that. That’s the tragic of this situation of demoralization.”
Who you gonna believe, Evans after he’s been told to change his story, or your lyin’ ears?
You’re assuming he wants to quell the controversy, but he doesn’t.
I see you still think you can read minds..ROFLMAO. Its more likely he can’t quell the controversy.
I see an appearance on Oprah TV in the future, a coming to Jesus moment asking for everyone’s support and understanding as he throws his white mother under the bus for being a whore and hanging out with communists.
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.