Posted on 05/06/2011 7:06:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The good news: It’s a heavy blow to the Trump boomlet. The bad news: … none that I can think of, really.
Actually, the bad news is that I lose a vein of easy content to blog. Help me, viral videos, you’re my only hope.
More crosstabs from WaPo. The “Honolulu/Hawaii” column is the big one, obviously:
This poll was conducted before Obama’s announcement of the Bin Laden killing, in case you’re inclined to attribute the huge bounce to goodwill rather than evidence. Needless to say, the key lines are the ones for Republicans and Conservative Republicans; in both groups, the number of Birthers was cut by more than half after the birth certificate revelation. (In fact, it was likely deeper than that. Birtherism had been spiking in the last few weeks since Trump mainstreamed the issue, so it was probably higher than the April 2010 numbers shown here.) I argued a few weeks ago that, contrary to big media’s received wisdom, Birthers aren’t a homogeneous group but rather a mix of hardcore and softcore believers, the latter of which were simply misinformed because they weren’t following the issue closely. These numbers bear that out. Which, for Chris Matthews, means … what? Republicans are racist, but maybe not quite as racist as he thought? What happens to the narrative?
Some people were hassling me in Headlines over this poll because I suggested yesterday in the post about the Bin Laden photos that evidence doesn’t convince skeptics anymore. Fair enough; at the very least, I should have qualified that by specifying that I meant skeptics with an agenda. But give the Birther issue time. I’ll be mighty keen to see if the numbers still look like this in six months — which, theoretically, they should — or if they start to creep back up as discontent with Obama’s policies rises and/or hardcore Birthers regroup and start challenging the long-form birth certificate. Trump had better hope so. Somehow, I don’t see the “trade war with China” platform carrying him to the nomination.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding
You refute National Review.
You know, a REAL source.
;)
You must like the taste - all I am serving up is CROW!
This is a statement from the state for its employees’ identification documents:
“Birth Certificates: Must be government-issured birth certificates listing parents’ names. Hospital-issued certificates are NOT acceptable... Some state and county clerk offices issue the short form certificate as a standard (Iowa, New Jersey, South Carolina, etc.). Please obtain the long form that includes the parnts’ names. This is the same document used to obtain a passport.”
Hussein can’t be employeed as a janitor at the state without a certified long form but he’s squatting in the highest of national positions with a forgery.
He also claimed he never had a passport before becoming a Senator, so someone please explain how he was able to travel to Indonesia, Australia, Pok-i-ston, and Kenya without one? Liar in Chief and his side kick POTUS.
I’ve never been “polled” in my life. Who are these people?
National Review didn't prove anything. Goulding didn't prove squat. You don't use some optimization feature on a magazine cover that did not even OCR the words and lettering (it didn't work on his "demonstration") on the cover dominated by picture. You would not even use that in the first place. If Goulding wanted to prove his point, he should have shown us all the step-by-step process that rendered exactly the same as Obama's alleged COLB by using the same flattened document. And he should have shown the process to everyone so that it can be duplicated by others. Goulding threw some BS out and you guys swallowed it. The pdf reader didn't even build the pdf document in the same manner as Obama's new COLB. It doesn't even come close. It renders the document in sections including the words that even fade in, and NOT like the the background that was rendered first with the rectangular white spaces that Obama's COLB was built before the additional layers of words and letters that were added later.
Goulding's nonsense demonstration:
http://global.nationalreview.com/pdf/passport2.pdf
Obama's new COLB:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
They are completely dissimilar in the way the pdf files are built.
No it isn't because if that's true, he's now complicit in a hoax as he claims his father is a foreigner. (and he's not a NBC)
Except payoffs can be made to produce whatever result you want. Nothing now days can be 100% foolproof but I'd like to know that someone somewhere in our government has the guts and the pride to stand up and demand some sort of accountablity. The GOP let it slide. Congress has laughed at it. The Supreme Court admits it is "evading" it. And we wonder why other countries have laughed at and insulted America since the election.
True. There is something on the real one that scares the cr@p out of him. But he couldn't manipulate one line because that would have let the cat out of the bag. Instead, he had the entire thing manipulated and manipulated again until now there is no way to tell what is the truth and what he had to hide.
Perhaps you can help us with natural born citizen requiring two citizen parents...if you have not done so pls review our Vattel research thread..
It is far more compelling than the birth certificate..
What’s also amazing is how MANY posters, who we’ve never seen on an eligibility thread, are suddenly authorities on the subject.
All of a sudden they’re experts in the field - who are so expert that they can’t even be bothered to rebut any points, just dances around saying “I’m right and you’re wrong haha”. Or variations, including making arguments that have been proven wrong or are irrelelvant.
It’s like a Greyhound bus station with crazy homeless drug addicts wandering around.
Everyones’ loyalties are being revealed clearly.
And - he who laughs last, laughs best.
"Eventually" is here now.
Barry even admits this on his previous campaign web site.
In 1787, there was only 1 known definition for citizens who where natural born and it came from a source so well known to the framers...they referenced the legal treatise during the Federal Convention.
Barry never was a "natural born Citizen" as known an intended by the framers.
No it isn't because if that's true, he's now complicit in a hoax as he claims his father is a foreigner. (and he's not a NBC)
-------------------------------------------
There's no proof Barry's father was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth.
Furthermore, even IF there was...that then Barry was an NBC...he'd have some explaining to do re: any number of felonies such as:
Why is he using the name "Obama" as his legal name?
Why did he take oats of office (state and federal) under the name "Obama" if that isn't his legal name?
Why did his campaign web site post the image of a fraudulent HI short form showing O Sr. as his birth father?
Why did he post on the whitehouse web site and image of a fraudulent HI long form showing O Sr. as his birth father?
Why has he signed *anything* using the name Obama?
Why did he solicite and accept campaign contributes under the "Obama?"
Who is this mysterious father..making the spurious born Obama a natural born citizen...
But, in reality, you have done nothing but demonstrate that you are the king of fools.
You are “crowing” about a document that has never been seen by anyone outside of Team Obama.
You are “crowing” about a document that has never been examined by a single independent forensic document examiner.
You are “crowing” about a document that you have never seen -- that NO "journalist" has ever seen.
You are “crowing” about Obama’s “trust me” gambit.
You insult every professional graphics expert that has examined the electronic image on the White House website and found it has been manipulated.
My conclusion is that you are an Obot, a blithering idiot, and a jerk whose opinion isn't worth spit.
This was a distraction.
Sarah Palin caught hell for saying so. Is any birther going to say she was right and sorry? Not likely.
Scorn is the proper course for such behavior.
So what is it going to be now?
Are commentators and candidates going to be held to the litmus test that these documents are false - or that NBC means two citizen parents - or that the documents were fraudulently entered - or the “truth” du jour; or they are blithering idiots who insults the work of hard working graphics experts, don't respect the Constitution, and are liberals?
If that is your course - expect disappointment.
It should have a flavor familiar to you by now.
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.