Hawaii's governor takes on birthers

I'm certain you are intelligent enough to see the difference here Scruffy. Bush released the documents that he had, the rest had to come from an unsurprisingly disorganized arm of the federal government. Nothing in the federal government is well organized Scruffy, not a blessed thing.

Obama, on the other hand, is fighting to deny access to his records. It isn't that he has released everything he has and is waiting for a disorganized government to supply the rest, it is he who is actively seeking to keep those records from being reviewed. George W. Bush had no personal control over how the Texas National Guard organized and stored his records. With regards to Obama's college applications, it isn't that the colleges can't locate them, it is that lawyers have been hired to ensure that those applications remain in the filing cabinets with the dust undisturbed.

The difference is pretty clear, isn't it Scruffy?

I presently know alot of people that are serving that would like an answer to the question, but they will still carry out the orders of those appointed over them. That is what we do.

But why not just put the stuff out there, call it a day, it will shut up alot of organizations and get on with the business at hand. Unless there is really something to hide.

navycpo7 wrote: I presently know alot of people that are serving that would like an answer to the question, but they will still carry out the orders of those appointed over them. That is what we do.

But why not just put the stuff out there, call it a day, it will shut up alot of organizations and get on with the business at hand. Unless there is really something to hide.

Why should anything be "put out there"....this is like asking someone when they stopped beating their wife. No matter what Obama put out there....the birthers would never stop. I suspect he has better things to do than try and satisfy a fringe group who has made up their minds already. To even respond to this kind of attack gives it a validity it doesn't deserve.

I wonder if Chris "I got a thrill up my leg" Matthews is still feelin' it for Barry? Oops...guess not, looks like he's asking for the records too! Makes me wonder what's running down Barry's leg at the thought of his base asking the same questions the "fringe" is asking!!

Now that's funny!

"Chris Matthews has fumbled his way right into the debate over President Obama's birth certificate.

The liberal MSNBC host -- while declaring the controversy over the President's birth certificate "nonsense" -- nonetheless asked on Monday night why Obama has not demanded the release of a copy of his full birth certificate."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... z19Sz9APps

As I mentioned before, when Obama released his Certificate of Live Birth (the new, shorter form), the birthers were all over that claiming it was fake. No raised seal (the seal was raised), photo shop job on the name, and other stuff. Nothing stuck and you don't hear the fake claims any more. So then they demanded the original certificate. And if that is released, they will still claim it's fake. And I pity the poor doctor (or attendent) who signed it (assuming he's still alive), because he/she will get hounded to death by the conspiracy crowd. If he says it's real, his whole life will be researched to "prove" he's a socialist or something.

And PrintSmith, you've said Obama's legal team has been fighting the release of his original certificate. Could you please provide a link to support that so I can further research it?

The name of the law firm is Perkins Coie.

You might be familiar with the name of one of the partners of that firm - Robert Bauer - who is currently employed as White House counsel.

Don't know that "fighting to deny access" accurately describes what's going on here. If you or I, or President Obama, are served in a civil matter, we have to pay an attorney to respond to the complaint, no matter how frivolous it may be. Is there any proof that this law firm is actively "fighting to deny access", or are they simply showing up to quash ridiculous lawsuits? Everything that I can come up with in your suggested Google search indicates that that's the extent of the "fight"......

Beeks wrote: Don't know that "fighting to deny access" accurately describes what's going on here. If you or I, or President Obama, are served in a civil matter, we have to pay an attorney to respond to the complaint, no matter how frivolous it may be. Is there any proof that this law firm is actively "fighting to deny access", or are they simply showing up to quash ridiculous lawsuits? Everything that I can come up with in your suggested Google search indicates that that's the extent of the "fight"......

Yeah, that's my point too. I asked PrintSmith for a link to show that Obama has a legal team fighting the release of his original birth certificate. I got a name of a firm, but no link. Please just give a link that proves Obama has a legal team actively fighting the release of his birth certificate, and I'll be glad to check it out.

I too have tried my own Google search, but so far I just get far right websites that if they site a source, just site each other. Grrr...

Wikipedia is no definitive source, but I'll just post this article I found since it covers a lot about the Obama birth certificate and seems up to date, not that I've yet had time to read it all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_birth_certificate

Beeks wrote: Don't know that "fighting to deny access" accurately describes what's going on here. If you or I, or President Obama, are served in a civil matter, we have to pay an attorney to respond to the complaint, no matter how frivolous it may be. Is there any proof that this law firm is actively "fighting to deny access", or are they simply showing up to quash ridiculous lawsuits? Everything that I can come up with in your suggested Google search indicates that that's the extent of the "fight"......

And in the instance of which we are speaking, the subject of the suits is the release of documents that pertain to President Obama and his life before the presidency. The lawyers show up with the intent of denying said release of documents, not facilitating that release. An active attempt to deny is akin to fighting the attempt in court Beeks. A NASCAR driver who is in the lead during a race and actively seeking to deny others his spot is said to be fighting to keep his lead. One seeking to forestall the foreclosure process is said to be fighting to keep their home. The term fighting would aptly describe what the lawyers are doing in seeking to deny access to the records that are being withheld from examination by their efforts. Obama could simply give his consent for the release of those records and then no lawsuits seeking to compel their release would be necessary. Two twins born the day after Obama have the fortitude to authorize the release of their original documentation on file with the state of Hawaii, an image of that documentation is part of this thread. They, however, are not in a position where their very job depends upon such records being in existence. Obama is. Thus, one would think it more appropriate for the image posted in this thread to be the record that resides in the archives of the state of Hawaii for Obama rather than a couple of twins that were born the day after him.

And while you may think the effort to examine the documentation pertinent to Obama and his ability to meet the constitutional requirement of a natural born citizen constitutes a "ridiculous" lawsuit, there are many among your fellow citizens who think otherwise. In the most recent poll I have seen, over 40% of the respondents were either not sure that he met the requirements (23%) or were of the opinion that he did not (20%). You may view their skepticism as ridiculous as well, others surely do. They attempt to ridicule with, in their minds at least, are derisive terms such as "birthers", but the attempt to ridicule has done little to satisfy the skepticism that they continue to hold. Many, in fact, have come to view such labeling as a badge of honor rather than one of ridicule.

There is always a day of reckoning Beeks. Absent the destruction of those documents they will one day be viewed and shared. And if they are destroyed to prevent them from being viewed and shared then that action will live in the same infamy as the missing 18 minutes of Nixon's tapes. Their destruction will confirm for many that such an action was the only means of keeping the truth a secret. So, destruction is out, and for whatever reason, releasing them doesn't appear to be an option the President is interested in pursuing; preferring instead to have a group of lawyers from the firm that represented him personally in the past continue to show up in court seeking to deny the ability of the documents in question to be examined.

And really Beeks, what is the purpose of the "natural born" requirement? Why was it included in the Constitution by the men who met in Philadelphia at all? Why does even one who is a natural born citizen have to also be 14 years a resident within the United States? The answer, or course, is that they wanted to minimize the pollution of the minds of prospective presidents with foreign ideas on how the government of this nation should operate. They believed with all their hearts that once exposed for an extended period of time to the republican principles of self government and self reliance that all other forms of government would be excluded from consideration. They were wrong, of course, as modern progressive ideology so clearly illustrates, but that failure is ours and not theirs to shoulder. As Ben Franklin is purported to have said, we were given a republic, if we could keep it. It seems that we were unable to do that over the last 100 years or so, allowing instead a steady slow march towards the democracy they sought to prevent us from adopting with their efforts.

You guys are going to need a LOT more tinfoil... I know where you can buy it quantity... rofllol