Small Price to Pay for Unity

[stephanie]

Posted by: hankrand // 7 minutes ago // viewed 4 times
Cleveland, Ohio // embed media
Last updated: 5 minutes ago
"Is Barack Obama a U.S. citizen?"

Of course he is, dummy..

"But how do you know?"

Well for starters, he posted his birth certificate on his website. Not to mention, the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii released a statement saying he was born in Hawaii . Also, factcheck.org (a non-partisan and highly credible political fact checking website) investigated it heavily and validated, beyond doubt, that the birth certificate he posted was real. Did I mention that if there were an actual conspiracy surrounding this...it would have to be 47 years in the making? That's right, read it and weep: his birth announcement was posted in a Hawaii newspaper way back in 1961! But if you're really not sure, just remember there have been court cases challenging his citizenship, and every one of them was laughed off the docket.

"That's all pretty compelling. But I got this email that said...."

The email you got is just a crazy, internet-born rumor. It's nothing but a desperate attempt to discredit him. Trust me.

"Yeah, I'm sure you're right...."

***************

Sound familiar? I've personally had it several times, but mine ends differently.

****************

"Well for starters, he posted his birth certificate on his website."

Really? Well humor me, because I think this is important enough for us to get our facts straight. So let's explore that. Hawaii doesn't issue "birth certificates". The state offers "Certificates of Live Birth" and "Certifications of Live Birth." What Barack Obama has posted on his website is a "Certification of Live Birth." So let's talk about the difference between the two documents. As you probably know, the document we commonly refer to as a "birth certificate" (more formally called a Certificate of Live Birth) is packed with detail. Detail like the hospital you were born in, the doctor who delivered you along with his/her signature, etc. It looks like a tax form with all the boxes and everything. The Certification of Live Birth is really just a snapshot of that. So which one is more credible? Which one does the state of Hawaii give the "last word" to? Based on information that existed long before this issue came up, let's take a look at one example of what the state of Hawaii has to say on it:

"In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." ( http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl ).

So if the state of Hawaii itself doesn't accept "Certifications of Live Birth" as a last leg of verification, it's safe to say there's a pretty solid distinction we too can make when comparing a Certificate to a Certification. What Barack Obama posted, was a Certification. What people want to see, is the Certificate. When you say he "posted his birth certificate" on his website, the truth (painful as it may be to hear) is that he posted a much different document that if accurately described, would be a "birth certification" - which is far less credible and far easier to alter.

"That's pretty lean. It's not really a big deal to me because I know it's just a rumor. But still, if you're going to insist there's a question here, I have to tell you....the state of Hawaii released a statement saying he was born in Hawaii . They have the 'Certificate' you're talking about, and they proved it was authentic. Are you saying they're in on this crazy conspiracy?"

I'm not saying they're involved in a conspiracy, or even that one exists. But I'm not sure you can honestly say you actually read that statement. Here, take a look:

read it all here..
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-156542

[Kathianne]

Stephanie and all that wish to find out more about 'the one's' birth. I hear ya, there may be something to what you are searching for, but unless the SCOTUS takes it up, he's going to take the helm on 1/20/09. We may all wish different, but it most certainly seems that is what is going to come to pass.

So, are you all going to go where the Democrats went for 8 years? If so, what is the point? What do you hope to accomplish?

[stephanie]

I want to see a fraud stopped at becoming our President, as do a lot of other people..

this is not just some little thing, Kat. I wish you would stop badgering me about it..

[Kathianne]

I want to see a fraud stopped at becoming our President, as do a lot of other people..

this is not just some little thing, Kat. I wish you would stop badgering me about it..

I'm sorry, really, if you feel I'm 'badgering' you about it. I don't mean to. On the other side, I just don't see where you hope to go. Unless the SCOTUS sees things your way, it's going to be a non-issue. I think if there were going to step up, it would have been before now.

That is NOT dismissing your concerns, just saying that perhaps time and talents could be directed elsewhere.

[gabosaurus]

Kathianne makes a great point. When Dems griped and moaned about the 2000 election result (which they did endlessly), Republicans couldn't understand why they would "continue to beat a dead horse."
"It's over!" Republicans shouted. "Bush is the new President and there is nothing you can do about it!"
Dems urged investigations and court battles. They didn't want a fraud, a man who "stole" an election, to become president. Republicans just laughed. They urged Dems to "support the president."

The shoe is now on the other foot. Why are you bitching and moaning? It's a done deal.
Of course, we all know why radical GOPs are doing it. Because they can't accept losing. You want to keep your head in the sand and root for worms in the system.

All these threads belong in the "Conspiracy Theories" Forum. Along with the various 9-11 BS.
But I don't expect Stephanie, RSR, et al to go along with this. Because they enjoy being full of shit, and inflicting their bullshit on others.

[emmett]

Kathianne makes a great point. When Dems griped and moaned about the 2000 election result (which they did endlessly), Republicans couldn't understand why they would "continue to beat a dead horse."
"It's over!" Republicans shouted. "Bush is the new President and there is nothing you can do about it!"
Dems urged investigations and court battles. They didn't want a fraud, a man who "stole" an election, to become president. Republicans just laughed. They urged Dems to "support the president."

The shoe is now on the other foot. Why are you bitching and moaning? It's a done deal.
Of course, we all know why radical GOPs are doing it. Because they can't accept losing. You want to keep your head in the sand and root for worms in the system.

All these threads belong in the "Conspiracy Theories" Forum. Along with the various 9-11 BS.
But I don't expect Stephanie, RSR, et al to go along with this. Because they enjoy being full of shit, and inflicting their bullshit on others.


I'm sitting here looking at one of YOUR posts that says you believe the 2000 election was stolen by Bush! I would link it but I'd rather get the pleasure of knowing you had to look it up!

Stephanie is determined to get people to listen, plain and simple! She thinks she has a case, so do many others! The point about the certificate is interesting. The law is the law! Oh...what the hell am I saying? We don't enforce immigration, we don't protect privacy and we tax without proper representation so why should the president have to be from America?

The fact is... President-Elect Obama will take office on 1/20. He will be the president. Hilary Clinton will be the Sec of State, Janet Napoli.................................oh fuck it! I'm jumping off a building!