So far, we've seen the officially produced short-form version of the birth certificate, date-stamped June 6, 2007. We've also seen the archived birth announcement, which was originally published by a Honolulu newspaper in August of 1961. The short-form document was posted online by FactCheck.org on June 16, 2008. Set aside FactCheck.org for a moment, and consider when and why the "birther" issue first arose.
If you listen to MSNBC's Chris Matthews, Media Matters, or virtually any liberal news outlet, you are led to believe the "birthers" were born of right-wing conspiracy theorists. Hillary Clinton supporters may well be the true parents of the "birther" movement. If not, Clintonistas such as notable blogger Larry Johnson, acted as midwives. His blog, No Quarter, criticized Obama's short-form birth certificate while Hillary Clinton was still fighting to be the Democratic nominee:
This certificate is what the Hawaii DOH calls a “Late” Certificate of Birth, and it is not an original Birth Certificate recorded at the date of actual birth. In Hawaii, anyone can claim they were born there and submit the evidence years after the birth to obtain a late “Certificate of Birth”.
(If I may slightly digress for a moment, in June of 2008, Google was accused by several pro-Clinton bloggers of being silenced by by Google Inc., using "its network of online services to silence critics of Barack Obama." Google CEO Eric Schmidt publicly supported Obama's candidacy and actively campaigned on his behalf.)
Take a look at pro-Hillary Democrat and former Pennsylvania Deputy Attorney General, Phillip J. Berg. Berg has unsuccessfully filed a number lawsuits attempting to get access to Obama's original long-form birth certificate, both before and after Obama became the Democratic nominee for President. (Berg had previously established himself as a conspiracy theorist by suing to discover the "truth" about the 9/11 terrorist attacks, alleging a cover-up by the administration of President George W. Bush.) Berg continues to press the "birther" issue on his blog, http://obamacrimes.com/
So while it is likely left-wing "nutjobs" who gave birth to the "birther" issue , the mainstream media is blaming the controversy on right-wing "nutjobs". Regardless of whether the question comes from the left or the right, is it unreasonable to request that Obama prove to the American people something that he says exists; i.e. an original long-form of his birth certificate? "Birthers" come from both sides of the political divide, yet the fingers of the mainstream media all point to the right.
Back to Factcheck.org., which MSNBC's Matthews recently cited as a "non-partisan" media outlet that has provided absolute proof that Obama is a natural born citizen of the Unites States. FactCheck.org itself has publicly criticized CNN's Lou Dobbs for calling on Obama to provide access to his original birth certificate, saying they have settled the matter once and for all.
Is FactCheck.org non-partisan? Hell no! They admit to longtime ties to Obama, but brush this off as a "canard".
Brooks Jackson, director of Factcheck.org, admits that his group is a part of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, but says the Obama board connection is a canard.
The only connection Obama had with Annenberg came in 1995 through 1999 when the president-elect was the board chairman for The Annenberg Challenge in Chicago. The Challenge was charged with distributing $49 million in order to improve public education.
"The connection with us is that Obama was the board chairman of a group that benefited from Annenberg's philanthropy years before we came into existence," Jackson says. "Somehow that was twisted into Obama sat on our board." Factcheck.org, in fact, does not have a board of directors.
Indeed Obama does have ties to FactCheck.org, via the Annenberg foundation, of which he served a four-year stint on the board for one of its "philanthropy" arms, alongside terrorist William Ayers. Obama and Annenberg also enjoy a cozy relationship with ACORN, the infamous group which Factcheck.org has repeatedly defended, by downplaying ACORN's role in indictments and convictions related to voter fraud. FactCheck.org has a major conflict of interest that the mainstream media ignores ... enough said.
It's been suggested by many, that the "birther" issue would simply go away if Obama allowed for his original long-form birth certificate to be open for scrutiny by unbiased sources. Top officials at the Hawaii Department of Health have publicly stated the document exists, and I'm inclined to believe them. My suspicion is, for whatever it's worth, that by sealing his birth record as well as his college records, Obama is hiding something that would be politically damaging to him. The "birther" issue will not go away until Obama releases his original birth certificate.
Happy "birther day", "birthers"! Thank you for asking the tough questions.
Remember the tea parties? The less than objective MSM called the participants "tea baggers" in jest. They felt the need to ridicule people who engaged in legal protest because they feared their message would be well received, which it was.
ReplyDeleteIt's the same thing with the birth certificate. What if the calls to see it keep growing? Liberals are scared to death of finding out the answer. Their strategy is to ridicule the opposition into submission.
August 3, 2009 2:52 PM
Word verification
Remember the tea parties? The less than objective MSM called the participants "tea baggers" in jest. They felt the need to ridicule people who engaged in legal protest because they feared their message would be well received, which it was.
It's the same thing with the birth certificate. What if the calls to see it keep growing? Liberals are scared to death of finding out the answer. Their strategy is to ridicule the opposition into submission.
Comment as: Select profile... Redskin () Google AccountLiveJournalWordPressTypePadAIMOpenID Name/URLAnonymous Edit Settings – Sign out
Remember the tea parties? The less than objective MSM called the participants "tea baggers" in jest. They felt the need to ridicule people who engaged in legal protest because they feared their message would be well received, which it was.
It's the same thing with the birth certificate. What if the calls to see it keep growing? Liberals are scared to death of finding out the answer. Their strategy is to ridicule the opposition into submission.
Y'know, I have my doubts about the BC controversy because I fear we're being set up by the Chicago politicos. But I gotta admit, this thing stinks! Something's rotten.
ReplyDeleteGreat Posting!! I agree with Nickie that something does stink to high heaven about Obama hiding his long-form birth certificate.
ReplyDeleteI do think that Obama was born in Hawaii, but I also think that everyone, including me, is justified to demand for Obama to release his long-form birth certificate. I personally think that Obama wants to drag this on for some political reason. He seems to be the type of sneaky guy to do anything for political or personal gain.
Is Obama setting up the birthers? Possibly.
ReplyDeleteIt's noteworthy that when the Clintonistas were making the claims, Factcheck.org put out the short form which quieted the debate for a few months. But why not release the real deal and settle the matter once and for all?
As I said, my suspicion is that he may be covering up an embarrassment the long-form would reveal, Maybe he was born in a manger or a whorehouse.
Here's one more point to think about. The modern short-form is dated 2007. Why? Did he have the long-form all these years, but asked for a short form to be released because he had few detail?
I do love how the MSM is ridiculing those who want to see the long-form. They say this matter is closed, the same way they say the global warming debate is over.
what a fabulous post!..too bad the Leftards dont even care !..thanks for the vis to WHT..don't be a stranger and let me know if ya want me to add ya to my blogroll hun~!:)
ReplyDelete