Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[BeAChooser]

Not information that affects the important location of birth information, which is what determines whether you were born in the US.

Gee, is there something about the hospital in which Obama was born that he wants to keep hidden? Or something about the doctor?

What hospital you were born in within city limits is pretty irrelevant compared to the fact that you were born within those city limits in the first place.

Not in this case. Not when so many now clearly doubt the veracity of what they've been told. Seems to me that revealing the name of the hospital and doctor that delivered Obama would be a small price to pay for bringing us all together again. Why the reluctance to do that, ANTPogo?

Quote:
No, untrue, as proven above, quoting the law itself. As proven by people who have gotten the so-called "long form" sent to them.

No, they haven't. Several anonymous people have claimed they have, but the forms displayed conveniently lack any actual proof that they were obtained on the dates claimed (and, in one case, the form is a plain uncertified and undated photocopy indistinguishable from someone taking their old certificate to a Kinko's).

You lie again. The link I supplied to you named a person making the claim (Miki Booth, who ran for Congress in Hawaii in 2010) and noone has proven what she presented wasn't authentic. Here's what she reportedly said in that link I first supplied:

The birth certificates I showed at the convention belong to my husband, Fred, and our son, Alan. Both were born in Kapiolani hospital over thirty years apart. Fred was born in 1949 and Alan in 1981. Fred’s is the black copy with white type which they still used in 1961, Obama’s alleged year of birth. Alan’s is the newer green version. If Obama was born in Hawai’i in Kapiolani, as he has claims, it would be the black version. The title at the top of Fred’s and Alan’s documents is CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH.

The document posted on the web alleged to be and wrongly referred to as Obama’s birth certificate is titled CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH, and only certifies a baby was born. The purpose of the Certification is to provide documentation for those babies and children who do not have a real birth certificate because they were born at home or outside the country without benefit of a hospital or doctor. When there is no proof of hospital or doctor it proves nothing, just the information attested to by the person filling out the application for a certified document. This is one of the biggest lies promulgated by people ignorant of the facts such as Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly of FOX who continue to claim that what is posted on the internet is the real deal.

Here's another story on her: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=124656 , with more details, including an image of the long forms she supplied for her son Alan, who was born after Obama:

http://logisticsmonster.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/MikiBoothBC.jpg

Are you claiming she fabricated this document?

The wnd link also contains an image of her husband's black copy long form.

Are you claiming that's a fabrication too?

Just how much in denial are you Obama Truther's?

And by the way, she said she and her husband were registered democrats when Obama ran for office in 2008. So apparently it was not just right wing wackos who were concerned.

I find it telling, though, that you uncritically accept the above

I find it telling that you lied about the above and uncritically accept the word of man who has lied about much regarding his history, acquaintances and his agenda.

You're not a skeptic in search of the truth, you're a gullible partisan looking for anything, however tenuous, to support something you desperately want to believe is true in the face of voluminous evidence to the contrary.

I feel the same way about you. And I've not only this example to prove you behave that way but your dishonesty in discussing the Foster case as well.

Quote:
No, that's untrue. Other people in Hawaii have obtained a so-called long form from around the time Obama was supposedly born for their own births

I've highlighted the key words here. What was issued then is not what's issued now.

But what was issued then is in fact at the heart of the matter. What are you afraid will be revealed by Obama's long form, ANTPogo? The name of the doctor who delivered him? The hospital in which he was born? Or perhaps something else?

Quote:
that clearly prove the long form contains information (like the doctor's name and the hospital of birth) that is not on the document Obama is claiming proves his birth.

And which is irrelevant to what his certified copy proves, which is that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.

But we already know that Mr. Wisch, spokesman for Hawaii's attorney general's office, lied. The law says exactly the opposite of what he claimed. Now if one public official will lie in this case, why not several? It would be so simple to clear this up so there was no doubt in the minds of folks like me. Why won't Obama and the DoH in Hawaii do that? Hmmmm?

Actually, the fact that the more information that is released (like Dr. Fukino stating outright that Obama's information shows he was born in Honolulu and has a doctor's signature)

Again, another unverified claim. I showed you statements by government officials in the Foster case that were outright lies. By doctors the government used in the Foster case that were outright lies. Why are you so confident now that Dr Fukino is telling the truth? Wouldn't it be so much simpler for them to simply prove it by publishing this so-called "long form"? Surely that wouldn't harm Obama and could only help the country heal. That is what you and Obama want ... the country to heal? Or are you like beren and want to controversy to continue?

the louder birthers like you cry for additional information, shows that you don't care about the truth at all.

Seems to me you are the ones who are protesting too much. Something about that birth certificate has those on the left in a panic.

 

[BeAChooser]

And you.

So just because I ask to see what you claim is an innocuous birth certificate that you and the State of Hawaii claim exists, that makes me a racist?

 

[beren]

So just because I ask to see what you claim is an innocuous birth certificate that you and the State of Hawaii claim exists, that makes me a racist?

What other explanation is there?

 

[BeAChooser]

I don't have to prove it. The State of Hawaii certifies that it is so.

We already have evidence that Mr. Wisch, spokesman for Hawaii's attorney general's office, lied. That being the case, perhaps the State of Hawaii's certification isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Now you can prove me wrong very easily. Just publish Obama's so-called "long form" birth certificate. Because unless you do, the number of people who doubt is only going to increase.

You've provided not one shred of evidence to suggest that the State is engaged in a fraud.

Not true. I've provided evidence indicating that at least one Hawaiian state official has lied. And it certainly seems that they can't keep their story straight. And perhaps the reason they won't release this innocuous document is that it would prove they engaged in a fraud. Perhaps the biggest scam in US history.

It says he was born in Hawaii, ergo he was born in Hawaii.

1984 has finally arrived.

That is acceptable to any court of law in the country as dispositive proof.

After this affair, maybe it won't be.

 

[A'isha]

Gee, is there something about the hospital in which Obama was born that he wants to keep hidden? Or something about the doctor?

As much as you desperately want to believe it, no.

Not in this case. Not when so many now clearly doubt the veracity of what they've been told. Seems to me that revealing the name of the hospital and doctor that delivered Obama would be a small price to pay for bringing us all together again. Why the reluctance to do that, ANTPogo?

Because it's against Hawaiian law. As Hawaiian government officials have told you.

But you'd rather believe they're all lying, and random bloggers are actually telling the truth.

You lie again. The link I supplied to you named a person making the claim (Miki Booth, who ran for Congress in Hawaii in 2010) and noone has proven what she presented wasn't authentic. Here's what she reportedly said in that link I first supplied:

You either don't understand what the problem is, or you do and you're being deliberately dishonest about it.

Up until 1990, Hawaii issued the "long form", the form that the Nordyke Twins, Obama's mother, and Booth's husband and son got.

From 1990 until 2001, you could get either the "long form", or a new computer-printed form (the so-called "short form").

After 2001, when everything in Hawaii was computerized, only the "short form" was available.

The forms that Booth displayed from her husband in 1949 and her son in 1981, therefore, have no bearing on what can be obtained post-2001. And Booth is lying when she says otherwise, since she actually knows better - when she attempted to get a birth certificate for her son after that, the form that she got was pretty much identical to the form Obama received. She was not able to get a copy of the 1981 form for her son dated at any point after 2001.

Or didn't you even stop to wonder why she had to post an anonymous "long form" that someone else entirely supposedly obtained post-2001? Why didn't she get a new copy of her son's "long form", and display the two identical forms with the different date stamps side-by-side?

Oh, and she's also lying when she says that the "short form" certificate of live birth is different from the "short form" certification of live birth. They're the exact same form, renamed by the state of Hawaii sometime in 2008 (as Arus808, a poster here who was born in Hawaii herself, as shown). If Obama were to request a new copy of his "short form" tomorrow, it would also say certificate of live birth. (EDIT:Not to mention her facepalm-worthy idiotic hypocrisy in dismissing Obama's certificate by falsely claiming it doesn't have a raised seal, in the same Post and Fail article where she provides the anonymous "long form"...which doesn't have a raised seal!)

And if Booth ever loses either her husband's 1949 original, or her son's 1981 original, she will never get them from Hawaii. Hawaii will only ever send her the same form they sent her when she asked for a new copy of her son's certificate, the same "short form" Obama got.

I find it telling that you lied about the above and uncritically accept the word of man who has lied about much regarding his history, acquaintances and his agenda.

I don't, actually. I accept the word of the men and women who are Hawaii state officials in charge of the relevant departments and procedures, some of whom are the political appointees of ardent opponents of Obama.

But we already know that Mr. Wisch, spokesman for Hawaii's attorney general's office, lied. The law says exactly the opposite of what he claimed.

Actually, no. You have a blog post from a Spanish blog that contains a cut-and-paste from Mario Apuzzo, a crackpot DWI lawyer who keeps getting his cases challenging Obama's legitimacy tossed out of court (what, did you just link to the first result that popped up in google that confirmed your biases? The blog post even links directly to Apuzzo's original...didn't you even bother looking at the original?). Even the Supreme Court has rejected him (though I suppose that they, like the entire Hawaiian government from the former Republican governor on down, are a bunch of lying liars who secretly support Obama).

Needless to say, he (and you) are wrong about what Hawaiian law states, and the Hawaiian attorney general's office is right.

You really will believe anything as long as it agrees with you, won't you?

 

[A'isha]

Since you now seem to find the flat assertions of Apuzzo so convincing, BAC, please tell me you're going to start citing Orly Taitz next.

Because that would just make my day.

 

[BeAChooser]

Oh and Lakin has publicly stated that he is sorry for ever entertaining the birther mantra.

Nice attempt to lie. What Larkin said was he regretted his decision not to deploy, not that he changed his mind about the need for Obama to prove he's eligible to be President. He's sorry for starting the lawsuit because of the way he was treated and what it has cost his family. He was railroaded by the government. During the trial, he was not allowed to present witnesses or documents related to the President's eligibility to be Commander-in-Chief under article II of the Constitution. Daniel J. Driscoll, the investigating officer, explained the rejection of the materials and witnesses as follows: “The Defense quest to use a military justice forum to invalidate all military authority while undermining the authority of a sitting United States President certainly appears at first blush to be a nonjusticiable political question.” In other words, the military punted on the question of Obama's eligibility.

And here's an excerpt from the first letter he wrote from prison:

http://www.terrylakinactionfund.com/prisondiaries/13-diaries20101221.html

Dec 21, 2010

Hope all is well. Don't know how to start a letter or what to say. I hope I made a difference in a very important matter. It cost me a lot. But I now have to believe it turned out okay. There certainly are no do-overs. The important thing is for the work to carry-on so we never have this situation again.

... snip ...

Just thought I was doing the right thing. I spent enough of myself and my family's future for now. Others are going to have to continue.

That doesn't sound like he's changed his core belief that Obama should be required to prove he really is a US citizen. And his later letters (at this link: http://www.terrylakinactionfund.com/prisondiaries.html ) appear to confirm that. So nice try at deceiving the forum.

 

[BeAChooser]

I don't fear it, or the contents of any other form of the birth certificate already released by the President.

Sure you do. Else you wouldn't object to having what you claim is a totally innocuous document placed in the public domain. And neither would Obama.

First, I do not stipulate to any particular percentage of members of any political party believing "birther" claims.

Actually, you did. You said you didn't believe that "most of these people" would change their minds. Well "most" is over 50% of those in the GOP who believe that . CNN published a poll in 2010 (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=187781 ) that found that about 77% of republicans question his citizenship. So that would be about 40% of the GOP membership who you are calling lying kooks. And according to that same poll, about 32% of independents question Obama's citizenship. And even some 18% of democrats. You must be calling them lying kooks too.

And later you said that "the vast majority" who say they'd accept the form are liars. Now "vast majority" is not 51% in my mind. In my mind, "vast majority" means a much larger percentage. Here's what someone found (http://lindarella.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/what-is-a-vast-majority-to-you/ ) the term generally means … numbers like 77%-89% to most people. Indeed, he links a Department of Homeland Security report that uses the term to mean 24 out of 27 or about 89%. So it does indeed appear as if you were claiming that about 0.89 * 0.77 percent = 68% of republicans are lying kooks.

First, as noted above, I do not stipulate to the "half the GOP" value

Actually, you did, as noted.

I am a registered unaffiliated (or independent as known in many states) voter. My allegiance is to no party; it's to my country.

So you claim. But then it's easy to make such claims from the anonymity of the internet.

But let's suppose such a form was provided (I don't know whether it is possible, and I don't care)

It's possible. The head of the Hawaiian DoH said the form exists and the law clearly allows the DoH to make a copy of the form and give it to a someone with a direct and tangible reason for having it. Obama would certainly qualify, and to remove all questions, Obama could simply direct the DoH to publish the form.

Why would you accept one form certified by the state of Hawaii but not another, given this supposed conspiracy to prevent its release?

Well it should be obvious that if they publish the form they are no longer hiding it. And as long as the form appears to be genuine why should we doubt it's veracity? But they aren't publishing the form, are they? So there is some reason to doubt.

Why would this grand conspiracy suddenly capitulate

But they haven't capitulated. They are fighting tooth and nail to make sure that the form isn't released. Why, if it's so innocuous?

A birth certificate has been certified by the State of Hawaii.

But politicians are subject to influence, as we've seen time and again. For goodness sakes, the Attorney General of the US was coopted by Bill Clinton. And the politicians in Hawaii have had some trouble maintaining a consistent story, giving us some reason to doubt their veracity. Especially when a very simple release that is well within their ability could end the doubt. Something seems amiss here. What is in that document that has them in panic, slash and burn mode?

I'm not a Democrat.

So you claim.

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Which is absolutely true. If you deny that, then why don't you tell us what courses he took at Columbia and Harvard?

Irrelevant.

But it's not irrelevant. The fact that Obama has been hiding his background and spending millions of dollars to do that is cause for concern. Ayers was more than just some guy in the neighborhood. Frank Marshall Davis was more than just a father figure. He was a KGB asset. Sooner or later the truth will come out. Even about this. Why not now? What harm could this innocuous document do?

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
And yet you aren't furious that the President and his staff have had to keep coming back to deal with this issue.

Wrong. I am furious. The President and Congress have a lot of real work to do and hard choices to make, and entertaining paranoid conspiracy theories distracts from that.

But Obama could end all that distraction tomorrow with one simple request to the DoH. So why doesn't he make it?

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Have spent millions of dollars and countless hours

No, I don't stipulate to that, because it appears the "millions of dollars fighting birther claims" isn't actually true.

Well this report, from April 2009, concluded that more than a million had been paid to quash eligibility suits: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95772 . Surely by now, two years later, it's in the millions … especially if you include what it has cost the government in this matter.

My hard-earned tax money shouldn't be wasted defending against ridiculous claims.

No, just thrown in the stimulus black hole.

You don't get it. This isn't about political viewpoints to me; it's about damage to America's civic discourse by promoters of a ridiculous conspiracy "theory".

But I do get it. That's exactly what this is about. The damage that this doubt is causing to the civil discourse and faith in the government. Surely Obama can see that … can see that he can prevent and undo all that damage by simply telling the Hawaiian DoH to publish his so-called "long form" birth certificate. What harm could that cause? But think of all the good!

You suspect, and I suspect the other way... that they spend their time in the field thinking about people who might shoot at them or try to blow them up.

But military morale is such a tricky thing. A little thing like this could seriously harm morale. Like a cancer. Cause us to lose the WOT even. And morale must be getting serious when numerous soldiers are publically expressing their doubt and refusing to be deployed and when retired military generals are seconding those doubts. And yet all that would need happen to satisfy them is Obama ask Hawaii to publish his long form birth certificate. But he won't. Hmmmmmm.

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Which could be put to rest so simply … by Obama allowing the release of his so-called "long form" birth certificate. Then reasonable people, and I count myself among them, would have no doubts...

Sorry, I still don't believe you. Again, I can't prove it; if such an event could and did occur, then there would be some resolution, but that doesn't seem likely.

Ah … so now you seem to admitting that publishing the long form would resolve this. Just what I've been saying.

 

[BeAChooser]

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
Gee, is there something about the hospital in which Obama was born that he wants to keep hidden? Or something about the doctor?

As much as you desperately want to believe it, no.

How do you know? Have you seen the so-called long form? Do you know the hospital? Do you know the doctor's name? You seem to be the one who want's to "believe" without evidence. The one who is not acting like a *skeptic*.

Because it's against Hawaiian law. As Hawaiian government officials have told you.

No it is not, as the wording of the Hawaiian law provided above (and ignored by you) proves. And don't you know by now that government officials lie, ANTPogo? All the time.

Quote:
You lie again. The link I supplied to you named a person making the claim (Miki Booth, who ran for Congress in Hawaii in 2010) and noone has proven what she presented wasn't authentic. Here's what she reportedly said in that link I first supplied:

You either don't understand what the problem is, or you do and you're being deliberately dishonest about it.

You are the one who was dishonest. You claimed there were only anonymous claims when in fact I'd supplied you with a claim from a named party who provided documentary proof of what was claimed.

After 2001, when everything in Hawaii was computerized, only the "short form" was available.

But that's not true in this case. The head of the Hawaiian Department of Health … the one you cited … stated that he had personally looked at Obama's so-called "long form" not once but twice and he stated exactly where it is now located. So he merely has to walk over there, get it, and take it to a copy machine to resolve this whole controversy. You're spinning, and I think everyone can see it. What's in that document that you fear?

Oh, and she's also lying when she says that the "short form" certificate of live birth is different from the "short form" certification of live birth. They're the exact same form, renamed by the state of Hawaii sometime in 2008 (as Arus808, a poster here who was born in Hawaii herself, as shown).

You mean Arus808, who tried to lie to the forum in post #2547?

And if Booth ever loses either her husband's 1949 original, or her son's 1981 original, she will never get them from Hawaii. Hawaii will only ever send her the same form they sent her when she asked for a new copy of her son's certificate, the same "short form" Obama got.

Yeah, but then she's not the President of the US. I rather suspect they would treat him special if he asked nicely.

Even the Supreme Court has rejected him (though I suppose that they, like the entire Hawaiian government from the former Republican governor on down, are a bunch of lying liars who secretly support Obama).

Nah. They probably just don't want to see the Constitutional Crisis that would ensue were it to turn out that the document contains something that places Obama's eligibility in real doubt. It's a nightmare situation for the statists.

Needless to say, he (and you) are wrong about what Hawaiian law states, and the Hawaiian attorney general's office is right.

Yet, I'm the one who cited the specific wording of the law that shows you are wrong. The specific wording that you then ignored.

You really will believe anything as long as it agrees with you, won't you?

Actually, that's what I was thinking about you.

 

[tsig]

Gee, is there something about the hospital in which Obama was born that he wants to keep hidden? Or something about the doctor?



Not in this case. Not when so many now clearly doubt the veracity of what they've been told. Seems to me that revealing the name of the hospital and doctor that delivered Obama would be a small price to pay for bringing us all together again. Why the reluctance to do that, ANTPogo?



You lie again. The link I supplied to you named a person making the claim (Miki Booth, who ran for Congress in Hawaii in 2010) and noone has proven what she presented wasn't authentic. Here's what she reportedly said in that link I first supplied:



Here's another story on her: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=124656 , with more details, including an image of the long forms she supplied for her son Alan, who was born after Obama:

http://logisticsmonster.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/MikiBoothBC.jpg

Are you claiming she fabricated this document?

The wnd link also contains an image of her husband's black copy long form.

Are you claiming that's a fabrication too?

Just how much in denial are you Obama Truther's?

And by the way, she said she and her husband were registered democrats when Obama ran for office in 2008. So apparently it was not just right wing wackos who were concerned.



I find it telling that you lied about the above and uncritically accept the word of man who has lied about much regarding his history, acquaintances and his agenda.



I feel the same way about you. And I've not only this example to prove you behave that way but your dishonesty in discussing the Foster case as well.



But what was issued then is in fact at the heart of the matter. What are you afraid will be revealed by Obama's long form, ANTPogo? The name of the doctor who delivered him? The hospital in which he was born? Or perhaps something else?



But we already know that Mr. Wisch, spokesman for Hawaii's attorney general's office, lied. The law says exactly the opposite of what he claimed. Now if one public official will lie in this case, why not several? It would be so simple to clear this up so there was no doubt in the minds of folks like me. Why won't Obama and the DoH in Hawaii do that? Hmmmm?



Again, another unverified claim. I showed you statements by government officials in the Foster case that were outright lies. By doctors the government used in the Foster case that were outright lies. Why are you so confident now that Dr Fukino is telling the truth? Wouldn't it be so much simpler for them to simply prove it by publishing this so-called "long form"? Surely that wouldn't harm Obama and could only help the country heal. That is what you and Obama want ... the country to heal? Or are you like beren and want to controversy to continue?



Seems to me you are the ones who are protesting too much. Something about that birth certificate has those on the left in a panic.

Actually I think it's the slot marked "race" that has rightists in a panic.

 

[332nd]

So... Bac, when will you be posting the slightest amount of evidence that Obama could release his long form/original/what ever birth certificate if he wanted to?

Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. Just provide someone with the long form bc from Hawaii that they got on or after 2008. Go.

 

[Travis]

I'm confused........what information does BAC think is on this mythical "other" form that would disprove the one released?

 

[BeAChooser]

Actually I think it's the slot marked "race" that has rightists in a panic.

LOL! Being called a racist by you folks doesn't bother me.

I know I'm not, nor have I made a remark to suggest I am.

So I just take it as a sign of your side's desperation.

Something analogous to Godwin's Law.

 

[BeAChooser]

So... Bac, when will you be posting the slightest amount of evidence that Obama could release his long form/original/what ever birth certificate if he wanted to?

Already did, but you just ignored it. It's there in black and white in the law.

Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. Just provide someone with the long form bc from Hawaii that they got on or after 2008. Go.

Noone else had a direct and tangible need to have it released. Unlike Obama. So the inability to satisfy your request isn't surprising. Nor is anyone else *The President* with the powers that office enjoys. But Obama does have a direct and tangible need to have it released. And like I said, if push came to shove, Obama could order the release of the document with an Executive Order which would have the force of Federal Law. I doubt the humble head of the Hawaiian DoH would resist that. Especially if Obama made it a National Security Directive, since the concern is that this growing doubt could lead to internal strife and possibly damage the morale and reliability of our armed forces. In fact, the Governor of Hawaii could also issue an Executive Order. That would also have the same binding effect as Hawaiian law. So sorry, Redtail, but you're just making excuses like the others ... excuses to prevent the release of something that you all claim is innocuous. What should that tell us, folks?

 

[BeAChooser]

I'm confused........what information does BAC think is on this mythical "other" form that would disprove the one released?

Why do you fear it being released if there is nothing on it of concern?

 

[Accidental Martyr]

I see. So you are claiming that over half the GOP are bat **** crazy racists?

Only half? That's a pretty low estimate.

 

[sylvan8798]

Gee, is there something about the hospital in which Obama was born that he wants to keep hidden? Or something about the doctor?

No one "fears" having anything released. If you do not believe that the documents released so far are valid, why would you believe any additional releases were valid? Can't the Hospital fake those as well? Or is it harder to do that? And what kind of thing about the doctor could possibly invalidate his eligibility to be president? Last I knew, there was no requirement that your birthing doctor be Jewish, or American, or white, or thin, or whatever fantasy you entertain, in order for you to be eligible to the presidency.

This thing is all about goal post moving is that you can keep on moving the goal posts as needed to keep your fantasy alive.

Personally, I applaud Obama for not kowtowing to your insanity.

 

[332nd]

Already did, but you just ignored it. It's there in black and white in the law.

C'mon Bac, just a little shred of evidence. Why are you stalling?

Noone else had a direct and tangible need to have it released. Unlike Obama. So the inability to satisfy your request isn't surprising. Nor is anyone else *The President* with the powers that office enjoys. But Obama does have a direct and tangible need to have it released. And like I said, if push came to shove, Obama could order the release of the document with an Executive Order which would have the force of Federal Law. I doubt the humble head of the Hawaiian DoH would resist that. Especially if Obama made it a National Security Directive, since the concern is that this growing doubt could lead to internal strife and possibly damage the morale and reliability of our armed forces. In fact, the Governor of Hawaii could also issue an Executive Order. That would also have the same binding effect as Hawaiian law. So sorry, Redtail, but you're just making excuses like the others ... excuses to prevent the release of something that you all claim is innocuous. What should that tell us, folks?

Why are you afraid Bac? Just provide one. Surely someone has gotten this long form since 08?

 

[sylvan8798]

Why are you afraid Bac? Just provide one. Surely someone has gotten this long form since 08?

No, no, Redtail, they are all hiding things about the doctors who birthed them, who would mysteriously cause them to be ineligible to be planet occupants.

ETA: OMG, I got it! Only the doctors who birthed Obama and Redtail and others born in Hawaii know that he (and they) are actually reptiles, here to take over the human species for reproduction and food supplies!

BTW, BAC, what evidence have you ever SEEN that George W. Bush was born here?

 

[Mojo]

If you do not believe that the documents released so far are valid, why would you believe any additional releases were valid?

If a "long-form" certificate were to be produced, the birthers would just denounce it as a forgery on the grounds that Hawaii no longer issues them.