Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[SpitfireIX]

Here's an editorial from The NY Times. It sums up the futility of dealing with this issue and its implicit racism. A Certificate of Embarrassment

It is inconceivable that this campaign to portray Mr. Obama as the insidious “other” would have been conducted against a white president.

Again, I call attention to the case of Chester Arthur. Can someone please explain how it is "inconceivable" that this could happen to a white President, when it in fact happened to a white President 130 years ago?

 

[therival58]

As was pointed out earlier in this very thread, that wasn't from the Obama campaign, it was from someone's blog post on their website, which allowed anyone to post anything they wanted.

right ANTPogo pointed that out to me, duly noted.

 

[therival58]

Again, I call attention to the case of Chester Arthur. Can someone please explain how it is "inconceivable" that this could happen to a white President, when it in fact happened to a white President 130 years ago?

calling someone or some group 'racist' is a clever defense to avoid criticism.

 

[CORed]

Obama releasing this "obamanation of a document"(wow, what a good pun), has re-ignited the birther flame.. he made the situation worst!!

Actually, I don't think so. When this all shakes out, I think it will clearly demonstrate that the birthers are nutcases. Sure, the hardcore birthers will continue to claim that the long form is fake, or that Obama's not a citizen because his father wasn't a citizen, or whatever other crap they will make up in the future. But the somewhat rational but lazy-thinking people who think maybe there's something to it because they haven't really paid attention will realize that birthers are irrational nutcases who will not be satisfied by any kind of evidence, and birthers will become much like 9/11 truthers: A lunatic fringe movement populated mostly by internet cranks and psychotics.

The birther movement has invested entirely too much of its very limited capital into this "long form" birth certificate nonsense to maintain any credibility among even marginally rational people. It is dead; what you are seeing now is just the reflexive twitching of its corpse.

 

[abaddon]

Well, here's the counter to the Alex Jones vid ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcWQw2AAIho

This provides an explanation for the layers. But, it doesn't explain the background, the single-bit 1064 and the grayscale 1. I think the WH should provide the complete provenance of the posted document. And, they should post a non-photoshoped scanned image of the BC if one exists.

The grayscale "1! was shopped in. Examples have been linked in this very thread both with and without the extra "1".

Go buy a clue if you can't get one.

 

[Swagomatic]

Again, I call attention to the case of Chester Arthur. Can someone please explain how it is "inconceivable" that this could happen to a white President, when it in fact happened to a white President 130 years ago?

The big difference is Obama provided all the documentation required to prove his place of birth and it was not accepted.

 

[dvictr]

At least they didn't go around making the ludicrous claim that Obama could not release his long-form birth certificate. That was one looney thing to claim but incredibly some Obama defenders did that, over and over again. Said "he couldn't"; that it was "impossible", etc, etc,.....I even posted he could have something the next day, and well, the next day Obama posted for the world to see.

+1

 

[abaddon]

They should post a non-photoshoped image. The posted documented was photoshoped and assembled. The green backgound, which appears as both background and as part of the BC, was not scanned with the BC.



No, that's just a clip of the WH document. The green crosshatching was not part of the scanned image*, the WH document, at best, was assembled from a scanned image and a green background document. Look at the WH document, the backgound border, clipped on the CBS image, merges with the presumed BC, the background underlies the whole image.

* this is obvious, but for confirmation note that the background crosshatching does not bend on the left side of the BC, where the BC does bend.

That is not part of the original so clearly it does not bend, while the document itself does as it is part of a bound set.

Once again, if you are unable to get a clue, go buy one.

 

[abaddon]

I don't know if this already has been posted:

"Well, no. The layers exist because the printed document was scanned by software that recognises text and lifts it from its background. A cursory examination of the file shows that that's what happened here."

Full article: http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/78274...birth-certificate-rumours-begin#ixzz1KpO0nuEu

But does that really explain the anomaly with the added '1'? That the software somehow would have scanned the last digit in the number 10641 in a different way, and then made a separate layer out of that? I remain skeptical.

The added "1" does not appear on the original, some woo meister just shoved it in to look big.

The original, sans the extra "1" is even posted in this very thread.

 

[abaddon]

Wow, I left for 14 hours and 4 pages of crazy appeared. I wish I could say I was surprised.

I know the feeling.

 

[abaddon]

Maybe it does explain it. I found:

[qimg]http://i55.tinypic.com/2dhbh5k.jpg[/qimg]

It shows a similar mix of different types of scanning. Ok, then it's normal, BUT the Obama administration must surely have known that the conspiracy speculations would go wild with such a document.

By your own admission, you know **** all squared about imaging technology, and imaging software.

How is this in any way above totally risible?

 

[Anders Lindman]

Article Two of the United States Constitution, Section 1, Clause 5: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articl...stitution#Clause_5:_Qualifications_for_office

A Citizen of the United States, doesn't that mean that Arnold can run for president?

EDIT. The adoption part means when the Constitution was written I see now. Ok, that explains it. Anyway...

 

[Saggy]

That leaves either photographic copies (ie, pictures taken of it), or certified photocopies. Two certified photocopies were released.

What, specifically, do you want them to do differently?

Any fool can see that the document posted on the White House web site is not a photocopy of anything.

 

[abaddon]

As far as I am aware, clipping masks only come from manual creation.

HaHaHaHaHa........NO

 

[Andy_Ross]

OCR software would have extracted text into a text file not into a layer on a graphics file.

 

[Anders Lindman]

By your own admission, you know **** all squared about imaging technology, and imaging software.

How is this in any way above totally risible?

What own admission? You must be making things up as you go along.

 

[abaddon]

Clipping masks are what were the woo folks told you they found within the Obama birth cert.

ftfy

 

[Taarkin]

Again, I call attention to the case of Chester Arthur. Can someone please explain how it is "inconceivable" that this could happen to a white President, when it in fact happened to a white President 130 years ago?

He wasn't white, he was Irish.

 

[A'isha]

Any fool can see that the document posted on the White House web site is not a photocopy of anything.

Of course it is. It's a scanned PDF of a paper document, which is a photocopy of an original book-bound document, printed on modern security paper.

 

[abaddon]

What own admission? You must be making things up as you go along.

Read your own crazy posts, don't expect others to pick up your poop.