The lefties sure are kicking and screaming a lot about the "birther" issue currently.

Quote from Larson:

again, who cares if people harp on it. Palin, Rubio, and Rove yappers are not prayer books.

The thread starter said lefties were kicking and screaming about the "birther" issue when in reality its republicans telling birthers to shut the fuck up
 
how frigging stupid do you have to be to be a birther? a thinking person would ask themselves how do you explain the birth announcements in two local newspapers?
the only way to explain that away is to come to the conlcusion that in 1961 someone knew that this black kid was going to run for president so they had the birth announcment planted. use your brain.

"In addition, as Factcheck.org and other media organizations have repeatedly pointed out, both of Honolulu's newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser on Aug. 13, 1961, and the Honolulu Star Bulletin, on Aug. 14, 1961, both ran birth announcements listing Obama's birth on Aug. 4 of that year. "
 
Quote from AK Forty Seven:

The thread starter said lefties were kicking and screaming about the "birther" issue when in reality its republicans telling birthers to shut the fuck up


As far as I am concerned the repubs. you quoted are no more reputable on this issue than the other side. Supreme Court will shut everbody up. They won't hear it.
 
Quote from AK Forty Seven:




By David Jackson, USA TODAY

President Obama, whose citizenship and religion have been questioned, is picking up some interesting defenders on those issues.

Sarah Palin and Karl Rove.

"Those are distractions," Palin said yesterday in New York. "What we're concerned about is the economy. And we're concerned about the policies coming out of (Obama's) administration."


You really have to be stupid when Sarah Palin is calling you stupid
 
Quote from Free Thinker:

how frigging stupid do you have to be to be a birther? a thinking person would ask themselves how do you explain the birth announcements in two local newspapers?
the only way to explain that away is to come to the conlcusion that in 1961 someone knew that this black kid was going to run for president so they had the birth announcment planted. use your brain.

"In addition, as Factcheck.org and other media organizations have repeatedly pointed out, both of Honolulu's newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser on Aug. 13, 1961, and the Honolulu Star Bulletin, on Aug. 14, 1961, both ran birth announcements listing Obama's birth on Aug. 4 of that year. "

In 1961 birth announcements were published in the 2 newsppapers from records at the DOH. In othwer words, no one had to go to the newspapers and ask for a birth announcement...they were done automatically from public records.


However, a detailed investigation of the history and procedures used by Hawaii’s municipal health department, and its relationship with the newspapers, shows that not only was it a matter of official policy that Obama’s birth would have been announced in the paper regardless of where he was born, the information used to publish the announcements is not even confirmed through any eye-witness medical authority or hospital in the state.

Also, in 1961, the two newspapers shared the same address and facility which means they received only one copy of the same vital records information from the Department of Health. Therefore, the format and content of information used in public announcements were published identically by both papers, including any mistakes, omissions, order or context, and no investigation was carried out by the editors to determine if the information provided by the DOH was actually accurate. The two newspapers have long since collaborated into one organization



And then there is this.....
“Did anyone notice the announcements are not in any alphabetic order, or in order of birthdate? This is because, in 1961, birth registration numbers were issued based on the location of the local Vital Records office in which the registration was recorded. The hospital does not assign these numbers, the DOH does. It appears that Obama’s birth was registered in an office not used by any of the birth registrations offices who received birth certification from either Kapi-olani Medical Center, or Queens Medical Center which use two local offices near those facilities,” said Crosby.

He continued, “It appears Obama’s birth was registered with the satellite office near his grandparent’s home some distance from the offices nearest to and most used by the hospitals. This particular office was commonly used by indigenous people of Hawaii wanting to record births of children outside of the city. This is why the U.S. Department of Health created the Certificate of Live Birth template in 1959 with a check box indicating whether or not the child was born in the city limits and if the residence of the mother was a farm or not. It appears Obama’s birth at least did not occur in the city of Honolulu and, at most, did not even occur in the state of Hawaii.”

In 1956, the National Vital Statistics Division of the U.S. Department of Health issued a revised template version of the “Certificate of Live Birth” form to be used by state municipalities to record and medically verify births. Since Hawaii had not yet become a state, these revisions to the template would not be used in Hawaii until 1959. Therefore, birth records created after 1959 were subject to demographic clarifications and metrics prescribed by the federal authority of the U.S. Department of Health, not the state of Hawaii.

“This also explains why Obama’s birth announcements appear in the succession of announcements where and when they do. His alleged “Certification of Live Birth” is not approved by any federal authority as an official source of demographic data or medical verification of his birth. It is merely a record of birth registration. Therefore, the order of printing of announcements in the local papers comes directly from the list which is ordered based on the birth registration office location, not the chronological or alphabetical order of the medically verified birth.”

Crosby says the difference between a "medically verified” live birth and a “birth registration” are significant. A live birth is witnessed by a doctor, a birth registration is simply recorded by administrative authority without witnessing the birth. ...Continued at source: http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/04/final-report-obamas-birth-announcements.html

Note to the Obots: "When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone could under Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born in a foreign country by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born abroad."
(http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/12/what-is-putative-president-obamas.html) and (http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/HawaiiPoliciesAndProcedures.htm)

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-research-final-report-obamas-birth.html
 
Well that would be very dishonest and treacherous. You don't really think that left wingers are generally that unethical do you? Why are you so insulting towards them? Are you some kind of extremist right winger or something?


Quote from Ricter:

It's a phoney "kicking and screaming" designed to trick the right into continuing on this issue.
 
Back
Top