It turns out Barack Obama is . . . is . . . a citizen. The White House has released President Obama’s long-form birth certificate to put the growing controversy to rest over his birth. Many of us have been critical of the birther conspiracy theories. However, I am not sure why the White House did not do this earlier since it addresses the allegations fully. It will be interesting to see that, now that Obama has produced the certificate, if the movement for state ballot laws declines. While it has been repeatedly stated that the laws are not about Obama, but we will see.
The long-form clearly states the date and other information. It also includes the name of Obama’s father — a focus of recent suggestions that the reason for withholding the document was the name of a different man or the inclusion of Muslim for religion.
Donald Trump immediately took credit for the disclosure stating, “Today, I’m very proud of myself, because I’ve accomplished something that nobody else has been able to accomplish,” Trump told reporters. “Why he didn’t do it when everybody else was asking for it, I don’t know. But I am really honored, frankly, to have played such a big role in hopefully, hopefully getting rid of this issue.”
I am not sure why the White House held on to the document. One theory could be that they knew it would blow up in the faces of Obama’s critics. However, it has served to rally critics for years. Those critics are not likely to register with the DNC now. They are likely to move on to other claims against Obama.
Perhaps now that he clearly was born in Hawaii, they will now claim that his is part of the Hawaiian royalty and thus making him ineligible as the holder of a foreign ennoblement.
Here are the two pages: Obama_birth_certificate and birth-certificate-long-form
Jonathan Turley
Blouise, raff, of all people, is not a geek. Some of the rest of us are, but from my interactions with him, computer geek is not one of the appellations I might hang on him. The one that does come to mind is, “Gentleman.”
This whole thread has declined into a pie fight and I am sick of it. Professor Turley emphasized in his comment that civility is a hallmark of this site, but I think civility got mugged on the way over here.
That is funny, Blouise. The tea baggers might come knocking on my door in 2012, but they probably won’t be from this blog. They will be Pete Sessions’ campaign workers.
Bob,
If you don’t like the answer, don’t ask the question. Or did “disagree about methods” suddenly equate to “let’s all just get along” while I was out? You both are more suspicious of each other than you need be is my point. Disagree all you like, but neither of you are the Devil.
Poor rafflaw … I don’t understand it … he is ALWAYS a gentleman … always … why does anybody take pot-shots at him?
As to IP addresses … honest to god, who the f**k cares. Come on … if the government decides they need your IP they can get it in about 30 seconds. Anybody else … send an email and they’ve got it. So what. Somebody is going to come to my house in Ohio, knock on my door, and yell at me that teabaggers are great people? I don’t think so.
This is stupid!
Bob,Esq.,
If you and Slarti started getting along I would go sit on the roof of my garage to wait for the second coming.
As to rafflaw? You are also wrong about raff.
I never said Raff specifically. If it was taken that way that would be your problem.
Blouise,
Thank you kindly.
See that Buddha? The ability to make an observation without turning into Rodney King with that “can’t we all just get along” tripe?
Stamford Lib,
From what I understand Big Sexy Hair Spray stands up well to humidity.
I go try to get some work done, come back and what do I find?
Bob,Esq.
1, April 29, 2011 at 7:38 pm
So Buddha,
What did you think of that “who I believe to be Bob, Esq. although I have no evidence of this beyond animus towards me” tripe?
=====================================================
I am not Buddha but I’m going to answer you anyway … it was unnecessary and a little bit silly. I’ve read many of your criticisms directed at Slarti and his at you … why in the world would you start posting under an assumed name?
Sometimes these trolls do succeed at their game.
Bob,
I think you and Kev had one too many pissing matches. You two should kiss and make up. We are all on the same nominative side, after all, even when we disagree about the methods to achieve justice.
_____
Badtroll,
“I’m not crying foul just being an informant, I mean informative”.
Informative about yourself maybe. However, as an informant you are a miserable failure. Some of us know how you suckpuppets, er, sockpuppets are being unmasked. Keep thinking you know what data mechanic it is based upon if you like. You’d be wrong like you are wrong about most things. Just like you’re wrong now.
As to rafflaw? You are also wrong about raff. Raff is not one of the ones in the know about either the mechanics or the data, nor is mespo, Elaine, Mike A. or Nal – the regular guest bloggers. The decision not to involve them was both purposeful and tactical. I should know. It was my idea to keep them out of it. Let me be crystal clear: Raff has given no one IP or e-mail information. I would swear to that in a court of law.
Raff also owes no one an apology, Jim, least of all you.
You trolls like to play your lil’ games, but you sure do get upset when people smarter than you start playing back.
It’s all so very funny.
It’s all good Mike. Hope you are well !!!!!!
Methinks thou protest to much and with such vehemence.
“Never banned, NEVER !!!!”
You were for a month or two, but not permanently obviously, nor do you deny what you were trying to do to me that got you banned. Some memories are quite short.
you can verify with the professor, Never Banned, NEVER !!!!!!
“Bigot
One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.”
A self description no doubt, except that you probably lack the self awareness to even know it.
Bigot
One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
one who stubbornly or intolerantly adheres to his or her own opinions and prejudices
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
I call ’em as I see ’em, Bob.
thank you Larry for rare truth on this blog when it comes to this issue…I have not given up on hope Professor Turley will do the right thing and not stay silent, or worse, obfuscate, but speak truthfully about the law
So Buddha,
What did you think of that “who I believe to be Bob, Esq. although I have no evidence of this beyond animus towards me” tripe?
“Never banned, NEVER !!!!”
You were for a month or two, but not permanently obviously, nor do you deny what you were trying to do to me that got you banned. Some memories are quite short.
“They all pissed standing up”
Kris/Jim etc.,
Oh I am so wounded by your rapier-like wit(lessness). Typical anonymous tough talker plays the homosexual card. Unlike you, before my marriage there were many significant women in my life, but it wasn’t my good looks, I knew how to treat them as equals. You tough, talking pseudo-Texan probably have the courage of your role models the draft dodging Bush/Cheney team. You say you have figured me out. If you had a brain that might be possible, but you’ve already proven lacking in that department.
To All The Birther Posters,
How typical of you all to talk so tough, pretend to be so principled and then whine like infants when you are shown to be just bags of hot, fetid air. At least Ayn Rand had a sex life, what’s your excuse?
and then I says, “Tell me I’m wrong Buddha!” And he says, “I can’t, baby, ’cause you’re not!”