Obama comedy gold

[Todd McCreary]

so, ya, Obama won the election, right?

actually, no. the Electoral College hasn't voted yet, in fact the Electors haven't even been certified yet.

but that's all pro forma, it's gonna happen ... right?

can you say, "Maybe" with a capital "M"?

here's the thing:
Obama has never produced a physical birth certificate. the digital 'copy' he had posted on his web site seems to have been a forgery made from a copy of his younger sister's birth certificate.

but that's all just right wing mud slinging, isn't it?

maybe not. Justice Souter ( that radical conservative ) is requiring our friend Barry to produce a physical birth certificate by December 1st.
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm

*starts making popcorn*

[Winger]

Old rumor. Case was dismissed. Original birth certificate has been examined and verified.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama...ertificate.asp

[Todd McCreary]

Old rumor. Case was dismissed. Original birth certificate has been examined and verified.

nice. a two-for-one fail. although it's disappointing to see that Snopes would rather be ideologically correct than actually bother to get their facts right.


i'll spoiler these responses so somebody else can try their hand this.

some basic fact checking issues with the Snopes article:
the Snopes article addresses the previous District court case, not the U. S. Supreme Court inquiry. weirdly, i suspect that Justice Souter is of somewhat higher authority than Richard Barclay Surrick.

regardless of what the Snopes article asserts, Obama has not yet proven his citizenship to Justice Souter's satisfaction.

a "Certificate of Live Birth" is NOT the same thing as a hospital issued "Birth Certificate". and you will note that the Certificate of Live Birth makes no mention of which hospital or home the child was birthed at.

Surrick never inspected the certificate. the District court case was thrown out because, supposedly, a registered voter has "no standing" to require a nominee to prove that he meets the Constitutional requirements for the office he is seeking and the voter will not suffer any "harm" should a Constitutionally prohibited candidate be elected. whether Obama proves citizenship or not, to me this is prima facie evidence that Surrick should be impeached and removed from the bench.
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loca...om_ballot.html

one of the "fact checking" articles Snopes uses is from FactCheck.org. FactCheck.org states directly at the top of their page that they are an arm of the Annenberg group of endowments. they are directly related to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge educational "program" to which Obama was nominated to run by Bill Ayers and from which Obama funneled millions of dollars into Ayers' educational "projects". does anything here look a little incestuous to you? http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...ZlM2Y2OGI0NDM=

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html
the FactCheck article states that "FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate." this is a bald faced lie in two ways, as proven by their own article. they examined what is purported to be a copy of the certificate that is in Chicago. i've already noted the difference between a "Live Birth" and a "Birth Certificate".

perhaps the most disturbing thing about the document that is in Chicago is this; evidently, Obama has had no need of a US Birth Certificate until May-June of 2007. this is somewhat odd for a man who has spent large portions of his childhood and 20's traveling the world on an Indonesian passport.
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFil...tificate_9.jpg

the testimony of Chiyome Fukino and Alvin Onaka is more problematic, but there's no reason for it to be. Obama could have made this all go away when it started simply by making whatever documents are held by the State of Hawai'i available for scrutiny. which he can do at any time. and which he has thus far refused to do.

[Todd McCreary]

forgot that this board expires editing privileges. so i guess i'll have to check back every so often and "de-spoiler" my points in new posts.

the Snopes article addresses the previous District court case, not the U. S. Supreme Court inquiry. weirdly, i suspect that Justice Souter is of somewhat higher authority than Richard Barclay Surrick.

[Todd McCreary]

here's the balance of my objections to the Snopes article:

regardless of what the Snopes article asserts, Obama has not yet proven his citizenship to Justice Souter's satisfaction. nor even to Surrick.

a "Certificate of Live Birth" is NOT the same thing as a hospital issued "Birth Certificate". and you will note that the Certificate of Live Birth makes no mention of which hospital or home the child was birthed at.

Surrick never inspected the certificate. the District court case was thrown out because, supposedly, a registered voter has "no standing" to require a nominee to prove that he meets the Constitutional requirements for the office he is seeking and the voter will not suffer any "harm" should a Constitutionally prohibited candidate be elected. whether Obama proves citizenship or not, to me this is prima facie evidence that Surrick should be impeached and removed from the bench.
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loca...om_ballot.html

one of the "fact checking" articles Snopes uses is from FactCheck.org. FactCheck.org states directly at the top of their page that they are an arm of the Annenberg group of endowments. they are directly related to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge educational "program" to which Obama was nominated to run by Bill Ayers and from which Obama funneled millions of dollars into Ayers' educational "projects". does anything here look a little incestuous to you? http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...ZlM2Y2OGI0NDM=

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html
the FactCheck article states that "FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate." this is a bald faced lie in two ways, as proven by their own article.
1 - they examined what is purported to be a copy of the certificate that is in Chicago.
2 - i've already noted the difference between a "Live Birth" and a "Birth Certificate".

perhaps the most disturbing thing about the document that is in Chicago is this; evidently, Obama has had no need of a US Birth Certificate until May-June of 2007. this is somewhat odd for a man who has spent large portions of his childhood and 20's traveling the world on an Indonesian passport.
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFil...tificate_9.jpg

the testimony of Chiyome Fukino and Alvin Onaka is more problematic, but there's no reason for it to be. Obama could have made this all go away when it started simply by making whatever documents are held by the State of Hawai'i available for scrutiny. which he can do at any time. and which he has thus far refused to do.

[Kyle Brandenburger]

Wow! The Florida rednecks still haven't changed!

[Fourhigh]

Wow! The Florida rednecks still haven't changed!

Soooo...does that mean you're not in Fort Myers anymore? :

[roundtracker]

Wow! The Florida rednecks still haven't changed!

Where have you been? Prison again? What's the humor like there?