The Birth Certificate from Hell (updated 16may2011)

George Rebane

President Obama posted what he vouched as his genuine Hawaii birth certificate the other day (here).  The intent was to finally put to rest the innuendos, claims, and downright charges that he is not a ‘natural born American’.   But given the image analysis tools broadly available today, along with a remarkable amount of well dispersed knowledge about image processing, the posted birth certificate raises more questions than it answers.

With some background in the theory and practice of image analysis, I found the arguments in this YouTube video illuminating and at the same time disturbing.  The question that resonates in my brainbone is ‘why would anyone from the White House think that this image of the birth certificate would pass muster?’  This dust-devil just wants to become a tornado.  You be the judge.

H/T for the email from a reader.

[4may2011 update]  The White House presented birth certificate is now becoming laughable.  The above image analysis was expended and explicated in this YouTube video.  To accept the certificate as authentic now requires the suspension of disbelief usually attributed to religious fanatics.  All that remains for the hard left to do is to just talk past this which does happen to be real evidence that the WH posted long form birth certificate is a doctored fake.  H/T to a reader.

[15may2011 update]  To bring the WH posted birth certificate issue to closure, I sent the following email to our Congressman Tom McClintock on 4 May 2011 with a copy to his chief of staff Igor Birman.

Hi Tom – I’m sure you’re aware of it by now, but the WH posted pdf of the President’s “scanned” birth certificate is a doctored fake.  I pulled down the image myself, and viewed it in Adobe Acrobat Professional to confirm the analyses available on YouTube.  My own post on the subject is here
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/05/the-birth-certificate-from-hell.html

I don’t know what the politics behind this fakery is or how it should be played, but I would like to know 1) any additional info you have on the posted birth certificate, and 2) what, if any, official reaction will you have toward this latest ‘proof’.

Thank you the great job, and for hanging in there for us,
George

And on 12 May 2011 I followed up with an email to Igor Birman that read –

Hi Igor – this birth certificate issue must really be one too hot to handle.  I made no birther claim, only corroborated (in my capacity as a registered professional engineer in the relevant technologies) that the WH posted birth certificate pdf is a fake.  If you don’t want to address that blatant fact, can you at least tell me what is the strategy of silence over this clumsy posting on the WH website?  In short, if Tom believes it to be authentic, and that it settles the matter, then please tell us.

Thanks,
gjr

To these emails I received the following reply.

[16may2011 update]  The subsequent exchange today between Igor Birman and me may put paid to the above developments.

Hi George:

First, please forgive the tardiness of my reply. Last week presented far more material than could be digested, so I am writing you back from a United A319 cruising at 38,000 feet over Ohio en route to California.

Our office never had the time to examine the birth certificate, so your findings concern me. You may have heard this before - we did have the time to send Brittan Specht to the Library of Congress to find the original newspaper bearing Obama's birth announcement in Honolulu. If the conspiracy to make him a natural-born citizen extends that far back, we are in more trouble than we realize.

The more important point for me is this: there is a finite amount of time between now and the election. We can either spend the next 17.5 months debating where Obama was born, or we can invest every moment of our time and every ounce of our energy into making a case against his reckless monetary policy, bungled bailouts, forcing Soviet-style healthcare on the country, wild spending, naked hostility to domestic energy production, etc. I can assure you that on the latter we have the rapt attention of almost every American. I don't know what percentage is paying attention to the former, but I can also assure you that it is a smaller figure. I am afraid that if we don't focus like a laser on the tangible consequences (present and future) of Obama's misadventures in the White House, we will allow him to skate on through into a second term.

Let me know what you think!

All the best,
-Igor

To which I replied -

Igor, thank you for the reply – well formed and to the point.  With your permission, I would like to publish it and my response.  In sum, I agree with your resource allocation decision in the face of ‘limited bandwidth’ that the congressman has at his disposal.  My caveats on the issue are intended to be added arrows in Tom’s quiver should the appropriate occasion arise.  I list them below –

1. As pointed out by several other commentators, the Honolulu newspaper birth announcement is not a validation of anything per se.  Newspapers don’t vet the accuracy of classified ads.  Such ads have been placed regularly for decades, and for a number of reasons by people who think ahead.  As concerned collectivist thinkers and activists, Obama’s parents most certainly had the ability and motive to think and act strategically in this manner.  Many illegal entrants do so regularly.
2. The posted birth certificate (pdf) is represented by the WH as definitive proof of Obama’s birth.   Americans should take at its face value the WH declared objective, production pathway, and intended function of publishing this pdf in resolving the birth issue.
3. Given #2, the FACT that the pdf is a modified document that could not have gone through the claimed production pathway – original paper document, file of scanned paper copy, conversion of file to pdf, posting pdf on WH website – makes the posted birth certificate a fake, and its representation to the American public a lie.
4. None of this is proof, per se, that Obama’s birth situation violates the constitutional provision for the country’s presidency.  But, at a minimum, it sustains the proposition that Obama has yet to offer proof that he does satisfy the Constitution.  And the more, that for TBD reasons his administration (he?) has behaved fraudulently in the posting of the pdf.
5. Any member of Congress can vet the authenticity of the pdf (for much less cost than sending someone to Honolulu to read newspaper archives) by asking a government funded unit such as the NSA or JPL to have their imaging experts look at the file for fifteen minutes, and report back on its purported authenticity viz its stated production pathway.  Or simply hire one of a legion of available private technical consultants to do so (I have already done it pro bono).  BTW, since we are dealing with a reproduced digital image, why the administration has not provided such accompanying bona fides is an additional mystery.

I hope this at least helps clarify my position on the matter.  Thanks again, and let me know when you’re next in town or striking distance.

gjr

Finally, my error in implying that Congressman McClintock's office sent someone to Honolulu instead of to the Libraty of Congress in Washington DC.

Comments

[Russ Steele]

Oh My! When asked about the Birth Certificate, I said let's wait until the forensic experts examine the document and see what they have to say. On the first pass, it looks like we have a fake. But, this is only an indicator, now it is time dig deeper, and I am sure that other experts will. Stay tuned!

[Mike Thornton]

Why don't you guys just admit that no matter what he does, you're never going to let this go!
This is all about engaging in dog whistle politics for the ill informed racist right wing.
You seem to have pretensions about being big conservative thinkers, but continuing to try and play the thoroughly discredited "Manchurian Muslim" card just makes you look ridiculous!

[Russ Steele]

Mike,

How do you explain the disparities demonstrated in the video? The document does not appear to be what the office of the President claims it is, the scan of the an original. Perhaps you can explain the differences between what we see and what we are being told. It appears to be a manufactured document. Please explain how this can happen, and why you think it is not the scan of an original? Perhaps there is a easy explanation we have over looked.

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Mike its no different than you applying for a drivers license or a passport. There are documents that need to verify you are in fact entitled to be approved. If those documents appear to the clerk to be false you may not get what you want without more scrutiny, they may not just take your word for it.

Only 2 requirements to be Pres - this is 1 - k

[wmartin]

Without anyone publishing the full tools chain to produce the file, I can't see that there's any point in tearing it down. Layers in Illustrator, for example, may have been introduced without the knowledge of the operator.

I think that the whole argument is tailor-made for modern times, there's a rather Philip K. Dick-ian aura of authenticity and doubts about same.

There is a real interest in this birth certificate business, obviously, because it pushes into an edge condition of what is considered a legal candidate for President. Having a US citizen parent is not enough depending on the year and exact circumstances. It does make for good political theatre.

In my mind, the really interesting part is the social and legal angles of what is considered 'real'. Modern abilities to produce fake documents will lead into an arms race between forgers and producers. We probably need to rethink the physical mechanism for things like wills, contracts, birth certificates. etc. Ever since National Geographic scooched around pyramids on the cover, you can't trust nobody.

For the man Himself, there's a certain falseness that makes him the ideal 21st century office holder. A lack of job history, secret school records, secret medical records, combined with a Reagan-like ability to stand there and effectively deliver prewritten lines to an audience. You end up with office holders that are whatever you want them to be. If you're a fan, Obama holds all that you deem good in humanity, if not, the opposite holds.

At the risk of sawing off the third leg of US federal government, there's something to be said for parliamentary systems. At least in the case of a PM, you tend to know what you are getting since they are the product of a long term Darwinistic climb through a party.

The next logical step in United States politics will be the first synthetic President. A combination of the IBM Jeopardy program, altered for speech making and press conferences, combined with a video game generated face will bring the federal government to a PS3 near you.

[Mike Thornton]

Russ
I think you know that any presentation (video or otherwise) can be manipulated, especially when the desired result has already been decided upon.
The real question is: Why is it that some so-called "conservatives" refuse to accept the fact that President is indeed an American citizen despite all the evidence and verification that has already been provided, including the State of Hawaii certifying that he was born there?
Why was there never such inquiries made about John McCain, when he, in fact WAS born in a foreign country?
Gee, Russ, let me count the ways, Obama is a "liberal" and so therefore must be discredited (at all costs) by the right wing. (remember when Clinton was a "drug dealing, murderer according to Richard Mellon Scaife) He has an African/Muslim sounding name (which one would think, that if he really was the "Manchurian Muslim" that you seem so desperate to make him, would have been pretty stupid to have him keep)and finally because he's a Black man and therefor inherently unworthy of being President of the United States and he must have come to the position through some gigantic conspiracy. How else could someone like "That One" have risen to such a high position?
The thing that drives me up the wall with this stuff, is you guys won't be honest about what you're doing. Over the years, the conspiracies have always been the same, only the names have changed. It was the Jews (and for many it still is!), The Communists, The Catholics, The Mexicans, The Blacks and now The Muslims!
I guess with Obama you get "two for one"?
It just gets really tiring Russ and I wish you guys would put your efforts into actually doing something to help the country instead of wasting everyone's time on this crap!
Remember that while you guys were hassling the president about this fake and made up issue, he was working on killing Bin Laden and he succeed!

[Mike Thornton]

I rest my case!

[Steve Enos]

Well it's clear... George is a birther.

[Mikey McD]

George, damn you for thinking for yourself! You too Russ! Drink the Kool-aid and get back in line already.

As for me and the birth cert issue- I could not care less.

[George Rebane]

SteveE - I understand a 'birther' is someone who definitely believes that President Obama is not a natural born American as required by the Constitution. I cannot say that, and maintain only that I have not seen credible evidence that he is. And therefore I remain an agnostic on the matter; my mind is open to new evidence as it comes in.

[Mike Thornton]

What would be "credible" evidence for you George?

[Todd Juvinall]

I was watching CNN a couple of weeks ago and their newsreader was interviewing a woman who allegedly had proof Obama's Social Security number was fake. She was also questioning the BC and some other stuff. It was quite a fun interview with the CNN fellow slapping her down rather than allowing her to finish a sentences. These "deniers" like CNN, Thornton and Enos probably believed there was a man on the grassy knoll and that is just fine, Or that Bush and the Jews downed the Towers. But God forbid anyone has a question about their lover Obama. I think it always legitimate to question anything the government or a politician says or claims. But when these lovelies become the bootlickers of those they have decided to love, )liberals and Obama), there is no room for questions. Just a Seig Heil for the liberal icons.

[Paul Emery]

Blog on Todd. It's a good place for you to spend your time with the ever shrinking group of birthers. Even your pal McClintock jumped ship on that one years ago. Where were you when Bush Jr's National Guard record was under scrutiny? And do you really believe Oswald acted alone? So many conspiracies, so little time.

[Account Deleted]

I'm curious as to why asking questions about the evidence presented makes one a racist liar. I personally think Obama was born in Hawaii based on what I can tell. I don't think that free and open inquiry about the issue should be ended. No matter what I believe about anything, I'm willing to entertain evidence to the contrary. And I would wonder why others want to stop folks from looking into the facts of the matter. Is there something to hide? As I see it, the president is having a great time with all of the hub-bub, as it makes a great diversion from the public focusing on his failed policies.

[RL Crabb]

Yes! Yes!...The mother and father, dead!...The doctor who delivered him, dead! The grandparents, all the people he ever knew growing up, dead! Very convenient!

And now that WE know about it, they'll have to get rid of u.......

[Todd Juvinall]

Paul, I am not a birther, I have state numerous times I believe he was born in Hawaii. What amazes me is you make fun of people asking questions of your sacred cows. As a journalist I would expect more from you. BTW, from what you wrote above you are telling us you believe Oswald had help? What should we call you for that?

[Greg Goodknight]

Oh my god, they killed Crabby! You bastards!

[Brad]

http://underthemountainbunker.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/35.jpg?w=461&h=298

The document is obviously a scan of the birth certificate overlaying a green background layer. Just look at the left side of the page where the written information becomes darker closer to where the page was attached to the book. You can see the edge of the scan clearly.
The hospital could have added the background, the State of Hawaii could have added the background, etc.
I give that YouTube video a big, so what?

Why doesn't the YouTube armchair detective get out of his basement, fly to Honolulu, and personally compare the documents to verify the information, instead of the green background?
Maybe someone would chip in a few bucks for a plane ticket to confirm this earth shattering revelation.

Here is another one you might be interested in. This email is making the rounds now:

"Subject: More alterations on Obama's birth certificate...

Obama could not have been born at the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in 1961, because it didn't exist.

In 1961, that hospital was called the Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital. There was a name change in 1978 (when the hospital merged with the Kapi‘olani Maternity Home).

Someone didn't to their research.

How could a document supposedly made in 1961 have predicted a name change 17 years into the future?"

And here is a wiki article on more Obama conspiracies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

[Greg Goodknight]

Interesting video, but just off the top of my head, I can think of one good reason for the background being blurred in the sections where there's type... DCT (discrete cosine transforms, a fascinating technique derived from Fast Fourier Transforms) compression techniques inherent in many file formats. If the scanned copy was saved as a compressed Jpeg file, sections with text could have resulted in bits being robbed from the background and leaving them fuzzier.

Time will tell. For now, while interesting, I see no reason to get worked up over this video.

[Paul Emery]

George, Todd

The questions have been asked and answered to the satisfaction of any reasonable person so I don't understand why you won't let this die? The only reasonable explanation I can muster is that's it's driven by a distrust and dislike of Obama that keeps it alive. Take the time to draw up a chart of the conspiracy that would have to be in place that would enable this to happen. And don't you think that the Dems would have dug this up while vetting Obama's candidacy in 08? Is it possible? Sure. It's possible Oswald acted alone as well and that the moon walk was a fake.

And yes, Obama and his crew are lapping this up in their efforts to push the Right off the table and onto the floor.

[Todd Juvinall]

Paul, so you believe Oswald had help that day eh? You have answered your own question. You and your fellow grassy knoll believers after almost sixty years still think what you believe. You don't question that but for some reason after a couple of years of dodging the question asked by inquiring minds, Obama releases a copy of his BC and we are racists and "birthers". I guess Thornton should not use this derogatory term since he is so sensitive. As I have said I am not a "birther", I am a skeptic tank type. Call me a tanker. So being a journalist, how is it you have no concerns or questions but simply attack the messengers? Aren't you always telling us "please don't attack the messenger"?

[Mike Thornton]

They know it's all BS, Paul.
This is all about casting Obama as the "other". Whether it's as the Black man or as the Muslim it's all about trying to drive a wedge between him and White Christians.
The other part of this (which is much more insidious) is the continuation of making government the "other" in order to facilitate corporate rule and fascist hegemony.

[Todd Juvinall]

Thanks for the belly laugh Thornton. You must be from Mars. What a hoot!

[Paul Emery]

Sorry Todd if I characterized you as a Birther. The fact is that nearly 50% of the Republicans are.
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2011-04-28-Blumenthal-bitherbyparty.png

I was just kidding about Oswald. We all believe the conclusions drawn by the Warren Commission right? According to the Commission Oswald renounces his US citizenship, moves to Russia, becomes a Russian citizen, takes a Russian bride, changes his mind, waltzes back to the US with his Russian wife and is taken back no questions asked, decides to assassinate Kennedy, moves to Dallas and pulls off an amazing feat of marksmanship all by himself. Sure

[George Rebane]

What would credible evidence look like? That is the same as asking when is any proposition judged to be ‘true enough’. There is no guarantee ever that something is 100% correct, some chance for error must always remain – for example, all scientific theories live such lives until they are superseded. Ultimately a proposition or theory is credible to the extent that it is useful for explaining something that happened, or predicting something that will happen – i.e. to the extent that it has utility.

In any event, credible evidence is not easily falsifiable – it can withstand testing. This means that it would be hard to point out weaknesses in it that cannot be explained away. In the current birth certificate posting, the ‘evidence’ has sophomoric errors in it that give lie to the claim that this was an unmodified scanned document. And there is no accompanying explanation given as to why such obvious artifacts occur in the image of the document. Moreover, the artifacts look as if some kid with an image processing package like Adobe Photoshop messed with it.

What adds to the conundrum is that the White House considered the whole population of the most technologically advanced country in the world to be so dense as to not pick up on these obvious artifacts. In sum, the posted birth certificate does not lend credibility (i.e. increase the assessed probability) that Obama was born in Hawaii, nor does it prove that he was not born in the United States. But it does raise questions as to its posting.

[Mike Thornton]

So, in other words, George, there will never be enough evidence as long as one far right extremist doesn't want there to be enough evidence.
How intellectually dishonest can you be?
Oh, I'm sorry, that answer is "As much as it takes!"
I realize that the likes of Todd are easily impressed and bamboozled, but then again he doesn't try to present himself as a great intellect or maybe he does try and just fails at it so badly, that it only looks like he isn't trying, but do you really think that you're not pathetically transparent?

[Mikey McD]

Powerful governments (lack of personal liberty) = corporate rule and fascist hegemony.

Mr. Thornton, are you saying that government must be all powerful in order to curb corporations? Do you believe in the accepted notion that corporations gain their power from a (too) powerful government (i.e. Robber barons are created by a large and corrupt government).

Mike Thornton: "The other part of this (which is much more insidious) is the continuation of making government the "other" in order to facilitate corporate rule and fascist hegemony."

[Mike Thornton]

No, I don't believe government should be "all powerful", I do believe that government under control of the voters should act as a counter-balance to entrenched corporate power and concentrated capital. Are you saying that you believe in an all powerful corporate control of society, cultural and the economy, with all decisions made by people that are unaccountable to anyone other than their major private investors?

[George Rebane]

Mikey - your excellent point can be summarized by the historical dictum that powerful corporations cannot exist without a powerful government, they go together hand-in-glove. It is government that creates and maintains oligopolies primarily through their directed power of the bayonet toward competitors and consumers.

"... pathetically transparent?" Transparency intended but apparently not achieved. Mr Thornton, kinda seems like further discussion on this (and any other?) matter is pretty pointless.

[Todd Juvinall]

Mikey, you cannot debate a rock. Thornton to my knowledge has never met a payroll nor had a successful business. Therefore he is in territory he knows nothing about. What he does know is government and its power to destroy. The last thing I recall him doing was being a leader in destroying small suction dredgers doing their thing and patting himself on the back for doing so. These kinds of people are why America is headed to the crapper. They are just big mouths with no history of success in what made America great. They are good whiners though.

BTW even Canada is rejecting the Thornton's of the world. See http://sierradragonsbreathe.blogspot.com/2011/05/canada-elects-conservative-majority.html

Paul, I think your last word in your post, the word "sure", says it all. You are obviously a person who believes Oswald had help in murdering Kennedy. Therefore, how is it you can judge others who question the birth certificate? Please explain.

[Mikey McD]

Mr. Thornton, I pray, hope and vote for personal liberty every time. I believe that in a truly free society (without a government powerful enough to sell out to the highest bidder) the values of the individual serve the both the individual and collective best. Competition (via personal liberty) protects us against corporate rule and fascist hegemony.

Agreed George:
"powerful corporations cannot exist without a powerful government".

[Mike Thornton]

So the "conservative" approach is to remove government and simply turn everything over to the oligarchs and they can then use their own privatized "bayonets" to enforce their will.
Makes sense: "cut out the middleman" and increase that "bottom line"

[Mikey McD]

Mr. Thornton, the common sense approach ("Mike Thornton said...
No, I don't believe government should be "all powerful") to increasing personal liberty would be to decrease the power of the government AND THUS CORPORATIONS which would insure against the "corporate rule and fascist hegemony" you speak of. Which begs the question, how much to do you value personal liberty?

In a free society the consumers vote their values via their wallets.

If you are suggesting that more competition would increase the bottom line then I fear any more discussion may be futile.

[George Rebane]

Dear Readers - by request I have enabled the 'comment thread' feature on TypePad that allows you to reply 'in place' to individual comments thereby allowing the creation of a separate discussion thread and/or skipping over an entire indented structure of comments that do not interest you.

For example, Mr Thornton quite often has trouble following the logic of arguments in responding to preceding comments, and instead takes off into left(!) field with his responses - see example immediately above. This feature may be useful in such cases.

[Todd Juvinall]

As you can see the left cannot reason. It is not our desire to remove all government it is our desire to have it live within the rules set by the Founders. Enumerated not limitless. The left always thinks things are a "zero sum game". Of course in real life it isn't but the left doesn't think that way. The large corporations and large governments and large unions are all the same format. We like to fight for the little guy and freedom. Oh, Big Green is the same thing now in our country. We fight them too.

[Greg Goodknight]

So the "conservative" approach is to remove government and simply turn everything over to the oligarchs and they can then use their own privatized "bayonets" to enforce their will.

Reductio ad absurdum is the last refuge of the scoundrel. In a free market, the government is there to keep the peace and enforce contracts, not choose the winners and the losers.

[Paul Emery]

George

You give a lot of credibility to the source of your information. Is he a forensic professional specializing in computer graphics or an amateur with a cause? He seems to be some kind of financial blogger best I can tell. It was just a few month ago that the slimmer Breitbart pulled his tryst and was exposed as a fraud. All this attention plays well for Obama. The recent poll data that shows nearly 50% of Republicans believe it is astonishing. I don't think this has legs and the Repubs will distance themselves as the election nears and they need to move to the middle.

George, how do you explain the published newspaper reports publishing his birth.

Todd The JFK assassination is a different story and I put that in to poke you and see where you stand. Have you ever read the Warren Commission report? It you have and believe it then that's your privilege and I won't dispute your opinion.

[Todd Juvinall]

So you don't believe Oswald was alone? Why would that be a different issue regarding conspiracy thinking? Tell us your position since you seem to think dancing around it is so fun.

[Mike Thornton]

I don't have any trouble at all George. You just don't like the answers!

[George Rebane]

Paul, anyone can play with the image of the birth certificate here
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

For a supposedly uniformly scanned image, even the simplest of consumer image processors display it as anything except uniform black print on green dappled paper. BTW, I'm not sure the originally published image has not been replaced on the WH website.

Re newspaper notices, many authors have argued how easy it is to post such notices that require no further proof of birth. But I think that is an area to be further explored for promising credibility. There may be stronger contemporaneous evidence of Obama's Hawaiian birth.

[Mike Thornton]

So then we agree Todd. There is a legitimate role for government to play. No we're discussing what that role is!

[Mike Thornton]

And Greg, that's what you guys have been doing for a long, long time!

[Mikey McD]

AMEN!!!! "In a free market, the government is there to keep the peace and enforce contracts, not choose the winners and the losers."

[Mike Thornton]

No amount of evidence will ever be enough for them, Paul!
The whole game is to de-legitimize, create fear and doubt and demonize.
And I'll say it flat out. When these people deny that is what this is all about, they're liars, plain and simple. The problem is that they've been allowed to get a way with it for way too long.
Notice that once somebody started really confronting Rebane, he changed the format to try and isolate comments he doesn't like and doesn't particularly want others to see.
When right wingers, were barking and growling, promulgating discredited conspiracy theories, calling their opponents disgusting names and engaging in personal attacks, that was all good!

[Todd Juvinall]

Thornton, here is your words from above trying t defame conservatives. "The whole game is to de-legitimize, create fear and doubt and demonize."

This is what you and your ilk do all the time. The latest is the dredgers you were able to get banned from doing their jobs. So, yes, kettle meet pot. What a hypocrite.

[George Rebane]

Correct on both counts Mr Thornton - you don't have any trouble with your comments, and I find your arguments beyond my ken.

[George Rebane]

Dear Readers - per many of your comments I'm trying something new. Have just deleted a series of comments by Messrs Juvinall, Enos, and Thornton that were not even remotely germain to the posted topic and consisted of mud pies thrown at each other. These exchanges could more properly be made via email between the parties concerned. I hope that all will understand that I'm trying to move the discussion back toward the message and away from degenerating into a bout of mutual messenger mangling. Your thoughts on this?

[Todd Juvinall]

Sorry George, I'll do better.

[Steve Enos]

Good job George!

On topic... the continued Obama is not an American, we never really landed on the moon conspiracy is a total waste of time and energy considering the real issues we face.

BUT... it sure makes the hard right birthers look like loons and it only helps Obama... so please keep it up!

[Paul Emery]

Sure Todd

After reading the Warren Report (have your read it) many years ago I came tho the conclusion that the real story has yet to be told. As I stated earlier, the theory of Oswald being the sole person involved doesn't at all seem plausible. Here is a refresher of the chain of events that lead to the assassination of Kennedy that I sent earlier

Oswald renounces his US citizenship, moves to Russia, becomes a Russian citizen, takes a Russian bride, changes his mind, waltzes back to the US with his Russian wife, a KGB Colonel's niece and is taken back no questions asked, decides to assassinate Kennedy, moves to Dallas and pulls off an amazing feat of marksmanship all by himself. Jack Ruby a local mobster who has no history of patriotism and never was know as a Kennedy supporter two days later shoots and kills Oswald on national television to save "Jackie the grief of a trial" then dies of cancer. The Kennedy family clams up and rubber stamps the Warren Commissions report by their silence.

AS a starter I suggest you read through this to see the scope of information that disappeared when requests were made to make them public.
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/review-board/report/chapter-08.pdf

This whole thing is just not plausible to an average thinker like me.

[Mikey McD]

Mike Smith, you just hit a new low. I hope Rebane deletes your hate.

[Todd Juvinall]

Just trying to get the level of things with those that condemn others for having questions. Seems as if you should look in the mirror about the act of conspiracy. Obama's BC and Kennedy assassination. You tell us the difference in the act of questioning either one. Then tell us why your conspiracy thinking is any different than those who question the BC. Besides, Kennedy was a Catholic and we all know how prejudice Americans were against that religion. Hmm, was Oswald a Protestant?

[Todd Juvinall]

I am a non racist person so Mike Smith is just trying to create a problem. I think it is either Pelline or Enos using that name since I have never heard of this fellow. I have found these liberal racists just enjoy saying the naughty words.

[George Rebane]

Mike Smith is indeed a piece of work. His comments have been deleted. Apologies for not catching them sooner.

[Steve Enos]

Oh please Todd... your BS claims that "Mike Smith" is Pelline or Enos is just another example of your insanity.

Geoerge... Todd's post IS a personal, red herring attack, based on total BS. It's like asking Todd if he still beats his girlfriend.

Seems it did take very long for Todd to dump his "Sorry George, I'll do better" commenting here.

So George... is Todd's post just fine with your standards here to stay on topic and stop the personal attacks or will you remove this lastest example of flamming, off topic BS by Todd.

[Todd Juvinall]

Thanks George for deleting the racist comment by "Mike Smith". Seems like the last refuge of a scoundrel is to claim someone is a racist. It is becoming clear there are people using phony monikers to shoot flames.

[Steve Enos]

Here's a DIRECT, SPECIFIC response to Todd's posts above:

It gets hard to follow Todd's positions as they change from one post to another.

Here is the most recent example from his last two posts above:

1. First Todd posted:

"I have found these liberal racists just enjoy saying the naughty words"

2. Right after that Todd posted this:

"Seems like the last refuge of a scoundrel is to claim someone is a racist"

If one applies Todd's first post to his second stated positon it's clear... Todd is calling himself a "scoundrel".

Enjoy your "last refuge" Todd.

[Paul Emery]

To summarize Birthgate I have these observations. The Birth Certificate controversy is being confined to the shrill right and amateur detectives and pretty much abandoned even by Trump who is winding down operations before bailing out of the election. The Republican Party establishment has serious work to do and is disciplined enough to not get distracted by what is and always has been a dead horse. Besides, there is no way Obama would have survived the vetting of the Democratic Party when he became a serious candidate for President without this being discovered. And there's the newspaper announcements that would have to involve fraudulent microfilm from two publications.

The face that nearly 50% of all Republicans are Birthers has to have the the Repub leadership in a tizzy as they race to the middle for the next election cycle. Even Tom McClintock thinks it's a waste of time. Is it possible? Sure it is. Is it likely? Not as I see it.

The hard right has perhaps 25-30% of the electorate as they have for the last 20 years. Remember, Bush won as a Compassionate Conservative. Ron Paul will steal the show for a while but cooler heads will prevail and the Repubs will pick an insider like they always do and probably go with Romney who is the best match up to Obama. They might throw the fight like they did with McCain Pallen and concentrate on the Senate but even then they will be better served with a moderate Republican to soften up the middle.

So in my opinion this is a moot point that will be old news soon as the election season grows nearer.
.

[Todd Juvinall]

When we are belittled for asking questions by the left, like the birth certificate, we know they have lost the argument. We win, they lose.

[Steve Enos]

Here's another reason to drop the birther/birth certificate insanity...

Have you birther folks ever read the Constitution and Title 8 of the US Code?

Read Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution and Title 8 of the U.S. Code.

You see even if Obama had been born in a foreign country (which he wasn't) Obama could still be president of the United States of America as long as one of his parents was a U.S citizen.... duh! Can't you birthers grasp this?

President Obama's mother was American. His late father was Kenyan. Under the U.S. Constitution and Title 8 of the U.S. Code one does not need to be born in the USA if one of the parents is an American! GOT IT?

President Obama is one of several presidents with a foreign born parent. The Constitution provides for and allows this. GOT IT?

But you birthers keep this up as it only shows how nuts you are. It's just a pointless distraction from the real issues we face.

But keep it up please as it undermines your efforts and helps President Obama and the Dem's in the next election.

[George Rebane]

I also believe it is likely that the Obama's birth issue will soon be a moot point. The only thing that I would leave the reader with is that the "scanned" image of the Obama's long form birth certificate posted by the White House is the absolute best that the White House has done to put the matter to bed once and for all.

We recall that the place of Obama's birth and the notion of its having legs in the upcoming campaign are two separate issues.

[Steve Enos]

The birth certificate is meaningless for many reasons, but this is the main reason:

President Obama's mother was an American. His late father was Kenyan. Under the U.S. Constitution and Title 8 of the U.S. Code one does not need to be born in the USA to be President if one of the parents is an American.

[George Rebane]

Strong and clearly stated interpretation of the Constitution SteveE. Who else out there stands with you on that point?

[Paul Emery]

Todd

I didn't intend to belittle you with my opinion, I was only expressing mine. You're such a sensitive guy. Blog on. I'm done with this

[Greg Goodknight]

Thorton sez "And Greg, that's what you guys have been doing for a long, long time!"

First, I'm not one of the "you guys". Second, I don't do the "it" in this case.

[Todd Juvinall]

Paul why so hostile?

[Steve Enos]

George... where was John McCain who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and was the Republican nominee for President in 2008 born?

Hint... he was born in 1936 and not on USA soil.

[Greg Goodknight]

Steve.... Hint.... During the campaign, within days of the questions of McCain's birth were being questioned by the *press*, McCain released a copy of his long form birth certificate that satisfied everybody.

For some reason, the press never got after Obama to do the same.

[George Rebane]

SteveE, and neither was our first child (born in Germany) who is still qualified to run for President since Congress passed a law stating that children of citizens in government service overseas conform with the 'natural born' restriction of the Constitution. (I was in the Army.)

Still waiting for something a bit stronger to buttress your argument.

[Steve Enos]

George... here's some info for you. Foot Note 15 covers McCain:

http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

I'm sure all this is pointless as you have made it clear you are a birther.

[George Rebane]

SteveE, thank you for settling the debate. By your reference your understanding of who is a natural born citizen is incorrect.

By my declared definition and corroborated by your reference, I am not a birther.

The long form birth certificate presented by the White House casts doubt as to its authenticity according to the representation made by the administration as to its image format.

None of this proves that Obama was not born in the US, nor does it prove that he is not a natural born citizen. We only know that dubious "evidence" has been presented to make the case of his natural birth as required by the Constitution (please see 4may11 update in the post).

[Steve Enos]

Like I said... I'm sure all this is pointless as you have made it clear you are a birther.

[Russ Steele]

The latest analysis is quite compelling, once the document layers are revealed and differences in the pre printed form are examined. This does not prove that Obama is not a natural born citizen, only that this from presented by the Presidents Office is a fake. Why go to this elaborate ruse? What is it that Obama is hiding. Both the live birth and the long form are fakes, according to this detailed analysis. Why?

I would like to see Obama staff explain away this analysis. Perhaps this expert has over looked something. Even experts make mistakes. So, where is the counter analysis?

[Russ Steele]

Oops. Should read "form presented"

[John Galt]

What shall the name for this fraud be?

LiarGate
ImposterGate
FraudGate
CitizenGate
FooledGate
ForgeryGate

I downloaded the PDF file file of the birth certificate from the whitehouse.gov website today. Anyone else can do the same. You can also download a trial version of Adobe Illustrator and use it for 30 days.

It's a fact that a scanner creates ONLY ONE LAYER, yet Obama's PDF copy of his birth certificate from HIS OWN WEBSITE has multiple layers. Without question, the Birth Certificate on Whitehouse.gov is a FAKE.

Funny, it's always the coverup that gets them.

[Brad Croul]

I am reading a lot of hysterical comments here. Just what is this histeria about? Is it about editing a document for clarification, to enhance information lost during the scanning process (I don't call that "faking). Or, is it about Obama not being a US citizen for some reason?

This birth certificate is not the same as Osama's head shot photo. Anyone can view the record book containing the birth information.

This witch hunt exemplifies the provincial mindset of the GOP.

[Mike Thornton]

And while the birthers fiddle, The President kills Osama Bin Laden.
Oh but that's right, he's faked that as well, right?
And if the "Manchurian Muslim" can violate "International Law" and "assassinate" OBL, how long before he sends "Navy Seal Team 6" after his real enemies, Glenn Beck and Russ Steele?
Oh that's right, the Navy Seals didn't really kill Osama, because they were actually off on the mission of making sure that no one who could possibly expose the truth, that Barak Hussein Obama (that was a clever "cover name") has been groomed and protected for decades so that he could become President of the United States and sell us into Shari-a Slavery.
Even John McCain was part of the plot and picked Sarah Palin to be his VP knowing full well that she would alienate enough voters to make sure that he lost the Presidency to Obama. In fact even "W" was part of the scam and cleverly refused to catch Osama Bin Laden so Obama could fake his capture and death, thereby convincing the gullible, that he really wasn't a secret Muslim and supporter of the Caliphate as he goes to ground Zero and "pretends" to be a "real" American.
Thanks Russ, for saving America!

[John Galt]

Dear Brad and Mike,

Since forged documents don't bother you, perahps you'd accept some forged $20 bills? for payment.

I just love the double standard exhibited on this blog. It's a monument to tortured thniking.

We learned during the Clinton adminstration that perjury is a crime, unless you're a democratic president. (If you're a white house aide for a Republican President you must go to jail.)

Now, forgery is okay as long as you're a Democratic President.

Just another example of how Republicans seek to be a nation of laws, while Demoncrats, Commicrats, Marxicrats prefer a nation where the ends justify the means.

[Mike Thornton]

Do you mean a "White House Aide" that outed a covert agent for the CIA and put our agents and assets around the world of capture and death? Or do you mean the dozens of criminals that went to jail who worked for Saint Ronnie Reagan? Or the group of criminals that worked for Richard Nixon?
Those folks were actually all "convicted" of crimes!
To the contrary the so-called "forgery" is a made up "conspiracy theory" that has been thoroughly debunked and is only being kept alive by hyper-partisan sufferers of "ODS"!

[Todd Juvinall]

I think Galt means the fifty or more friends of Clinton and Clinton himself. I bet you liberals still believe the forged documents by Dan Rather are real don't you? What a hoot.

[Mike Thornton]

Rather didn't forge the documents, Todd, he was given forged documents.
However what you fail to mention is that while the documents were indeed forged the story about Bush and his ducking out on his military service was in fact still true!

[Bob Hobert]

My my, the commentary is... useless. Everyone seems hardwired into their preferred perceptions and reading the blather is pointless. Nuts. Meanwhile, the country lurches aimlessly. Sometimes I admire the Brits for having their "no confidence" mechanism. I have no confidence left in this administration, those who blindly prop it up, OR those who oppose it that cannot focus on the most expedient way to fire it - the next election.

[Mike Thornton]

It's hard to get direction when you have a group of folks that fail to deal with any facts at all, Bob!

[Todd Juvinall]

Bob, when people like Thornton still claim Bush was nowhere to be found while he showed that even his dentist proved he was where he claimed then you can see why there is a large gap. Dan Rather to this ay claims the documents were real and yet Thornton makes up his little story. Wow, no wonder no one believes "journalists" or "progressives.

[Steven Frisch]

For once in my life I agree with Bob Hobert--this conversation is useless, but it is because people are hardwired. Mike, you are making great points here, too bad they always fall on deaf ears, closed eyes, and shut minds.

[Todd Juvinall]

What a hoot. Liberal licking each others boots. What a surprise.

I bet you think there was someone on the grassy knoll and the Bush documents were real too. Amazing.

[John Galt]

Look, I wasn't beating the drum on this birther thing before. I'm just looking at the facts.

The Birth Certificate was manufactured.

You don't have to go do some conservative web site. Just download the PDF file from the blog on www.whitehouse.gov yourself and open it up with a trial version of Adobe Illustator...or send the file to your most liberal graphic artist.

You will then see that that the published birth certificate has multiple layers...which is an impossible property of a scanned original file.

By the way, Mike, I'll help you throw all the crooked "White House Aide's" into jail as long as you hold the same standard for The President himself.

I can't support double standards. We're NOT a monarchy. Our governmenbt was established by the consent of the governed.

Under oath (which I'm old enough to still believe means something) The President and other electeds swear to uphold the laws of our nation. Forgery is a breach of that oath.

[Mike Thornton]

I know, Steve. I'll do this until it gets boring.
There are actually a couple of folks that post here, while a bit myopic and hyper-partisan, are fairly sharp and do have some facts to back up their arguments.
Then, you've got TJ, who actually has the nerve to refer to other people as "bootlickers". Now that's a "hoot"!

[John Galt]

Thanks Todd for the reminder on the Dan Blather forgery episode. And yes, I was referring to Bill Clinton's perjury....which is interesting to compare to Barry Bond's perjury trial. The one that involve national security issues was forgiven. The one that involves a game was taken pursued to the bitter end.

[Mike Thornton]

Clinton lying about having had sex with an intern involved "national security issues"?
And what was really great, was that a number of his most vocal detractors (at the time) were engaged in lying about and covering up illicit affairs of their own. The hypocrisy of the right wing is absolutely stunning!

[Todd Juvinall]

Then we have Scooter Libby. Even though he was proven not to be the person who "outed" the leftwingnut ex0CIA liberal woman, he was prosecuted for perjury because some statement he made during the investigation didn't match up with a later statement. President Bush did the right thing with the commutation. s you can see Galt, the left posting here has no facts but lots of "feelings". I love debunking a liberal, but sometimes it is boring, they are so easy.

[John Galt]

Mike, Who are the "most vocal detractors (at the time)[that] were engaged in lying about and covering up illicit affairs of their own." that you refer to above...and what conservatives were defending them. I doubt I was.

Did you forget?, or do you dispute?, that Bill Clinton's illicit sexual affair exposed the President of The United States (and ultimately the citizens he serves) to potential extortion etc.

If an unfriendly power had learned of this information (which was freely discussed via unsecured phone calls) this could have compromised Bill Clinton's decisions to the detriment of the citizens and our national security.

Forgot? Dispute? Or Don't care (doesn't apply to baseball>?

[Mike Thornton]

OMG.
Lets see if I have this right.
You can out a CIA agent if she's a "Liberal Woman" and Clinton would have become a foreign agent over a BJ!
We can start with Newt (I'm the hypocrite that divorced my wife while she was dying from Cancer) Gingrich.

[Todd Juvinall]

Don't condone Newt, so what is your problem? I guess your facts about Libby are made up and now you believe them eh?

[Russ Steele]

Mike T, Steve E, & Brad:

Let's stop trying to change the subject, let's get back to focusing on the document. Is it a forgery? Yes or No? If No what is your proof? Please explain the layers. I am sorry, but the need to retouch for read ability up does not fly. Did you look at the other copies of the scanned documents, did they need touch up? What about the live birth certificate on a form introduced in 1974. How did a 1961 birth show up on a 1974 per-printed form? I am sure there must be a good explanation! Let's hear it!

[Steve Enos]

Hey Russ... review my posts above and show us all where I didn't stay on topic as you claim.

Good news for all, stop the presses and get out an international press release! Russ and George have reviewed President Obama's long and short birth certificates and declare them fakes.

Birthers are a hoot!

[Mike Thornton]

Oh Russ... Give it up.
Even the leaders of the Republican party have said that this is a dead issue!
Everyone in any "real" position to know says, that Obama is a citizen, he was born in Hawaii, when he says he was born and the officials of the State confirm that the birth certificate is real, there are announcements printed in the paper at the time of Obama's birth, but none of that is good enough for you.
You continue to beat the completely discredited drum.
Why?
That the real question!
And what's the answer to that?
I'll tell you what the answer is: You're desperate to continue a climate of doubt and fear about Obama and why is that? I'll answer that for you as well. The most benign part is that you think it helps your side politically. The more you can make people doubt and fear, the easier it is to convince them to support Obama's opponents, who conveniently happen to be the people that you support politically, just a coincidence, I'm sure....
The worst aspect of it is that you're really afraid of this guy because he's got a "different" sounding name and he's a Black man and how could a "Black" man with a "different" sounding name possibly support "America" or more correctly "your" vision of America?
You know, Russ, I've worked with mentally ill people in the past and sometimes you can tell them over and over that the voices they hear in their head aren't real, but they simply can't believe it.
It's the same thing with you "Birthers".
No amount of evidence will ever be enough for you, so why don't YOU just be honest and admit that?
This isn't worth talking about anymore!
You've lost!
Get over it!!

[Todd Juvinall]

Is the term "birthers" some sort of problem? Is that a pejorative?

Namecalling with a madeup word. Wow, how special.

[Mike Thornton]

Hmmmm....good question!