Obama Releases Birth Certificate

President Obama has released his birth certificate. You can view it here.

The President believed the distraction over his birth certificate wasn't good for the country. It may have been good politics and good TV, but it was bad for the American people and distracting from the many challenges we face as a country. Therefore, the President directed his counsel to review the legal authority for seeking access to the long form certificate and to request on that basis that the Hawaii State Department of Health make an exception to release a copy of his long form birth certificate. They granted that exception in part because of the tremendous volume of requests they had been getting.

Will the absurd accusations stop? Unlikely. Of all the non-issues raised by the right to Obama, this is one of the most ridiculous.

< Petraeus to Head CIA, Panetta to Head Defense Department | Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Why this now? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:01:33 PM EST

    Re-election 2012 (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:02:34 PM EST
    Ya. My thought was: far enough after the (none / 0) (#5)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:10:11 PM EST
    first election such that he doesn't look like he was caving in to pressure, but far enough ahead of the next election such that it doesn't look like he needed to do it for electability reasons.

    Still and all, there wasn't jacksh*t in the news last week, and this week's all about some big wedding or another.

    So why this now?


    It was appropriately timed (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:14:26 PM EST
    And no reason to have given them a damned thing until now.  The nation is really embarrassing in many ways right now.

    Point was he could've released the BC (none / 0) (#11)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:19:43 PM EST
    last week, or even next week after the wedding. I wonder if he really did feel like he got stiffed by not getting invited to the wedding. Weird week to release the BC, imo.

    I'm jaded about Obama (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:24:03 PM EST
    But even I'm not that jaded to think he did it simply for the sake of attention :)

    I just wonder if he didn't enjoy taking some of the 24/7 limelight away from the wedding that he didn't get invited to...

    I think ... (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:50:51 PM EST
    ... you're trying too hard ...

    Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (none / 0) (#52)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:02:04 PM EST
    Were not invited to the wedding.

    I don't think Obama is worried about it.


    No, it was released after (none / 0) (#75)
    by MKS on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 05:32:05 PM EST
    the Corsi expose has already gone to print and will be available to the public on May 17, 2011.  You know, Jerome Corsi the Swiftboat liar--the guy who published the Swiftboat book in 2004.

    Now, his book is mush, outdated.....

    Perfect timing to sink the book.  Too late to redo it.  Early enough before anyone reads it.....

    Senator Obama during a Senate hearing to confirm a Bush campaign contributor as Ambassador to a nice Eurpopean country, Belgium I think, expressed his disdain for that contributor's participation in the Swift Boat nonsense in 2004.  (Repaying Kerry's favor in giving Obama a speaking slot at the 2004 convention.)

    Obama knows who Corsi is....And Corsi just got slammed--as his book is now worthless and the publisher will eat a lot of money.


    Geezus (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:27:10 PM EST

    Dunno. He could've waited a couple days... (none / 0) (#17)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:29:32 PM EST
    the world stops for no man (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by CST on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:57:38 PM EST
    or his birth certificate.

    Wait a week and maybe you have a hurricaine in timbuktoo that kills a bajillion people, and then the certificate is a "distraction" from that.

    There's always going to be something.  A royal wedding is as good of an opening as any.


    I guess. He's had 3 years (or something) (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:10:22 PM EST
    to choose a date to release the BC, he chose this today.

    I recall (none / 0) (#39)
    by CST on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:16:06 PM EST
    a lot of contentious political battles and major world events during that time too.

    Also, I get the feeling that Trump did "force" this.  By harrassing people in Hawaii to no end.  At least that's what the request letter seems to imply.


    I agree that the Trump point has weight. (none / 0) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:17:37 PM EST
    I'm laughing (5.00 / 0) (#21)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:36:56 PM EST
    Obama picked the best news day of the week, it seems. Many people were involved with Easter activities during last week and over the weekend. Monday is a downer, and Thursday & Friday this week will be consumed by The Wedding (with some economic news that routinely comes out on Thurs, Fri.) Maximum impact of his good timing.

    Being involved with other matters earlier today, I didn't have time to speak with anyone about the "news" until the past hour or so. Same response from three people: Laughter. If one is not too far predisposed on either side, it does look like "come into my parlor said the spider to the fly." Or, "My goodness, Madge, did you see how the President just burst their balloon with one piece of paper!?! And, they've been walking right into it. What fools!" (Of course, as many of us suspect, the provocateurs will just move onto the next manufactured RW issue.) For today, the ultimate counter-puncher in our President did get the last laugh on that issue...and, most of the middle sees, gets it, and (I'm guessing) gets did-ya-see-this exclamation from it.  

    My personal favorite: The timely advice to get on with the significant issues of the day, etc. The President's use of the word "bemusement" to describe observing the birther-charade with its' "carnival barkers" was perfect tone.


    Nah - Friday would have been better (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:42:18 PM EST
    It's called "Take Out the Trash Day" on a regular week.  This week, with the wedding, any other news will be ignored.

    So far, this is the news today (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:53:21 PM EST
    After The Wedding on Friday, we will also hear about Astronaut Kelly's flight and the courage of Cong. Giffords in travelling to her husband's side. (And, the President will also be going to the launch...a different news day this time, Friday.) Wednesday is pretty good....

    In any event, considering all the "reporting" over the last year or so on this issue--as Obama has now observed, this "silly" issue--the outcome is deliciously served cold. And, as my husband & I briefly commented earlier, the President has a remarkable ability to counter-punch in perfect timing. (Myself, as a government type--aka enforcement & prosecutor type--I've always quickly gone for the jugular, etc.  Always tended toward offense. So, I find the ability to consummate a good defense incredibly impressive.)


    Please (none / 0) (#43)
    by cal1942 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:32:12 PM EST
    Upset over an invitation?  

    This is one "issue" that he remained above that I agree with 100%.  Getting into it would have given birthers legitimacy and if any group doesn't deserve legitimacy it's the birthers.

    But addressing it today with a worthless, just taking up space, complete and total fraud like Donald Trump arriving in NH was, IMO, the right thing.


    This one actually makes sense to me (none / 0) (#60)
    by sj on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:04:18 PM EST
    Point was he could've released the BC (none / 0) (#11)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:19:43 PM EST

    last week, or even next week after the wedding.

    Now is the perfect time to minimize the PR ripple.  I don't blame him for not wanting to make a bigger deal about this than he has to.

    In terms of the actual decision to release I have my cynical moments.  But if they're going to do it, I think this is the perfect time for it.


    All (none / 0) (#86)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 07:19:01 PM EST
    he cared about was Trump. Period.
    Panic mode imo.

    As I said to CST, that';s a great point. (none / 0) (#96)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 12:04:56 AM EST
    hahahhahahahahahahhahahaha (none / 0) (#94)
    by pitachips on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:26:38 PM EST
    you're kidding right?

    You're someone who I think would be a hoot to drink a few beers with.

    Anyhoo, there was some speculation here on TL a while back that O'B was dissed by not being invited to the wedding. I never gave it any credence.

    However, whether or not he gave a sh*t about not being invited, he surely knew the "politics" involved in dropping his own little 3-year-old bombshell two days before the big wedding.

    Or are you suggesting he is as dumb as all the loons say he is?


    There are... (none / 0) (#93)
    by Thanin on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:17:15 PM EST
    probably some internal polls telling them that continued WH silence on the "issue" might start turning movement against them, so now is the best time to do it.

    IMO Obama has played this birther nonsense beautifully.


    It gets better (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:08:16 PM EST

    "Look, I applaud this release. I think it's a step in the right direction," so-called "birther queen" Orly Taitz told me in one of her many media interviews this morning. "I credit Donald Trump in pushing this issue."

    But she still has her suspicions. Specifically, Taitz thinks that the birth certificate should peg Obama's race as "Negro" and not "African."

    "In those years ... when they wrote race, they were writing `Negro' not `African'," Taitz says. "In those days nobody wrote African as a race, it just wasn't one of the options. It sounds like it would be written today, in the age of political correctness, and not in 1961 when they wrote white or Asian or `Negro'."

    Taitz says she's not giving up her fight. She also claims Obama isn't a "natural born citizen" because she uses a standard that requires both parents to be American citizens -- a misreading of the Constitution which if enforced would have rendered several other American Presidents ineligible.


    Orly still "practicing law"? surely NOT (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by thereyougo on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:16:56 PM EST
    now there is mystery. How does  this mail order attorney managed to tie up the courts with frivolous accusations, gets sanctioned and she's still around?!

    Says the Russian... (none / 0) (#22)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:37:36 PM EST
    You skipped the best part. (none / 0) (#38)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:15:33 PM EST
    Orly---who looks like she just got released from a mental institution, btw---said that releasing the BC was  a good start, comparable to Nixon's release of the Watergate tapes.

    {head desk} (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:17:18 PM EST
    That was cruel of me, btw. (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:32:27 PM EST
    I should have said she looked like Trump's hairdresser did her makeup.

    lol!~ (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:36:51 PM EST
    jeeze, now I may have to find a current pic of her ;)

    Isn't (none / 0) (#85)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 07:15:16 PM EST
    what she said true?
    I have never seen "African" listed as a race.

    I haven't examined the released long form - but is it true that it says "African" for "race"? Really weird.


    Perhaps because of the color of his skin (none / 0) (#87)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 08:17:39 PM EST
    and the fact his father is African. Perhaps if his skin favored his mother more, they would have called it differently. Or perhaps his mother or father gave his race as African (American?) . . .

    I looked at my birth documents today, it has my mother's sig, as in they got some of the info (name etc) from her. And in 59 they wrote caucasian, not white as TO seems to think . . .   ;)


    Still weird... (none / 0) (#88)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 08:28:15 PM EST
    "African" is a nationality, not a race.

    Race (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Politalkix on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:00:50 PM EST
    50 years (or more) ago, races would be listed as Caucasian, African and Mongoloid.
    BTW, Africa is a continent, not a nation (so not a nationality).

    But.. (none / 0) (#100)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 07:25:26 AM EST
    in the year of Obama's birth, "African" was not listed as a "race"...
    Was that commonplace in the Hawaiian Islands at that time?

    Common???? How many African (none / 0) (#102)
    by observed on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 08:07:11 AM EST
    fathers of babies were in Hawaii in 1961? If there were even 10, I'd be surprised.
    There is absolutely nothing to deduce from that word.

    Interestingly . . . . (none / 0) (#91)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 08:39:56 PM EST
    I just dl a copy of his BC. No mention of his race, only the mother's (Caucasian) and the father's (African).

    Wow. Obama was NOT born (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:21:16 PM EST
    in the continental US. This is HUGE!!!

    Did anyone check the kerning yet? (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:33:19 PM EST

    To be clear, he already released (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:34:04 PM EST
    his birth certificate. This is just a different version that carries no particular weight--even with the birthers who will no doubt move on to some other "inconsistency."

    Obama is feeding the crazy people--for god knows what reason.

    I don't keep track of much (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:48:59 PM EST
    of the birther stuff but this does have listed the facility he was born at.  Isn't that one their big "things", no record of what facility he was born at and no recorded physician?  I didn't look closely at this new release.  It looks much like mine though and I thought I saw a couple of signatures on there where my physician's signature is.

    Anybody (none / 0) (#28)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:56:06 PM EST
    who was born around the same time Obama was like me has no doubt that this is real. I mean only an idiot would think he could fake all that information. The only thing that I see that's different from mine is that HI obviously didn't have a box to check if the parents were married.

    Because (none / 0) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:51:15 PM EST
    something like 45% of the GOP don't think he's an american citizen or have doubts and as we all know by now, he really, really cares about what the GOP base thinks and wants to please them.

    That 45% number comes quite a bit (none / 0) (#29)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:56:21 PM EST

    Was that not the percentage of Dems that thought Bush helped plan 9-11?



    What? (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:01:25 PM EST
    You have really slipped off your cracker now :)

    And I guess we all just slept through (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by CST on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:09:09 PM EST
    that part of 2006 when some loudmouth Dems tried to turn it into a major election issue.

    One can believe the 9-11 (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:12:43 PM EST
    commission was a joke without thinking
    Bush was behind the attacks.

    No, 45% is the amount of (5.00 / 5) (#32)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:07:01 PM EST
    "facts" you just pull out of your as$---or is it 78.3%? Let me check.. yeah, it's the 2nd number.

    My recollection slipped a tad (none / 0) (#50)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:53:16 PM EST

    It was 42.6% of Dems that thought the Evil Chimp or his Evil Minions had made it happen or let it happen.

    See page 8 at the link for the Zogby Poll.


    so many problems with that poll (5.00 / 4) (#53)
    by CST on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:05:00 PM EST
    If someone asked me if I thought the US government was caught completely off guard and that the official story is 100% true I would say no.  There are a lot of indications that they knew something might be coming.

    Do I think they intentionally let it happen? No.  Do I think they planned it? No.  Do I believe the "official" story that they had no idea anything was coming? No.  I think they had clear threats that weren't taken seriously enough and bad things happened.  So I don't fall into your little poll at all.

    Also, you said "helped plan" - if you can't see the difference between plan and neglect I don't know what to tell you.


    Exactly (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:28:51 PM EST
    Nobody really wanted anyone to know that our fighters initial response was from the cold war and they acted as if we were being attacked by Russia from some old "Russia Attacks" scenario :)  I guess it was the only one we had up and running :)

    And of course all that needs to be looked at alongside the memo that Bush received earlier that an attack by Osama was eminent, because then we have lots of competency questions.  The underfunding and silencing of the 9/11 commission was to do what they could to ensure a 2nd Bush term and hide the Bush administration's utter giant incompetency.  None of this hiding of wholesale incompetency saved any Katrina victims either.  Another moment of totally incompetent gone wild.


    More than a "tad" (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:55:19 PM EST
    The closest category to your original claim (i.e. Dems who thought Bush planned 9-11) is the people who thought he "made it happen".  This includes 6.3% of Democratic respondents and 3.7% of Republican respondents.  Many others thought Bush may have "Let it happen" by failing to take action that could have prevented it.

    But nice try.


    Read the poll (none / 0) (#98)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 07:09:32 AM EST
    Let it happen means:

    ...certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic motives...

    That response was not merely about not taking some action or other, but failing to take action on purpose.


    read the poll again yourself (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by CST on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 10:32:08 AM EST
    when you have only three choices, and the other choices are "I 100% believe the government had no idea this was coming" or "they planned it with Al-Queda"

    Than maybe you answer yes even if you only partially agree.


    Well in that case (none / 0) (#111)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 02:31:16 PM EST
    Given that option one is blatantly false (they knew something was up just couldn't connect all the dots) and htat option three is freaking insane, option Two seeems to be a logical choice.

    Um,,the facts absolutely (none / 0) (#101)
    by observed on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 08:04:00 AM EST
    support the claim that the Bush administration knew something was coming, and did nothing.
    This is very far from your original claim that Democrats believed Bush was behind 9-11.
    I hate liars.

    Well (none / 0) (#103)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 09:31:37 AM EST

    I did say my recollection was off a tad.  However, there is precious little moral difference in "being behind 9/11" and knowing it was coming and choosing to let it happen.  

    IMHO, any public official that knew those planes were going to be hijacked and crashed but chose to let it happen for whatever motives is just as guilty as the hijackers, planners, and funders.  You apparently disagree.


    Do you agree that Condi Rice (none / 0) (#104)
    by observed on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 09:42:33 AM EST
    had warnings about planes being hijacked and flown into buildings? Well, we know that for a fact.
    What's your take on her moral culpability, by your standard.

    (by the way, that's a ridiculous hedge,  but let's go with it, because I think you must find Bush responsible for 9-11)


    No one but a truther (none / 0) (#106)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 10:33:59 AM EST

    Thinks Condi Rice had sufficient information to stop the attack but chose not to for political ot other motivations.  That is what the Zogby poll was addressing.

    ahem (none / 0) (#107)
    by CST on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 10:59:12 AM EST
    not addressing, projecting.

    Its' a very poorly worded question (none / 0) (#109)
    by observed on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 11:05:31 AM EST
    If you think that Bushco ignored clear warnings of an attack (which they did), you may answer that they "let it happen", which is a very vague statement. We don't know what Bushco thought, but they were grossly negligent.

    I don't think (none / 0) (#112)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 02:33:54 PM EST
    Bush on 9-11 is much worse than FDR on 12-7, he had more information but in both cases it was essentially impossible to fully anticipate (different than saying the attack was possible, I mean I'm guessing the DoD knew an attack from Japan was possible in the Winter of 1941 as well but absent direct information it would've been hard to avert Pearl).

    Good - now tell me how many people ... (none / 0) (#108)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 11:02:35 AM EST
    ... having those three definitions read to them in the middle of a telephone poll are even going to remember them by the time the interviewer finishes reading the question.  The Zogby polls, are a joke for many reasons, not the least of which is their methodology.  Zogby could have asked very simple questions if he wanted accurate results (i.e. "Did Bush plan 9-11" - your original claim about Democrats).  Instead, when the 9-11 "Truthers" hired Zogby to take a series of polls, he came up with convoluted questions creating a false trichotomy of choices on order to get results his client would like.

    lol! (none / 0) (#61)
    by sj on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:08:59 PM EST
    At least (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:54:02 PM EST

    Obama has a better story on the BC issue.  The facts really do help.

    OTOH, his statement on oil production is otherworldly:

    "They need to increase supplies," Obama told CBS affiliate WTKR in Hampton Roads, Virginia. "We are in a lot of conversations with major oil producers like Saudi Arabia."

    The US is the world's #3 producer and Obama's conversation has been about increasing taxes on oil production.  The guy is BRILLIANT no one before him has figured out that increasing taxes on an activity is a way to get more of that activity.  Perhaps we better cut the cigarette tax to reduce smoking.  Gak!


    Just wondering.. (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:27:01 PM EST
    If Obama felt that this tempest in a teapot was, "distracting from the many challenges we face as a country", and all he had to do to end it was to make a phone call, why didn't he just do it two years ago and eliminate the distraction?

    Didn't he consider the issues of foreclosures, bailouts, unemployment, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan important enough as challenges we faced as a country?

    I don't care where he was born. The issue is meaningless to me.
    But his statement upon the presentation of this long form is just... hot air.

    In addition, it gives some force to the horrifically funny specter of a Trump candidacy. Obama did nothing about this for years, until Trump started stirring the pot. Trump. My god. This is truly pitiful.

    It's good for another stupid reality show (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:38:50 PM EST
    ala "The Truman Show"

    Because it wasn't on the news every day? (none / 0) (#47)
    by Tony on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:40:29 PM EST
    Look, I don't think Obama should have done this.  People prone to believe conspiracy theories are not going to be swayed.

    But the question was asked in the press room yesterday, it's getting serious coverage on the networks, etc.  It is quite a different situation than two years ago.  

    Blaming politicians for not "debunking" insane conspiracy theories is not a road I want to go on.


    The (none / 0) (#62)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:16:59 PM EST
    simple fact is that Trump made it an issue. The press is fixated on him, so it became a hot item. And Obama blinked.

    It's all about Obama's reelection campaign.
    It has nothing to do with eliminating a distraction from important issues. That's a lot of hooey from Obama.


    You may be confusing his wink for a blink (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:32:42 PM EST
    Seriously, most people in these parts are chuckling about the inescapable reality that the so-called birthers are really the fools that so many of us always thought them to be. It was Obama, stating that he was "bemused" in observing their shenanigans, who demonstrated patient intelligence while they wandered foolishly in conspiracy land and--with his wonderful little lecture to them today--have been exposed for what they are. After the holidays, winter doldrums, arguments about government shutdown, and before the crush of the wedding tomorrow & Friday and the later summer forget-about-news season, President Obama delivered with finesse. (The President let them con themselves.)

    Finesse... (none / 0) (#84)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 07:10:36 PM EST
    I'm glad he issued the thing.

    But the truth remains that it had nothing to do with Obama wanting to focus our attention on important issues.

    All this means to me is that Trump got his attention.

    Now - if only we could get his attention...


    A little point (none / 0) (#89)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 08:31:56 PM EST
    A corollary benefit for the WH: Give Trump attention &, thus, conflate him with the overall Republican Party. Trans: Are they all birthers? What land do THEY live in? And, this attention--well, this attention just might drive an even deeper wedge between the various components of the Repubs.

    You (none / 0) (#99)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 07:22:30 AM EST
    keep changing the subject.

    "Birthers" is not the subject.

    The diversion from things that matter is the subject.
    At that, Obama is quite effective.


    Changing the subject? (none / 0) (#110)
    by christinep on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 12:19:36 PM EST
    The subject listed for this thread is the "birth certificate" stuff aka rw diversion (& changing the subject.) If you want to change the subject of the thread, well....

    I think... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Tony on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:43:03 PM EST
    Obama calling Donald Trump a "carnival barker" might be my favorite moment of his presidency.  

    Takes one to know one ... (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:36:53 PM EST
    or, a great example of "projection", as the psychologists would put it.

    Tut, tut. (none / 0) (#64)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:36:01 PM EST
    Its not becoming to let bitterness show. (Be a sport, and give the President kudos for a counter-punch well & deservedly delivered.)

    Phoodos. (none / 0) (#90)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 08:39:18 PM EST
    Trump made Obama blink.

    It would be interesting if Trump would now bring the wars into focus - since he obviously has the attention of the press.

    But - I think he's going to go on about oil and OPEC - and put people to sleep. Too bad. We could use someone who is a media magnet who is also against the wars.


    Someone down-rated me ... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 04:33:48 PM EST
    for comparing a POL to a carnival barker.  Sigh.

    teh birtherism: where did it start? (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:52:44 PM EST
    Jeralyn, you said:

    Of all the non-issues raised by the right to Obama, this is one of the most ridiculous.

    as for the question of who first raised this silly issue, Ben Smith & Byron Tau at Politico have this to say:

    The answer lies in Democratic, not Republican politics, and in the bitter, exhausting spring of 2008. At the time, the Democratic presidential primary was slipping away from Hillary Clinton and some of her most passionate supporters grasped for something, anything that would deal a final reversal to Barack Obama.

    the only source Smith & Tau give is an "anonymous e-mail" supposedly circulated by Clinton supporters - no link of course

    i was a Clinton supporter & never received or saw this conveniently anonymous & inaccessible e-mail

    Of course it's HRC and her supporter's fault :) (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:10:14 PM EST
    yeah (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 03:42:03 PM EST
    i like Smith & Tau's "bitter, exhausting" spring too - clearly exhausting for the WWTSBQ crowd, poor things

    The President was wise (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by KeysDan on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:56:02 PM EST
    to not underestimate Trump.  A clown he is, but such carnies have been drawing crowds for ever.  The birth certificate baloney has been smoldering for a while, but Trump's hot air has produced flames that needed to be quenched--to staunch most media play.  Of course, it will do little or nothing for the devoted birthers but they are not the target of the White House fire hose.

    Agreed 100% (none / 0) (#1)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:00:17 PM EST
    This will only be viewed as a good forgery by the conspiracy nuts.

    If he was going to wait, he should have waited until one of his actual opponents called him out on it.

    Will Trump slither back to his hole now ?

    No (none / 0) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:24:44 PM EST
    Trump is now onto Obama's college records. That's the next thing we all are going to be hearing about.

    Trump's so desperate now (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by shoephone on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 06:09:16 PM EST
    that the birth certificate is online for all to see. He's going to go after Obama for his (supposed) grades?? Pathetic, scraping the bottom of the barrel. I seem to recall that we already know what Obama's college grades were -- average at Occidental, much better at Harvard. But no one cares anyway.

    I really miss the likes of Molly Ivins and Ann Richards. We could do with some of their deliciously witty quips right about now.


    Also (none / 0) (#82)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 06:24:15 PM EST
    even if Obama was an affirmative action admit to Harvard wouldn't he kind of be the very sort of person that proves affirmative action is a good idea? I mean admitted to Harvard (and I think one could argue being the son of an alumni is at least as big a factor as AA), graduate with honors, etc.   Not to mention the fact that GPA is less of a decider in Law School admissions than it is for virtually any other academic admissions process-undergrad, grad, or professional due to the weight of the LSAT.

    Did Trump even go to college? (none / 0) (#20)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:35:26 PM EST
    If so, he needs to release his transcripts first.
    And what college did his hairdresser go to?
    Man, it's amazing that he has been hiding baldness that way for 30 years.

    Hairdresser (none / 0) (#35)
    by cal1942 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:12:35 PM EST
    had to have flunked.

    Nah, he invented a hairstyle--- (none / 0) (#37)
    by observed on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 02:14:05 PM EST
    the double combover.
    Trump is mostly or entirely bald across the top of his head, and his rat's nest hairdo hides the fact expertly---although it is hideous to look at.

    that's alright (none / 0) (#77)
    by jondee on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 05:48:20 PM EST
    it dovetails perfectly with the popular liberal-conspiracy-in-academia-to-keep-conservatives-out theory; promulgated for years by the likes of David Horowitz and broached by Jim a number of times at this site..

    The tests scores at a liberal bastion like Harvard would of course have been doctored to advance the career of someone like Obama..


    They will dream up or find something wrong (none / 0) (#6)
    by thereyougo on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:11:20 PM EST
    with the COLB(certificate of live birth).

    Maybe an "i" didn't get a dot, or the  ink skipped, or some other stupid thing.

    But then again the GOPers don't need much distraction, just for Rush to give it cred.

    I'll  be waiting for that.

    And Trump is nothing but a shameless self promoter but he does it well. Based on his history of bankruptcies, his portfolio is based on his ability to keep his brand out in the public which in America translates to dollars.

    There must be some (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:12:31 PM EST
    crypt in Kenya with a dead baby jackal in it that obviously died of a skull fracture.  The birthers are believers :)  Perhaps the Donald will find it.

    Sigh (none / 0) (#9)
    by huzzlewhat on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:16:53 PM EST
    I'm sorry to see Obama dignify this crap, but I really feel for him on this issue -- there was no way he could win, given how unbelievably stupid people were being about it. Like dealing with a seriously spoiled and misbehaving child's outrageous behavior -- ignore it and it gets louder, cater to it and you enable it.

    political advatage (none / 0) (#65)
    by star on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:45:22 PM EST
    what is the political advantage to Obama to release his BC now?( am pretty sure it is his pol adv that motivates O to do anything).  He might as well have released it 2 years back when this issue first cropped up so it would have been a non-issue. or use it to let the crazies show their true colors to all and sundry...and keep it going till 2012.

    The polls (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 05:00:32 PM EST

    Still, in the USA TODAY poll, only 38% of Americans say Obama definitely was born in the USA, and 18% say he probably was. Fifteen percent say he probably was born in another country, and 9% say he definitely was born elsewhere.

    Fertile grounds for the idle mindless (none / 0) (#68)
    by NYShooter on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 04:55:01 PM EST
    sensing somewhat of a victory;  after all, they did get the President of the United States to respond to their lunacy, they'll leave the birther issue for a while, letting it simmer in its caustic brew until the next "ah-ha!" moment rears its ugly head. They remind me of those circus jugglers, spinning and balancing one plate after another until you can't even keep track of them all.

    Now, we're on to Obama's college records. Woo boy, how many plots and conspiracies will that be good for?

    And just watch how the MSM, like trained seals, lap up every sardine tossed their way. By the end of the campaign you won't even remember we had an economy in trouble.

    They've (none / 0) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 05:16:31 PM EST
    already moved on to college records. At least people like Trump have. The Orly's of the world are never going to let this go.

    Next: the original draft of his Theory of Change (none / 0) (#71)
    by RonK Seattle on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 05:08:56 PM EST

    the question is (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 06:07:35 PM EST
    did he "pass away" naturally, or was he nudged along just a little by secular, socialist, envirowackos before he could tell his side of the story..

    We may never know..

    He was the ghostwriter (none / 0) (#81)
    by shoephone on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 06:12:20 PM EST
    of "The Audacity of Hope." They had to do something to keep him from spilling the beans.

    Now if only there was a document (none / 0) (#83)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 06:25:33 PM EST
    Obama could release that would turn him white a lot of this crap would die down.

    the BS surrounding them would have been less. Oh, yeah, they are white...

    No one questions (none / 0) (#113)
    by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 28, 2011 at 02:35:59 PM EST
    if they're constitutionally eligible for the Presidency- they might accuse them of murder or being a fascist or what have you but their basic Americanness isn't a topic of debate among the cross-burning crowd.

    You're splitting hairs, imo. (none / 0) (#115)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Apr 29, 2011 at 02:55:59 PM EST