derek bomar;736089 wrote:Anyone ever think Obama isn't producing it just to make these other people look like morons?
It's possible, though 47 would be hilariously unrealistic, even with that happening.jhay78;736170 wrote:I've thought that myself. I think Glenn Beck espoused that theory, that the President is keeping it under wraps to keep the "birthers" going.
I can see it now: the controversy keeps brewing, and the suspense keeps escalating, and then the week before the 2012 election, Obama produces the real official birth certificate and rides the momentum to a 47 state electoral beatdown.
Stuff like this is what keeps people going. And no, you're not a nutjob to at least ask questions about Obama. You know the media won't do it (even though they've proven capable of making stuff up a few weeks before an election when it's for a cause they believe in).But he held up the long-form birth certificate of someone who was born the day before Obama, and compared it with the shorter version Obama has released, which to the birthers, he said, “is evidence that he really ain’t one of us.
“Why has the president himself not demanded that they put out the official document?” Matthews said.
“Why doesn’t the governor just say, snap it up, whoever’s there at the department of records, send me a copy right now? Why doesn’t the president just say, send me a copy right now? Why doesn’t [White House press secretary Robert] Gibbs and [senior adviser David] Axelrod say, let’s just get this crappy story dead? Why not do it?
“The department out there just said the other day that there is such a thing. It exists. The original document of his birth is available. They have it in storage, they said. And if it exists, why not put it out?
“Will there be any harm done by releasing the original document?”
But Obama’s critics — many of whom don’t buy in the birther theory he was born outside the United States — still note a pattern of secrecy surrounding much of Obama’s life before he entered politics. They note that many Obama never has unveiled many key documents that presidential candidates released to the press and public.
For example:
During the presidential campaign, Obama released just one brief document detailing his personal health, while GOP opponent John McCain released what he said was his complete medical file totaling more than 1,500 pages. The Obama campaign eventually released some routine lab-test results and electrocardiograms for Obama.
Obama refused to offer his official papers as a state legislator in Illinois and did not produce correspondence, such as letters from lobbyists and other information, from his days in the Illinois State Senate.
Obama did not release his client list as an attorney or his billing records.
Obama declined to release his college records from Occidental College, where he studied for two years before transferring to Columbia University.
Obama’s campaign refused to give Columbia University, where he earned an undergraduate degree in political science, permission to release his transcripts. Such transcripts would list the courses Obama took, and his grades.
Obama’s college dissertation, reportedly titled “Soviet Nuclear Disarmament,” has disappeared from Columbia’s archives.
Obama did not agree to the release of his application to the Illinois state bar, which would clear up intermittent allegations that his application to the bar may have been inaccurate.
Obama has not released records from his time at Harvard Law School.
During his campaign for president, Obama promised he would make his White House “the most open and transparent administration in history.”
Read more on Newsmax.com: Chris Matthews: Obama Should Release Birth Certificate
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
jhay78;736182 wrote:I'm sure partisanship explains much of the birther controversy, but then Chris Matthews doesn't fit that category:
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Obama-birth-certificate-Matthews/2010/12/29/id/381362
This was from back in late December 2010
Stuff like this is what keeps people going. And no, you're not a nutjob to at least ask questions about Obama. You know the media won't do it (even though they've proven capable of making stuff up a few weeks before an election when it's for a cause they believe in).
I Wear Pants;736357 wrote:Some of those aren't really things that he kept. I mean, I don't need to know Obama's medical record. Mccain's was relevant because many thought he was gonna up and die. It was stupid but that's why such an in depth record was released for him.
And is he even allowed to release his client list as an attorney?
Writerbuckeye;736439 wrote:Okay, what about all the others, particularly everything associated with his college years -- especially having been editor of the Law Review (supposedly)? As for health records...Obama smokes (or did at the time). His records as a black man (prone to heart disease, diabetes and hypertension) who is more at risk from smoking are every bit as relevant as McCain's were.
cbus4life;736462 wrote:Supposedly?
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/06/us/first-black-elected-to-head-harvard-s-law-review.html
Was the NYT getting in on the conspiracy all the way back in 1990?
And pretty much what he's been "doing" as POTUS since the Repubs booted Nancy Pelosi's ass down to Minority Leader.Writerbuckeye;736534 wrote:Yeah, yeah I saw that article a long time ago. Funny how there's not been any of his actual WORK during that time revealed, isn't it? Most Law Review Editors are fairly prolific and proud of what they produce. For some unknown reason, Obama is reticent to share much of anything he did in that position.
Perhaps it was like his stint in the Illinois Legislature -- he showed up and didn't do much else. His version of voting "present" as editor.
jhay78;736170 wrote:I've thought that myself. I think Glenn Beck espoused that theory, that the President is keeping it under wraps to keep the "birthers" going.
I can see it now: the controversy keeps brewing, and the suspense keeps escalating, and then the week before the 2012 election, Obama produces the real official birth certificate and rides the momentum to a 47 state electoral beatdown.
Writerbuckeye;736534 wrote:Yeah, yeah I saw that article a long time ago. Funny how there's not been any of his actual WORK during that time revealed, isn't it? Most Law Review Editors are fairly prolific and proud of what they produce. For some unknown reason, Obama is reticent to share much of anything he did in that position.
Perhaps it was like his stint in the Illinois Legislature -- he showed up and didn't do much else. His version of voting "present" as editor.
derek bomar;736089 wrote:Anyone ever think Obama isn't producing it just to make these other people look like morons?
stlouiedipalma;737180 wrote:They don't need any help. They are morons, just like those on here who still like to cast doubt about it. To them, it's just another way of saying "he's not like us". Like when Huckabilly "misspoke" and said that Obama didn't do all of those "American" things, like play little league baseball and go to Rotary meetings. It's cheap, stupid and shows that those who believe this really are unbalanced.
However, I do believe the President is playing them. It probably makes his advisers laugh their asses off to see all of the nonsense over an issue which is dead. If that's all Trump has to do to appeal to the Republican base, what does that say about the base? What does that say about Trump? That he will whore himself out to these idiots?
Well, you kind of ruin your own argument/opinion right there.stlouiedipalma;737180 wrote:They don't need any help. They are morons, just like those on here who still like to cast doubt about it. To them, it's just another way of saying "he's not like us". Like when Huckabilly "misspoke" and said that Obama didn't do all of those "American" things, like play little league baseball and go to Rotary meetings. It's cheap, stupid and shows that those who believe this really are unbalanced.
I'm sure his advisers DO laugh their asses off. But not so much at shutting down the idiots as having covered their asses on the issue...even if it did cost them a boat load of money to pull it off.stlouiedipalma;737180 wrote:It probably makes his advisers laugh their asses off to see all of the nonsense over an issue which is dead.
You have it all wrong, O-Trap. Those eeeeevil, wascally Wepubweekuns are too wacsist to nominate a black man or woman for POTUS. So I suppose we'll never be able to test your theory.O-Trap;737393 wrote:If Obama had been a Republican, I can guarantee that most who oppose him currently would be supporting him tooth-and-nail, to the degree that many of THEM would probably call the Democrats who opposed him racists.
Oh it would be such fun to see how this would play out if the shoe was on the other foot ...
believer;737406 wrote:You have it all wrong, O-Trap. Those eeeeevil, wascally Wepubweekuns are too wacsist to nominate a black man or woman for POTUS. So I suppose we'll never be able to test your theory.
I just don't think they're comprised of mostly racists.
I agree, but not for the reason(s) that you're thinking of. Think Malcom X's speech (the one Belly posts)O-Trap;737393 wrote:If Obama had been a Republican, I can guarantee that most who oppose him currently would be supporting him tooth-and-nail, to the degree that many of THEM would probably call the Democrats who opposed him racists.
Oh it would be such fun to see how this would play out if the shoe was on the other foot ...
believer;737406 wrote:You have it all wrong, O-Trap. Those eeeeevil, wascally Wepubweekuns are too wacsist to nominate a black man or woman for POTUS. So I suppose we'll never be able to test your theory.
