Is this close to the truth?

• jhay78

  

  derek bomar;736089 wrote:Anyone ever think Obama isn't producing it just to make these other people look like morons?

  
  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.
• O-Trap

  

  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.

  It's possible, though 47 would be hilariously unrealistic, even with that happening.
  
  Still, it'd be quite unprofessional.
• jhay78

  

  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
  

  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?”

  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 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!

• Writerbuckeye

  

  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).

  
  Yet he promised the most transparent presidency in history -- which of course hasn't happened, either. If you can't be open about your own past, why would anyone expect him to run an open presidency.
• I Wear Pants

  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

  

  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?

  
  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.
• I Wear Pants

  I don't think either is relevant. I meant from a "people are legitimately demanding to know standpoint". A really old dude is more legitimate in that regard, imo.
  
  However, as for the school records and stuff I can't answer. I don't know.
• cbus4life

  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.

  
  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?
• I Wear Pants

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQSmfzfg2MY&feature=player_detailpage#t=174s
• Writerbuckeye

  

  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?

  
  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.
• believer

  

  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.

  And pretty much what he's been "doing" as POTUS since the Repubs booted Nancy Pelosi's ass down to Minority Leader.
• O-Trap

  

  Uuuuugh ... Nancy Pelosi makes my skin crawl ...
• dwccrew

  

  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.

  
  You did mean a 57 state win, right?
• cbus4life

  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.

  
  Fair enough. Was just pointing out that it pretty much cannot be denied that he was editor of the law review. Now, taking issue with what he actually did during that time is fine.
• stlouiedipalma

  derek bomar;736089 wrote:Anyone ever think Obama isn't producing it just to make these other people look like morons?

  
  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?
• jhay78

  

  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?

  
  It's so dead that's why Obama's spent millions to keep the issue out of the courts? So dead that the governor of Hawaii (Democrat) couldn't locate the long-form certificate in the state archives, despite his best of intentions to settle this thing once and for all? So dead that Chris Matthews (not your average right-wing nutcase) has asked why the Obama team hasn't produced the long-form certificate?
  
  As for Trump, I don't think he's pandering to anyone- I think those are his honest feelings on the issue, and when everyone else knows it's politically disastrous to be labeled a birther, Trump doesn't care.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  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.

  Well, you kind of ruin your own argument/opinion right there.
  
  Because Obama IS "just like them". Meaning he is just another politician who relies on talking smoothly (with or without a prompter) and snazzy commercials. He's promised alot and delivered little.
  
  Are there people out there who don't want anything to do with him as President because he's black? Of course.
  But I would imagine that there's a vast majority of dislikers out there who don't like him as President for his ideology, actions, inactions, policy, etc. Color of skin has nothing to do with it.
  I'd imagine he would also be microscoped if there was a question if he was born in let's say Russia or China or France.
  
  I'm sorry to say, but it's getting to the point that I'm starting to think that when people constantly bring up the skin color thing (unfortunately, this means you too, obviously) that it's THEM who has the hangup, not the majority of Obama dislikers. Those are the people who have the hangup, and they're blatantly obvious and repetitive about it by their own admission.
  
  Hypothetically, if Pelosi was President, would the argument be against her that it was because she was a woman? Or because she's a nutbucket? I'd bet the farm that the same pocket of people who pull the race card now would prance around and proclaim that it was a gender bias and they would resort to parading that excuse in much the same way. They wouldn't be able to determine that people question all aspects of her Presidency because she's an idiot, rather than because she's female - if they were hit in the head with a frying pan in an effort to wake them up.
  
  It's lame. It's past it's prime and it's demeaning to the people who do it.
• believer

  

  stlouiedipalma;737180 wrote:It probably makes his advisers laugh their asses off to see all of the nonsense over an issue which is dead.

  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.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Center: I wrote something similar. I believe the people who keep bringing up Obama's race are the racists -- not those of us who simply dislike how he's doing his job, his belief system, and a myriad of other issues related to his being president.
• Footwedge

  The wide majority of people that do not like Obama for his politics...not his skin color. There are exceptions of course.
• O-Trap

  

  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

  

  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 ...

  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

  

  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.

  
  Don't get too excited, believer. I do think the birthers are grasping at straws at this point. I just don't think they're comprised of mostly racists.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  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 ...

  I agree, but not for the reason(s) that you're thinking of. Think Malcom X's speech (the one Belly posts)
• I Wear Pants

  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.

  
  You're not a racist because you're a birther. But you are likely uninformed or unintelligent or just lying.
  
  And I didn't mean you particularly when I said "You're".