About us Login Get email updates
Press/Bloggers
Print

Dobbs vs. CNN
How will network solve serious problem with its premier host?

July 23, 2009 2:27 pm ET

Comments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Thursday, July 23, 2009

CONTACT

Jessica Levin (202) 772-8162

jlevin@mediamatters.org

Washington, DC -- Today, Media Matters for America called further attention to Lou Dobbs' continued use of his CNN show and his radio show to legitimize conspiracy theories about President Obama's birth certificate. Dobbs' mainstreaming of such claims comes even as other CNN figures -- including his stand-in, Kitty Pilgrim -- have repeatedly and resoundingly debunked them, calling them "nutty" and "ludicrous."

"CNN has a very serious Lou Dobbs problem on its hands," said Eric Burns, President of Media Matters. "All eyes are on CNN to see how the network will handle a host who has clearly become a stain on its journalistic credibility."

Media Matters released the following web video today on Dobbs' undermining the network's credibility: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXmqTmRPAng

BACKGROUND

Dobbs has repeatedly claimed on both his television and radio shows that President Obama has failed to address the claims of "birther" conspiracy theorists. He has said that Obama needs to "produce a birth certificate" and that the birth certificate the president posted online more than a year ago has "some issues."

However, several of Dobbs' CNN colleagues have distanced themselves from these claims:

  • On the July 17 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, guest host Kitty Pilgrim said that CNN "found no basis" for the birth certificate claims and cited "overwhelming evidence that proves that his birth certificate is real, and that he was born in Honolulu," including Obama's birth certificate posted online by FactCheck.org.
  • Later on the July 17 Lou Dobbs Tonight, CNN contributor Errol Louis stated of the theory's proponents, "I think what we have here is a case where under the guise of saying, well, we can't trust whether or not he should be president because we don't have the evidence, it's actually the reverse."
  • On the July 21 edition of CNN Newsroom, host Rick Sanchez held up a printed copy of Obama's birth certificate and then said, "To a large and vocal group of Americans, this paper that I just showed you might as well be bathroom tissue. Factual? Maybe. Enough to stop the speculation? Absolutely not." He later added: "[W]e certainly hope that there are people out there who do their own fact-checking, see for themselves what's on the record, and see that this seems to be more conspiratorial than factual."
  • On the July 21 edition of Larry King Live, CNN political contributor James Carville said of those who don't believe Obama is a natural-born American citizen: "These people are poor -- these poor pathetic people are believing stuff, just like -- just like [Liz] Cheney tonight. She refuses to say this is ludicrous, because she actually wants to encourage these people to believe this. It's just a simple thing. This is a nutty thing. There's nothing to this. I disagree with this president's policies."
  • On the July 22 edition of CNN Newsroom, CNN contributor Roland S. Martin said: "This is a small group of nutty people." He also discussed a video clip in which Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) is challenged by a woman who claims Obama has not produced a birth certificate. Martin said the woman's "I want my country back" comment means, "How is this black guy all of the sudden running the country?"

Despite the fact that his colleagues have rejected the "birther" claims, Dobbs has continued to repeat them on both CNN and his radio show. As Comedy Central's Jon Stewart asked, referring to Dobbs on the July 22 edition of The Daily Show, "Do you even watch CNN?"

  • On the July 22 broadcast of his radio show, Dobbs said that Obama could "make the whole...controversy disappear...by simply releasing his original birth certificate."
  • On the July 22 broadcast of his radio show, Dobbs responded to Martin's suggestion that race was fueling the controversy: "I can't believe Roland would say something that stupid -- that it's racist." Dobbs also called Martin's July 22 CNN.com commentary dismissing the claims "a hoot."
  • Dobbs stated on the July 20 edition of his CNN program that the birth certificate questions offered by "passionate supporters" "won't go away because they haven't been dealt with, it seems possible to, straightforwardly and quickly."
  • On the July 21 edition of his CNN show, Dobbs said: "We had people, including reporters from the LA Times, calling up because I referred to this. ... Instead of calling the White House to ask why they didn't do it, they're calling me to ask why I said I don't know what the reality is. No one does."

###

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
      1 11
      1. Kitty Pilgrim lied. If anyone wants to make me look bad, find any statement from HI's governor in which HI's governor directly states that BHO was born in HI.

      2. Sanchez didn't hold up a "birth certificate". He held up a COLB; if someone can't get that straight then they don't understand this issue. Further, what he held up has never been verified by the issuing agency. In fact, it would be illegal for them to verify that what's on the picture on BHO's site matches what they have on file. If someone says that Hawaiian officials have verified the contents of the picture on BHO's site, they're accusing those Hawaiian officials of breaking the law.

      3. The rest of the quotes in the first section are just disreputable smears. Perhaps those same people would care to explain why BHO's supporters keep having to lie, mislead, smear, and twist themselves into knots in an attempt to prove something that they say is so cut-and-dried. Why do they have to keep lying? Why can't they even get their stories straight on which hospital he was born in? They should just just tell the truth: we haven't been given definitive proof of where he was born.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
        5  

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/01/obamas-birth-certificate-final-chapter-time-we-mea/

        http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html

        http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html

        http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

        Even the radical extremist teabag website confirms it:
        http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73214

        Report Abuse
        • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:51 pm ET)
            8
          Regarding the first Politifact link, here's how Robert Farley was trying to mislead you. Note that what Okubo says at the Politifact link contradicts what she says at the starbulletin link above and the first is also contradicted by a picture of an entirely different form of cert someone says they got in 1998.

          The KLTV link above is highly misleading; compare their attempt to deceive you to what Hawaii actually said.

          The FactCheck link contains an outrageous lie: that the release at the last link confirmed he was born in Honolulu. If you actually read the release (no, really, go read it) you'll see nothing in there confirming where he was born. They only say that they have a valid cert on file. They don't say anything about what's on the cert. As discussed in my first comment, it would be illegal for them to disclose what's on the cert they have on file, and that includes verifying that what they have on file matches the picture on BHO's site.

          Like I said, all the arguments that BHO fans present are incredibly faulty. They lie, they mislead, they twist themselves into knots.

          Try telling the truth for once.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
            7  
            Try telling the truth for once.
            Why don't you take our own advice. Obama was born in Hawaii. Fact.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
            6  
            Regarding the first Politifact link, here's how Robert Farley was trying to mislead you. Note that what Okubo says at the Politifact link contradicts what she says at the starbulletin link above and the first is also contradicted by a picture of an entirely different form of cert someone says they got in 1998.

            No. You're wrong on all points
            Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:56 pm ET)
            6 1
            The KLTV link above is highly misleading
            Prove it. Linking to your radical website is not proof. So, now prove it.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:58 pm ET)
            6 1
            The FactCheck link contains an outrageous lie: t


            No. It doesn't.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Brian in FL (July 23, 2009 7:40 pm ET)
            1  
            You need to seek professional help.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:26 pm ET)
        7 1
        Sanchez didn't hold up a "birth certificate". He held up a COLB;
        You won't understand this, because you are a complete idiot, but, in Hawaii, when residents request a birth certificate they receive a COLB. Hence, in Hawaii, a COLB = birth certificate.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:52 pm ET)
          1 5
          Take a look at the difference.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
            4 1
            WND is not credible, factual, or based in reality.

            http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jul/01/obamas-birth-certificate-final-chapter-time-we-mea/

            http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html

            http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html

            http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
            Report Abuse
            • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 4:16 pm ET)
              1 5
              Since you don't seem smart enough to provide any form of counter-argument, maybe someone else would care to point out if there's something wrong with the long-form picture at the link I posted above. Is anyone else claiming it's not valid or something?

              As for your links, I already responded to them and showed how they're wrong above. Please don't waste everyone's time with garbage comments.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:02 pm ET)
                1  
                That the longform BC is not available is irrelevant. Officials from Hi vital statistics have said it is there and they have seen it. A COLB is what you GET rather than the BC when you ask for a copy it IS proof there is a BC. Two, count them TWO birth anouncements FROM contemporary newspapers have been produced. You are embarassing yourself. You stupid tinfoil hat conspiricy theory is only compelling to those who WANT TO BE LIED TO. ITs over. Obama was born in Hawaii. No one in their right mind thinks the arguments against this PLAIN FACT are anything but the mutterings of fools.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 9:59 pm ET)
            1  
            You are an idiot. If you try to get a COLB from Hawaii and you dont HAVE a birth certificate there. Guess what? YOU. DONT. GET. ONE. What part of this is too complex for your simple mind?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by kathleen.mckinley7760 (July 25, 2009 1:11 am ET)
               
            Yes, they are different forms of document. So what? The material information regarding place of birth would be the same on a Certification of Live Birth (short form birth certificate) as it is on a Certificate of Live Birth (long form birth certificate).

            The point of certification by a government official on the short form Certification of Live Birth is to attest that the information on the short form is the SAME as the CORRESPONDING INFORMATION on the long form, even though the long form includes additional information that is not on the short form (none of which is material here). What we have here is a distinction without a difference as far as the material information regarding Obama's place of birth is concerned, so it isn't clear why you are harping on the "differences" between the two forms, since the additional categories of information included on the long form have no bearing of the issue of whether Obama was actually born in Hawaii.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:54 pm ET)
            6
          That's a picture on a website, it's not the original document. Even Judge Judy wouldn't accept it in lieu of the original document.

          And, from my comment at mediamatters.org/columns/200907230005#529507

          4. Neither announcement listed a birth place or hospital, and no one has ever provided proof that such announcements could have only come from the birth hospital... Why isn't MMFA mentioning that the possibility that the announcements were planted by BHO's grandparents in expectation of a custody battle? That doesn't mean they did that. However, isn't MMFA misleading you when they only state one outrageous possibility rather than stating other more reasonable possibilities? Is MMFA dumb, or do they think you are?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:59 pm ET)
            3  
            That's a picture on a website, it's not the original document.
            Prove it
            Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 4:00 pm ET)
            4  
            Judge Judy wouldn't accept it in lieu of the original document.
            Prove it.

            The COLB is an original document proving his birth in Hawaii.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:04 pm ET)
            1  
            So then someone has to put the original document in your hand? Is this a joke? Obama has proven he was born in Hawaii. No one is going to deliver the original birth certificate to YOUR HOUSE for you to read or more likely burn. Grow up
            Report Abuse
          • Author by jcalton (July 24, 2009 12:31 pm ET)
               
            That's a picture on a website, it's not the original document. Even Judge Judy wouldn't accept it in lieu of the original document.
            Do you actually mean that you, "The Lonewacko Blog," personally, have not seen the original document and are only looking at a picture of the document on Factcheck.org's website?

            That until Obama mails you his BC or COLB you won't be satisfied? Even then it could be a fake or the USPS could be intercepting your mail or Hawaii could be in on the conspiracy.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by kathleen.mckinley7760 (July 25, 2009 12:55 am ET)
               
            "Even Judge Judy wouldn't accept it in lieu of the original document."

            What, are you a lawyer now?

            All too obviously not, which is why you should really stay away from this whole argument, because you aren't equipped, either by training or intellect, to handle it. Certified copies of official documents are admissible in evidence in lieu of originals in both state and Federal courts, so Judge Judy would certainly admit it into evidence if she were still on the bench and not just on TV. Even authenticated copies of documents (official or otherwise) that are not "certified" are admissible in lieu of originals. You and your birthers comrades may have your own idiosyncratic notions of what constitutes "acceptable" evidence, but you are all out in left- (or probably right-) field. (Actually, you are on another planet.) So sad that you are posing as having more legal "expertise" than you actually do. If it's good enough for a court of law, it should be good enough for you. If it isn't, that's YOUR problem.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:29 pm ET)
        3  
        http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg

        http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg

        http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_9.jpg

        http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_1.jpg

        Report Abuse
        • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
            5
          As detailed in a comment I left above, FactCheck isn't a credible source.

          And, regarding those images, you do know that FactCheck silently modified them after their original posting, right?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:06 pm ET)
            1  
            So Factcheck ISNT a credible source but Newsmax IS? And Factcheck is in some wide conspiricy with the State of Hawaii and Obama to subvert the constitution? You are a sad joke. Increase your medication
            Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 24, 2009 8:18 am ET)
               
            FactCheck isn't a credible source.

            And with that, your credability is gone. You can close the window now.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:30 pm ET)
        2  
        The rest of the quotes in the first section are just disreputable smears.
        Prove it.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
        2  
        In fact, it would be illegal for them to verify that what's on the picture on BHO's site matches what they have on file
        Prove it.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by The Lonewacko Blog (July 23, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
            5
          Do some basic research first.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by harley (July 23, 2009 3:59 pm ET)
            3  

            Perhaps you should. He was born in Hawaii and his COLB proves it.

            You're desperate and you look stupid.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by insaneloki20024664 (July 23, 2009 6:18 pm ET)
                3
              How does the COLB prove it? It is missing a lot of information. If the COLB is the same as a birth certificate then why does the Hawaii not accept it as an acceptable form of identification?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by funnymanpants (July 23, 2009 9:10 pm ET)
                   
                >>why does the Hawaii not accept it as an acceptable form of identification?

                What are you talking about? Hawaii most certainly does accept a COLB.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:10 pm ET)
                   
                Hawaii DOES. It isnt the SAME it is however what you GET when you ask for a copy of your BC. All that missing information would make identity theft a snap which is why you dont get it. If you want a drivers license in Hawaii and give them a COLB you GET THE DRIVERS LICENSE. Do you guys EVER know what you are talking about or is repeating the garbage that you are brainwashed with REALLY the best you can do?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:10 am ET)
                   
                f the COLB is the same as a birth certificate then why does the Hawaii not accept it as an acceptable form of identification?
                Hawaii does accept it. Next
                Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:08 pm ET)
               
            You are hilarious. What you linked to is the reason you get a COLB rather than a copy OF the BC.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Zrob314 (July 24, 2009 5:42 pm ET)
               
            See, you're the one who needs to do research.

            Here's my story. I'm from Ohio, I live in Colorado. I had to get my Colorado license last year and I'd lost my passport. Colorado wouldn't accept my old Ohio license because Ohio uses middile initials and Coloraod doesn't. So I call my mom and ask her to go get my a copy of my birth certificate so I can get my license.

            I took a good look at it last night.
            1) Nowehere on the form does it say the words "Birth Certificate" The closest it comes is in the bottom corner is in the middle of a paragragh that it is a "certification of birth facts"
            2) Neither the doctor's name nore the hospital name are listed. It simply says that my birthplace is Kettering, OH
            3) It is not signed by the Secretary of State, it is signed by the local registrar of vital stitistics.
            4) There is an embossed seal, but they didn't do a good job. If I posted a picture on the internet I'd immediatly be flamed down for not having an embossed seal.

            So...please tell me, because I am very confused....

            Am I a US Citizen?
            I mean for 34 years I thought I was. Now I'm not so sure.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by insaneloki20024664 (July 23, 2009 6:20 pm ET)
            1
          Really? You have never dealt with a governing agency have you? With all the privacy laws that exist they barely release information to the people it belongs to themselves. You cannot be that daft.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:19 pm ET)
               
            Which is why you get a COLB instead of a copy of your Birth Certificate.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by FemmeKat (July 23, 2009 6:16 pm ET)
        2  
        Janice Okubo, spokeswoman for Hawaii's State Department of Health, says that they only issue "certifications" of live births, which is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii.

        The Health Department "DOES NOT HAVE A SHORT-FORM or LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE." (emphasis added)

        http://www.starbulletin.com/features/20090606_kokua_line.html

        From the Star Bulletin:

        "The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models," she said.

        Okubo also emphasized the certification form "contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate."

        She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state's current certification of live birth "as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements."

        Here's another statement from their government website supporting that long-forms are no longer available:

        "Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."

        The above is found here, under "Primary Documents":

        http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl

        There's also more about the birth certificate issue here:

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/01/worldnetdaily/birthers-claim-gibbs-lied-when-he-said-obamas-birt/

        Another Birther claim is that a birth certificate could have been applied for by ANY adult, and that one could easily have been granted for a baby born outside of the country.

        "In fact, only the legal parents of a child—in this case, Barack Obama Sr. and Stanley Ann Dunham—can apply for a birth certificate."

        http://washingtonindependent.com/51652/some-more-clarity-on-hawaiian-birth-certificates?dsq=12827089#comment-12827089

        "As for the theory that Obama's original birth certificate might show he was foreign-born, Okubo said the "Certification of Live Birth" would say so. Obama's does not. Again, it says HE WAS BORN IN HONOLULU." (emphasis added)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (July 23, 2009 5:02 pm ET)
        6
      Why has his administration paid almost 20 million to fight this, when he could just show the real birth document, you know the ones we all have with the doctors name, the fathers name, the mothers name, not a bogus document I could create on my computer. Two, why out of the blue did his administration let a solider that was fighting him about being deployed by a president whom could prove his citizenship no longer being deployed? I just do not understand why he just want release the real document, it would save a lot of time and money.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:21 am ET)
           
        not a bogus document I could create on my computer.
        Anyone could make any form on a computer....even the non-existent "long form".
        Report Abuse
      • Author by kathleen.mckinley7760 (July 25, 2009 1:27 am ET)
           
        Where on earth did you get that canard about the Administration spending "20 million to fight this"? Out of a certain one of your bodily orifices? And you really think you could you create a such a "bogus document" on your computer? One that bears an official governmental seal of the State of Hawaii and that several Hawaiian govt officials have asserted (repeatedly) is authentic? OK, whatever. You're clearly prepared to believe anything but the simple truth. Oh, I forgot. Conspiracy theorists are never prepared to believe the simple truth. In fact, if a theory doesn't violate Occam's razor, it can't POSSIBLY be true. (Insert eye-roll here.)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (July 23, 2009 5:02 pm ET)
        5
      Why has his administration paid almost 20 million to fight this, when he could just show the real birth document, you know the ones we all have with the doctors name, the fathers name, the mothers name, not a bogus document I could create on my computer. Two, why out of the blue did his administration let a solider that was fighting him about being deployed by a president whom could prove his citizenship no longer being deployed? I just do not understand why he just want release the real document, it would save a lot of time and money.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by CaptCCT (July 23, 2009 5:24 pm ET)
           
        Could you provide a source proving they have spent 20 million?

        As for the soldier, he disobeyed an order to deploy and filed a lawsuit. The only reason he's not being deployed now is because he's in the process of being discharged, and probably not honorably. It's in the army's best interest not to have people in the service do this, thus they kick him out.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Old_Benjamin (July 23, 2009 5:26 pm ET)
        1 1
        Two, why out of the blue did his administration let a solider that was fighting him about being deployed by a president whom could prove his citizenship no longer being deployed? markbfoot

        Back with more stupidity?

        He volunteered. When he changed his mind, he doesn't get deployed.

        Lt. Col. Maria Quon, U.S. Army Public Affairs Officer, U.S. Army Human Resources Command-St. Louis, said Tuesday evening, Cook was no longer expected to report Wednesday to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida for mobilization to active duty.
        "A reserve soldier who volunteers for an active duty tour may ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty," Quon said.

        http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/777472.html

        And what a patriot this Cook is, either there is a unit in Iraq missing one person or someone else will be sent in his place.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by funnymanpants (July 23, 2009 9:14 pm ET)
        1  
        >>Why has his administration paid almost 20 million to fight this, when he could just show the real birth document,

        A COLB is a real document, valid for joining the military, etc. You cannot get the original long from.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 24, 2009 12:22 am ET)
           
        He HASNT spent 20 million fighting this no matter WHAT the screechmonkey on the radio told you to think. NEXT.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:11 am ET)
           
        Why has his administration paid almost 20 million to fight this
        No, they haven't.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:16 am ET)
           
        Two, why out of the blue did his administration let a solider that was fighting him about being deployed by a president whom could prove his citizenship no longer being deployed?
        The administration had nothing to do with revoking the traitor's orders.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by BrooklynBoy (July 24, 2009 10:49 am ET)
           
        That's rich. I'm 41 and I have no idea where my original birth certificate is. So I'd do what any person in any state would. I'd send away to the appropriate agency for whatever legal document they issue as proof of birth in that state. The COLB in a official, legal document that meets all Federal standards for proof of birth in the US. In New York, I'd get something similar and I'd be able to run for President with that as proof of being born here and being a citizen. The people who won't give up on this issue are the same people who believe 9/11 was conceived by and carried out by the Bush administration, who believe we never went to the moon, who believe JFK was shot by several conspirators that can be traced to the CIA, who believe UFO's visit us daily, etc.. That's the wonderful thing about crazy conspiracy theorists... they never have to really prove what they theorize. But if they say it over and over again, a lie becomes an accepted fact through sheer repetition.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Sagra (July 24, 2009 11:22 am ET)
        1  
        Maybe the army doesn't want to deploy treasonous soldiers. Seems like a sensible policy to me.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by insaneloki20024664 (July 23, 2009 6:13 pm ET)
        6
      What I do not understand is that Obama can easily silence all the critics. He even dedicated a website during his campaign to respond to smears and set the record straight. All he has to do is one simple thing, something that is not unreasonable, just provide the long form birth certificate from his birth. Why would he resist if there was nothing to hide.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 23, 2009 10:17 pm ET)
           
        Yeah, its unreasonable. Why should he the COLB already establishes he was born IN Hawaii. The birth anouncements SHOW he was born IN Hawaii. At this point he has jumped through enough hoops. Hoops that NO WHITE CANDIDATE would be expected to jump through. You petulant whiners dont deserve anything more. It is shown. It is proof enough. It is OVER. You guys are just embarassing yourselves.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by ex-punk (July 24, 2009 2:00 am ET)
        1  
        If saw the real birth certificate you so desire, you still wouldn't believe it, so what would be the point. Your mind is already made up and nothing will change it. You deny reality so you will have to remain incensed for eternity. The wonderful people here are offering a way back, all you have to do is say, "oops, my bad!"
        Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:17 am ET)
           
        just provide the long form birth certificate from his birth.
        There is no such thing as a "long form". Next
        Report Abuse
    • Author by insaneloki20024664 (July 23, 2009 7:21 pm ET)
        2
      Hawaii Statute 338 states:

      [§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

      (b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.

      (c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]

      That means I could have a kid anywhere else in the world but then move to Hawaii for one year after the birth and get a Certification of Live Birth.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by funnymanpants (July 23, 2009 9:13 pm ET)
        3  
        >>That means I could have a kid anywhere else in the world but then move to Hawaii for one year after the birth and get a Certification of Live Birth.

        Oh, the stupid burns! Did you not even bother to read what you posted? see that "L 1982?" That was when that law was passed--decades after Obama was born! Further, his own birth certificate states he was born in Hawaii, and two Hawaii officials have confirmed that the COLB Obama posted on his website is real.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by congero6189599 (July 24, 2009 9:45 am ET)
             
          FMP that was too funny ! "Oh, the stupid burns!..."
          Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (July 24, 2009 8:12 am ET)
           
        That means I could have a kid anywhere else in the world but then move to Hawaii for one year after the birth and get a Certification of Live Birth.
        No, it doesn't.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (July 24, 2009 9:00 am ET)
           
        The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]
        L 1982 law passed 21yrs. after Obama was born. How do you argue with stupid? Insane, yes you are! :-)
        Report Abuse
      • Author by DesertRat (July 24, 2009 2:37 pm ET)
           
        You would be right, except for two problems:

        1. The law was passed in 1982, when Obama was 21.
        2. Birth certificates for children born in other states or countries always have the child's place of birth on it. If the child was born in Texas, it says he was born in Texas. If she was born in China, it says she was born in China.

        FAIL.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by smarshall1432997 (July 23, 2009 10:40 pm ET)
         
      The Republicans and CNN with this "Birther" issue is only a political "DISTRACTION" from America's real problems. First, the Republicans wrote a "Birther" Bill backing their Republican Base". Second, the Republicans hit the airwaves (radio and tv) making this "Birther" non-sense an issue against President Obama. So far, so good - right? Now, MSM (especially CNN) talks about this "Birther" issue as real political news 24/7.

      So, America's main problems: Bank Bailouts, Auto Bailouts, Stimulus (American Recovery & Reinvestment Act), HealthCare Reform, Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. etc. are all side issues, and "Birther" #1. Republicans "REALLY" know how to play this political game. LOL
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sagra (July 24, 2009 11:18 am ET)
        1
      The "Most trusted name in news" thing is a joke, right? CNN's Headline News had Glenn Beck on every night up through October of last year.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by austin55455 (July 24, 2009 10:02 pm ET)
         
      It's time to start a national boycott of CNN. It's crossed the line by continuing to host the rightist, racist, ranting fringe Dobbs show.
      Report Abuse

Appearances

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube MySpace