I don't think any of us can provide an answer to those questions. I find it hard to believe that he doesn't actually have a valid birth certificate, but it certainly seems like he's hiding something from his past. Of course, he could squelch all the speculation immediately simply by releasing everything to the public. The fact he doesn't do that means one of two things. Either he thinks that having this story dangling out there works to his political advantage by distracting his opponents from policy issues and making them look petty, or he really has something big to hide.
Whatever Obama is hiding, I hope we can all agree that is disgraceful that this guy could be elected president without ever having to provide an official birth certificate or complete criminal records to the public. This is what happens when the press is in the tank for one particular political candidate and fails in their role as a public watchdog. The Constitution clearly spells out that our President must be a U.S. citizen, so it should be required by law that he present his official birth certificate to Congress and the public. So far, Obama has only disclosed the short form of his birth certificate, which is not even sufficient evidence to obtain a passport. It certainly should not be sufficient to be elected president of the U.S.
I personally have a high degree of confidence that Obama was born in Hawaii -- health dept. officials have asserted that they personally inspected his original birth certificate kept on file, and then of course the newspaper announcement. So no problems there.
But there is certainly some real weirdness going on here that Obama has failed to explain. Why is it that, when people want to see his birth certificate, he produced a short-form document created and date-stamped in the year 2007? I mean, the guy is 48 years old. We are all pretty sure that he wasn't born in the last two years. McCain released the long form. The long form is what people would expect to see. The short form omits important info, like what hospital he was born in, and what physician delivered him.
Obama made reference in one of his books to possessing his birth certificate as a teenager; and beyond that, we know that the state of HI has the original on file. So... why not show people a copy of the original / long form? There's no question Hawaii would bend over backwards to faciliate that if Obama requested it.
It has become the custom among many journalists on both the right and the left to shout-down anybody who calls attention to this weirdness. But it's not just WorldNetDaily that is curious, the New York Times also wanted access to Obama's birth records, but thus far has been denied access (as far as we know based on what's been published).
I am betting that one good thing that will come out of this, is that in the future, Democratic party leaders will probably be more sure to ask their "rising stars" up front whether they plan to hide any of their primary documents from the public. No question this has been a big embarrassment (though Democrat leaders won't admit it), and for reasons that still remain unknown.
3 comments:
I don't think any of us can provide an answer to those questions. I find it hard to believe that he doesn't actually have a valid birth certificate, but it certainly seems like he's hiding something from his past. Of course, he could squelch all the speculation immediately simply by releasing everything to the public. The fact he doesn't do that means one of two things. Either he thinks that having this story dangling out there works to his political advantage by distracting his opponents from policy issues and making them look petty, or he really has something big to hide.
Whatever Obama is hiding, I hope we can all agree that is disgraceful that this guy could be elected president without ever having to provide an official birth certificate or complete criminal records to the public. This is what happens when the press is in the tank for one particular political candidate and fails in their role as a public watchdog. The Constitution clearly spells out that our President must be a U.S. citizen, so it should be required by law that he present his official birth certificate to Congress and the public. So far, Obama has only disclosed the short form of his birth certificate, which is not even sufficient evidence to obtain a passport. It certainly should not be sufficient to be elected president of the U.S.
Just to clarify -- the Constitution specifies that a President must be a natural-born U.S. citizen.
I personally have a high degree of confidence that Obama was born in Hawaii -- health dept. officials have asserted that they personally inspected his original birth certificate kept on file, and then of course the newspaper announcement. So no problems there.
But there is certainly some real weirdness going on here that Obama has failed to explain. Why is it that, when people want to see his birth certificate, he produced a short-form document created and date-stamped in the year 2007? I mean, the guy is 48 years old. We are all pretty sure that he wasn't born in the last two years. McCain released the long form. The long form is what people would expect to see. The short form omits important info, like what hospital he was born in, and what physician delivered him.
Obama made reference in one of his books to possessing his birth certificate as a teenager; and beyond that, we know that the state of HI has the original on file. So... why not show people a copy of the original / long form? There's no question Hawaii would bend over backwards to faciliate that if Obama requested it.
It has become the custom among many journalists on both the right and the left to shout-down anybody who calls attention to this weirdness. But it's not just WorldNetDaily that is curious, the New York Times also wanted access to Obama's birth records, but thus far has been denied access (as far as we know based on what's been published).
I am betting that one good thing that will come out of this, is that in the future, Democratic party leaders will probably be more sure to ask their "rising stars" up front whether they plan to hide any of their primary documents from the public. No question this has been a big embarrassment (though Democrat leaders won't admit it), and for reasons that still remain unknown.
Post a Comment