Obama Releases Long form birth-certificate

[dayalsoap]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf


How does that taste?

[kermitthefrayer]

Honestly looks really photoshopped to me.

[dayalsoap]

Yeah, you have no way of knowing that.  No matter what he releases, you will say it's forged.  There is no way to please you.

I told you people all along, this birther thing only hurts your movement.  It's not a real issue because he really was indeed born in the USA.  The entire movement is discredited now.

[Protean]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf


How does that taste?

Like spin, that's how it tastes.

This is not a long form birth certificate, it is a "certificate of live birth."

The PDF name: birth-certificate-long-form.pdf
is incorrect. A "long form" would include the doctor's names and size of baby.

Need to see the long form---AND all the other sealed records to determine WHO Barry Soetoro REALLY is.

Also posted here--
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=206953.msg1237657#msg1237657

[Protean]

Yeah, you have no way of knowing that.  No matter what he releases, you will say it's forged.  There is no way to please you.

I told you people all along, this birther thing only hurts your movement.  It's not a real issue because he really was indeed born in the USA.  The entire movement is discredited now.

Tell your buds at Team Obama to release the LONG FORM Birth Certificate (Doctor sigs, size and weight of baby), and while you at it--let's see those college records.

[dayalsoap]

This IS the long form.  The short form he released before was the "Certification of Live Birth".

This is a Certificate of Live Birth; it's the long form.  What information is missing from this document?

You really are uneducated on this.

[Protean]

This IS the long form.  The short form he released before was the "Certification of Live Birth".

This is a Certificate of Live Birth; it's the long form.  What information is missing from this document?

You really are uneducated on this.

Try READING my posts.

(Doctor sigs, size and weight of baby),

[dayalsoap]

Tell your buds at Team Obama to release the LONG FORM Birth Certificate (Doctor sigs, size and weight of baby), and while you at it--let's see those college records.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_a_certification_of_live_birth_the_same_thing_as_a_birth_certificate_in_Hawaii

Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification. The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual's birth.



Just admit you were wrong.

[dayalsoap]

Try READING my posts.

(Doctor sigs, size and weight of baby),

This form he released today has the doctors signature.

My birth certificate in Hawaii does not contain the baby's size and weight.  I don't think many (if any of them at all) do.. that's private medical information.

[Protean]

Need to see LONG FORM with attending doctors signatures--

Admit you don't have it.

[dayalsoap]

Need to see LONG FORM with attending doctors signatures--

Admit you don't have it.

The one he released today has the doctors signature on it.

[Protean]

This form he released today has the doctors signature.

My birth certificate in Hawaii does not contain the baby's size and weight.  I don't think many (if any of them at all) do.. that's private medical information.

Wrong Hospital Name On Obama's New Birth Certificate
Exclusive to Rense.com
By Devvy
4-27-11


http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

Well, the fine print could come back to bite you. The email below popped into my email box. I went and did a scroogle search and Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital does not come up as a facility.  Just Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children as search engines do by word association. I went over to the hospital's official web site (last link at bottom) and they don't call themselves a Gynecological Hopsital.

I would be interested to see incorporation papers for a Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Hawaii. Bet one doesn't exist.

This is no small thing. Also, this "new" Birth Certificate does not have the name or signature of a doctor, just an attendant.

http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

[dayalsoap]

Try READING my posts.

(Doctor sigs, size and weight of baby),

http://www.colonelmaggie.com/images/BirthCertificate.jpg

Montana Birth certificate.

The one Obama released today has all of that.  Notice: no weight, none of that.

Troll.

[dayalsoap]

An attending physician is not a doctor?

Wrong Hospital Name On Obama's New Birth Certificate
Exclusive to Rense.com
By Devvy
4-27-11


http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

Well, the fine print could come back to bite you. The email below popped into my email box. I went and did a scroogle search and Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital does not come up as a facility.  Just Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children as search engines do by word association. I went over to the hospital's official web site (last link at bottom) and they don't call themselves a Gynecological Hopsital.

I would be interested to see incorporation papers for a Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Hawaii. Bet one doesn't exist.

This is no small thing. Also, this "new" Birth Certificate does not have the name or signature of a doctor, just an attendant.

http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

[Krateros]

... The entire movement is discredited now.

It seems to me that, quite apart from the issue of whether or not the birth certificate is authentic and will satisfy everyone, the fact that the Obama administration apparently capitulated and presented one is proof enough that the so called “movement” has muscle.   

[dayalsoap]

Of course, an attending physician is a doctor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attending_physician

In the United States, an attending physician (also known as an attending, or staff physician) is a physician who has completed residency and practices medicine in a clinic or hospital, in the specialty learned during residency.

Wrong Hospital Name On Obama's New Birth Certificate
Exclusive to Rense.com
By Devvy
4-27-11


http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

Well, the fine print could come back to bite you. The email below popped into my email box. I went and did a scroogle search and Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital does not come up as a facility.  Just Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women & Children as search engines do by word association. I went over to the hospital's official web site (last link at bottom) and they don't call themselves a Gynecological Hopsital.

I would be interested to see incorporation papers for a Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Hawaii. Bet one doesn't exist.

This is no small thing. Also, this "new" Birth Certificate does not have the name or signature of a doctor, just an attendant.

http://www.rense.com/general93/wrong.htm

[lamourlady]

This form he released today has the doctors signature.

My birth certificate in Hawaii does not contain the baby's size and weight.  I don't think many (if any of them at all) do.. that's private medical information.

OMgosh...a birth certificate IS a record of that private medical information.  Geesh!

[donnay]

The one he released today has the doctors signature on it.

And the doctor died in 2003.  How do we prove he signed it then, have a seance?  

[lamourlady]

It seems to me that, quite apart from the issue of whether or not the birth certificate is authentic and will satisfy everyone, the fact that the Obama administration apparently capitulated and presented one is proof enough that the so called “movement” has muscle.

Excellent point!!!  QFT

[dayalsoap]

It's comical to watch people implode instead of admit they were wrong.

First, it's not the long form, then when it's shown to be the long form, they say it's missing the baby's weight and height.

When it's shown that there's no height or weight on other states birth certificates, they say it's missing the doctors signature.

When shown that an attending physician is a doctor, they say something else.  "The edges are wrinkled!"

[dayalsoap]

I've already shown that other states do not contain such information.  NY and Montana don't.

PLease show me that the majority of the states contain a baby's height and weight. 

OMgosh...a birth certificate IS a record of that private medical information.  Geesh!

[lamourlady]

It's comical to watch people implode instead of admit they were wrong.

First, it's not the long form, then when it's shown to be the long form, they say it's missing the baby's weight and height.

When it's shown that there's no height or weight on other states birth certificates, they say it's missing the doctors signature.

When shown that an attending physician is a doctor, they say something else.  "The edges are wrinkled!"

Prove it, buddy.  You can't and neither can anyone except the shills who are putting it forth.  If you want to believe everything the MSM shoves down your throat...enjoy the constipation later!

[dayalsoap]

So now, if a person's doctor dies, the whole birth certificate is invalid?  Pretty much nobody can prove birth, then, since doctors are always older than the babies they've delivered.

The doctor died at 81 years old.  Ron Paul will die some day too.  I guess none of the babies he gave birth to are citizens.

And the doctor died in 2003.  How do we prove he signed it then, have a seance?  

[lamourlady]

I've already shown that other states do not contain such information.  NY and Montana don't.

PLease show me that the majority of the states contain a baby's height and weight.

You missed the point, you were going on about how that information is so sensitive and private; my point is that that is what a birth certificate is for, to contain that private information and hence why only you can obtain it.  Who you show it to after that they could care less.

[Protean]

An attending physician is not a doctor?

You could be correct, point acknowledged.

Let's see how this issue develops.

[jofortruth]

It seems to me that, quite apart from the issue of whether or not the birth certificate is authentic and will satisfy everyone, the fact that the Obama administration apparently capitulated and presented one is proof enough that the so called “movement” has muscle.   

Exactly!!!!! He's feeling the heat, no doubt. However, he's also in an reelection campaign so trying to make this go away. WELL, IT ISN'T GOING AWAY, UNTIL WE SEE THE FULL TRUTH FROM THIS GUY WHO CALLS HIMSELF A PRESIDENT!

[dayalsoap]

You missed the point, you were going on about how that information is so sensitive and private; my point is that that is what a birth certificate is for, to contain that private information and hence why only you can obtain it.  Who you show it to after that they could care less.

No, that's not true at all.  This is to establish the birth and citizenship of a baby.  Having height and weight doesn't do that, that only establishes the HEALTH of the baby, which isn't the issue; that's private.

Please show that the majority of the states show height and weight.

I've already shown that Montana and NY don't.

[Geolibertarian]

It's comical to watch people implode instead of admit they were wrong.

Freudian projection if ever I heard it, because it was you Obama cultists who -- despite all of the fact-based warmings issued by Obama biographer Webster Tarpley and others -- mindlessly insisted for all of 2008 that Obama would end (or at least curtail) all of the corporate fascist economic policies, Nazi-style police state measures and terroristic wars of aggression of the Bush administration.

Then Obama himself -- your hero, your messiah, your lord and savior -- proceeded to prove you wrong:

---------------------------------

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/new-face-same-imperialism-20101005-16612.html

New face, same imperialism: Obama no better than Bush

Tariq Ali
The Age
October 6, 2010



After all the hope and hype, Obama's foreign policy mirrors the ugliness of the Bush years.

The election to the presidency of a mixed-race Democrat, vowing to heal America's wounds at home and restore its reputation abroad, was greeted with a wave of ideological euphoria not seen since the days of Kennedy. The shameful interlude of Republican swagger and criminality was over. George Bush and Dick Cheney had broken the continuity of a multilateral American leadership that had served the country well throughout the Cold War and after. Barack Obama would now restore it.

Rarely has self-interested mythology - or well-meaning gullibility - been more quickly exposed. There was no fundamental break in foreign policy between the Bush and Obama regimes. The strategic goals and imperatives of the US imperium remain the same, as do its principal theatres and means of operation.

Obama's line towards Israel would be manifest even before he took office. On December 27, 2008, the Israeli Defence Forces launched an all-out air and ground assault on the population of Gaza. Bombing, burning, killing continued without interruption for 22 days, during which time the president-elect uttered not a syllable of reproof. By pre-arrangement, Tel Aviv called off its blitz a few hours before his inauguration on January 20, 2009, not to spoil the party.

Once installed, Obama called, like every US president, for peace between the two suffering peoples of the Holy Land, and again, like every predecessor, for Palestinians to recognise Israel and for Israel to stop its settlements in the territories it seized in 1967. Within a week of the President's speech in Cairo pledging opposition to further settlements, the governing Netanyahu coalition was extending Jewish properties in East Jerusalem with impunity.

However, war-zones further east have the first call on imperial attention. In 2002, on his way up the political ladder as a low-profile state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed the attack on Iraq; it was politically inexpensive to do so. By the time he was elected President, his first act was to maintain Bush's Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, long-time CIA functionary and veteran of the Iran-Contra affair, in the Pentagon. A cruder and more demonstrative signal of political continuity could hardly have been conceived.

Before his election, Obama promised a withdrawal of all US ''combat'' troops from Iraq within 16 months of his taking office, that is, by May 2010 - with a safety clause that the pledge could be ''refined'' in the light of events. It promptly was.

There persists the uneasy thought that the Iraqi resistance, capable of inflicting such damage on the US military machine only yesterday, might just be biding its time after its heavy losses and the defection of an important segment, and could still visit havoc on the collaborators tomorrow, should the US pull out altogether. To ensure against any such danger, Washington has put down markers in the modern equivalents - vastly larger and more hideous - of the Crusader fortresses of old.

As for Iran, schemes for a grand reconciliation between the two states had to be set aside. The calculation was upset by political polarisation in Iran itself. For Obama, the opportunity for ideological posturing was too great to resist. In a peerless display of sanctimony, he lamented with moist-eyed grief the death of a demonstrator killed in Tehran on the same day his drones wiped out 60 villagers, most of them women and children, in Pakistan.

The Democratic administration has now reverted to the line of its predecessor, attempting to corral Russia and China - European acquiescence can be taken for granted - into an economic blockade of Iran, in the hope of so strangling the country that the Supreme Leader will either be overthrown or obliged to come to terms.

From Palestine through Iraq to Iran, Obama has acted as just another steward of the US empire, pursuing the same aims as his predecessors, with the same means but with a more emollient rhetoric. In Afghanistan, he has gone further, widening the front of imperial aggression with a major escalation of violence, both technological and territorial.

[Continued...]


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16181

The Pentagon Budget: Largest Ever and Growing

by Sara Flounders

Global Research, November 19, 2009
International Action Center - 2009-11-07

On Oct. 28, President Barack Obama signed the 2010 Defense Authorization Act, the largest military budget in U.S. history.

It is not only the world's largest military budget but is larger than the military expenditures of the whole rest of the world combined. And it is growing nonstop. The 2010 military budget--which doesn't even cover many war-related expenditures--is listed as $680 billion. In 2009 it was $651 billion and in 2000 was $280 billion. It has more than doubled in 10 years.

[Continued…]


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16488

Obama's Big Sellout
The president has packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders

by Matt Taibbi



Global Research, December 10, 2009
Rolling Stone - 2009-12-09

The president has packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders intent on turning the bailout into an all-out giveaway

Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers "at the expense of hardworking Americans."

Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.

Then he got elected.

What's taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy.

What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.

[Continued…]

---------------------------------

[Geolibertarian]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/10-reasons-obama-is-just-as-bad-or-worse-than-bush.html

10 Reasons Obama is Just As Bad or Worse Than Bush

Activist Post
April 5, 2011

George W. Bush was clearly a mentally-challenged puppet of the military/banking/oil elite.  The policies put it in place at breakneck speed after 9/11 were provably predetermined by think tanks well in advance. Not that other presidents were any less controlled by this hidden agenda, but there was a noticeable in-your-face quickening of corporate-government tyranny under Bush.
 
These policies like wars of aggression, illegal surveillance of Americans, torture of detainees indefinitely held without formal charges, unfair “free trade” agreements, and bank bailouts rightfully enraged many progressives during the Bush years.  Yet, not only have these policies accelerated under Obama, even more of the draconian playbook is unfolding.
 
After 8 years of Bush’s reign that ended with a record low presidential approval rating in the low 20s, Obama’s promise of hope and change inspired many beyond mainline progressives.  His campaign speeches were so powerful that they landed him the Nobel Peace Prize without having done anything for world peace except to offer the idea in order to get elected.  As a Constitutional law professor and attorney, Obama appeared to have a greater understanding of rights and the balance of power than did flunky Bush.
 
Although policies being implemented under Obama’s leadership exhibit the continuation of Bush’s tyrannical agenda, his stunning betrayal of populist and Constitutional principles in support of these actions makes him the ultimate hypocrite.  Additionally, because Obama is a much more influential orator than Bush, his service to the puppet masters is far more dangerous to the American people he’s supposed to serve.
 
There have been many articles written about Obama’s unkept promises and outright lies, but here are 10 actions that prove Obama is just as bad if not worse than Bush:

Bank/Corporate Bailouts: Although the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), otherwise known as the bankster bailout, occurred on Bush’s watch, Obama fully supported it as necessary. Obama then followed up this massive wealth grab with a gargantuan stimulus bill which has basically been absorbed by the financial crisis as well. All said, Bloomberg and others reported the taxpayer guarantees for Wall Street are upwards of $23 trillion. Additionally, the best part of Obama’s cabinet and appointed czars are directly connected to big banks like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. Furthermore, Obama and Democratic leaders gave the Federal Reserve even more regulatory power over the economy. The Administration hails the Financial Reform bill as a big political accomplishment, but the bill never addressed the three major problems: doesn’t break up or reduce the size of too-big-to-fail banks, doesn’t remove the massive government guarantees to the giant banks, and it won’t even increase liquidity requirements to prevent future meltdowns. The inmates are too clearly running Obama’s asylum.

Betrayal of the Poor: Bush never pretended to give a damn about the poor and the systematic mechanisms that keep them poor; openly calling the “haves and have mores” his “base.” But Obama has been portrayed as different, mainly because the Democratic party is viewed as more empathetic to the poor. Obama promised affordable healthcare, to create new jobs, and to increase access to a college education. However, the mandated healthcare bill has proven to actually hurt the poor, the “jobs” bill HIRE was nothing but a smokescreen to pass capital controls, and college loans are increasingly worse than useless since record numbers of students can’t find work to pay them off. So far he only seems to be helping the poor by extending food stamps to a record number of needy Americans — which is currently on the spending cut chopping block by the way. Obama also extended Bush’s tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans while the poor suffer the dramatic effects of inflation and the approaching austerity cuts demanded to prevent a government shutdown.

Expansion of "Free" (read: Corporate-Managed) Trade: Obama excoriated NAFTA, GATT and other so-called “Free Trade” agreements that were put in place under Clinton and Bush (with CAFTA). One of Obama’s campaign mailers to Ohioans read “one million jobs have been lost because of NAFTA, including nearly 50,000 jobs here in Ohio.” And Obama told unions that “he has always opposed NAFTA, and said the trade deal should be amended and renegotiated.” It is abundantly clear that free trade agreements have not done well for American manufacturing and its workers (just like Obama told us during his campaign). These free trade agreements are designed to only help the multinational corporations who wrote them, and who Obama now works for. In contrast to being “opposed” to such agreements, the government moves forward with many new similar agreements.

Escalating Wars of Aggression: Whoever thought it couldn’t get worse than Bush in regards to wars of aggression — especially by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient — have been proven dead wrong. Obama has now unilaterally attacked more countries than Bush, notably bombing inside Pakistan, Yemen and now Libya without Congressional approval. Obama is worse than war-mongering Neocons because he moved the war bar from requiring a real or manufactured threat to justify American military intervention, to vague humanitarian justifications. In other words, if a secular dictator is stamping out a handful of jihadists that threaten his regime, we will now bomb the dictator and support the jihadists when it serves corporate interests. By all counts Obama is serving the same military/oil masters no matter what labels or excuses are given. It is truly a hideous display to watch progressives support Obama’s wars as if they’re more righteous than Bush’s.

Internet Rights Eroding: The open and free Internet is under full assault under Obama’s leadership. It has become obvious that there has never been much in the way of Internet privacy, especially since the Patriot Act went into full effect. But now, free access to information via the Internet is the target of legislation such as The Protecting Cybersecurity as a National Asset Act, aka the “Internet Kill Switch” bill, and the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), aka the domain “Blacklist” bill. The free Internet is also being threatened by market-based “net neutrality” agreements, civil lawsuits, technical censorship via search engines, and yes, blogging taxes too. Finally, the DHS has been arbitrarily seizing domain names, which is clearly unconstitutional. Given that Obama is completely in bed with Google and others in the corporate information cartel, you can bet he will show his support for these endeavors even if only by remaining silent as they are debated then implemented.Free Speech Restrictions: Bush mainly used fear, intimidation, access and fake reporters to control the establishment message. He and the media cartel acted in concert to sell gigantic lies to the public. Now, as more people replace their television service with the Internet, “news” has been more difficult for the establishment to control. As the global awakening takes place, the crackdown on free speech intensifies under Obama. The crackdown has been most obvious on the Internet (see next section) and on peaceful protesters. In a comically hypocritical moment that exemplifies how tyrannical this administration has become, Hillary Clinton was giving a speech about supporting the right of peaceful protesters while her security thugs violently removed a “veteran for peace” from the audience for standing in silent protest. Additionally, there was an absolute police state put in place during the 2009 G20 meeting in Pittsburgh to shut down peaceful protests. Finally, we know what direction the current Administration is headed in terms of free speech, given the recent White Papers revealing their desire to “outlaw” or “tax” conspiracy theories, and to make it a felony offense to share copyrighted information even when no money is involved. Torture and Sport Killing: Bush accepted some blame for the Abu Ghraib torture debacle. Rightly so, as it was his Administration that set forth more enhanced interrogation permissions down the chain of command that ultimately resulted in such disgusting behavior. Obama used the notion of closing Guantanamo prison to score political points and to appear as “anti-torture.” Not only does Guantanamo remain open two years into his presidency, the detainees have less rights than they did under Bush. Additionally, Obama has allowed the torture of American soldier Bradley Manning simply for being a suspected whistleblower. If he allows this type of treatment to an American citizen, we can only imagine the tactics that are still being used against enemy detainees. If it’s fair to blame Bush for Abu Ghraib, then it seems fair to blame Obama for allowing an environment where the U.S. military is engaged in sport killing of innocent civilians — which also seems to negate his calls for humanitarian purity in other nations.

Illegal Domestic Surveillance: It seems the monster surveillance-industrial complex that was kicked off under Bush remains in full swing under Obama. Obama voted for the Bush/Cheney FISA-telecom immunity after vowing to support a filibuster of it while he was a Senator. Glenn Greenwald reported: “So candidate Obama unambiguously vowed to his supporters that he would work to ensure ‘full accountability’ for ‘past offenses’ in surveillance lawbreaking. President Obama, however, has now become the prime impediment to precisely that accountability, repeatedly engaging in extraordinary legal maneuvers to ensure that ‘past offenses’ — both in the surveillance and torture/rendition realm — remain secret and forever immunized from judicial review.” And Carol Rose added, “The link between secrecy and surveillance is critical: in effect, our government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing the power of citizens to watch their government – the very antithesis of democracy.” It’s telling how out of control illegal surveillance has become when private foreign companies are hired to spy on American environmental activists. This is in addition to the TSA’s roll-out of naked body scanners and intrusive pat-downs selectively enforced at airports and fiercely defended by Obama’s DHS.

Rule of Law is Dead: The Rule of Law is an ancient concept that means a society is governed by rational, objective written laws, as opposed to the personal whim or arbitrariness of some king. Under this pretext, no one is above the law, not even kings. Yet, we have seen this concept steadily erode from reality over many decades, but not so blatant as under George W. Bush whose team permanently subverted the rules in favor of the elite. Under Bush and now Obama, the corporate elite clearly get away with massive crimes against humanity and overwhelming fraud, while the little people are still routinely punished for all minor offenses. With not even a hint of punishment, banks can openly loot and defraud the public, the government can spy on Americans, the TSA can grope our private parts, while large corporations continue to poison us and the environment with impunity. The Feds, under Obama, have even raided legal medical marijuana dispensaries and private organic cooperatives. In addition, Obama signed an Executive Order to indefinitely detain “terror” suspects even after acquittal — while other lawmakers seek to remove Miranda Rights. Who is prosecuting these crimes and injustices? When the criminal corporations with their government partners continue to run the system, there will be no rule of law, or justice.

Obamacare Fascism: Even many progressives view Obamacare as a purely fascist policy. When a progressive tries to defend Obamacare these days, the best argument they can give is “at least Obama tried to fix the problem.” It’s their way of subtly deflecting blame to Bush for ignoring it because he was too busy “smokin’ turrurists outta their holes”. Healthcare reform was meant to increase competition and affordable coverage for all Americans. Yet, the private insurance monopolies remain and citizens are mandated to buy from them under penalty of jail, while 1000 of the most connected corporations are exempt from the law. Furthermore, the FDA remains under the full control of Big Pharma/Chemical giants and the giveaways to the drug companies have only increased. Finally, when there are huge profits involved in deciding if people live or die, and budgetary rationing of services, you will always have “death panels.” So, yes, the corporate government healthcare merger is complete with for-profit “death panels.” Folks, if you want to know what the modern-day definition of fascism is, you just read it.

[Continued...]

[Rebelitarian]

No stateseal, no footprint, and what year is the paper ?

It's a FAKE !!!!!!!!!!

[dayalsoap]

This whole post does not pertain to the issue at hand, at all.  I am just as against Obama as any of you.

That said, you lose on the birther issue.  Everything necessary has been released.  You are now down to saying "THE 81 YEAR OLD DOCTOR IS DEAD!!!!!!!" and "THE EDGES ARE WRINKLED!!!!"

And on top of that, you can't just admit that you were wrong all along about the birther scenario, you have to go off on unrelated tangents like the Iraq war.


I hate to break it to you, you are all still sheep.  Just because you have a different shepherd doesn't mean you're any less of a sheep.

Freudian projection if ever I heard it, because it was you Obama cultists who -- despite all of the fact-based warmings issued by Obama biographer Webster Tarpley and others -- mindlessly insisted for all of 2008 that Obama would end (or at least curtail) all of the corporate fascist economic policies, Nazi-style police state measures and terroristic wars of aggression of the Bush administration.

Then Obama himself -- your hero, your messiah, your lord and savior -- proceeded to prove you wrong:

---------------------------------

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/new-face-same-imperialism-20101005-16612.html

New face, same imperialism: Obama no better than Bush

Tariq Ali
The Age
October 6, 2010



After all the hope and hype, Obama's foreign policy mirrors the ugliness of the Bush years.

The election to the presidency of a mixed-race Democrat, vowing to heal America's wounds at home and restore its reputation abroad, was greeted with a wave of ideological euphoria not seen since the days of Kennedy. The shameful interlude of Republican swagger and criminality was over. George Bush and Dick Cheney had broken the continuity of a multilateral American leadership that had served the country well throughout the Cold War and after. Barack Obama would now restore it.

Rarely has self-interested mythology - or well-meaning gullibility - been more quickly exposed. There was no fundamental break in foreign policy between the Bush and Obama regimes. The strategic goals and imperatives of the US imperium remain the same, as do its principal theatres and means of operation.

Obama's line towards Israel would be manifest even before he took office. On December 27, 2008, the Israeli Defence Forces launched an all-out air and ground assault on the population of Gaza. Bombing, burning, killing continued without interruption for 22 days, during which time the president-elect uttered not a syllable of reproof. By pre-arrangement, Tel Aviv called off its blitz a few hours before his inauguration on January 20, 2009, not to spoil the party.

Once installed, Obama called, like every US president, for peace between the two suffering peoples of the Holy Land, and again, like every predecessor, for Palestinians to recognise Israel and for Israel to stop its settlements in the territories it seized in 1967. Within a week of the President's speech in Cairo pledging opposition to further settlements, the governing Netanyahu coalition was extending Jewish properties in East Jerusalem with impunity.

However, war-zones further east have the first call on imperial attention. In 2002, on his way up the political ladder as a low-profile state senator in Illinois, Obama opposed the attack on Iraq; it was politically inexpensive to do so. By the time he was elected President, his first act was to maintain Bush's Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, long-time CIA functionary and veteran of the Iran-Contra affair, in the Pentagon. A cruder and more demonstrative signal of political continuity could hardly have been conceived.

Before his election, Obama promised a withdrawal of all US ''combat'' troops from Iraq within 16 months of his taking office, that is, by May 2010 - with a safety clause that the pledge could be ''refined'' in the light of events. It promptly was.

There persists the uneasy thought that the Iraqi resistance, capable of inflicting such damage on the US military machine only yesterday, might just be biding its time after its heavy losses and the defection of an important segment, and could still visit havoc on the collaborators tomorrow, should the US pull out altogether. To ensure against any such danger, Washington has put down markers in the modern equivalents - vastly larger and more hideous - of the Crusader fortresses of old.

As for Iran, schemes for a grand reconciliation between the two states had to be set aside. The calculation was upset by political polarisation in Iran itself. For Obama, the opportunity for ideological posturing was too great to resist. In a peerless display of sanctimony, he lamented with moist-eyed grief the death of a demonstrator killed in Tehran on the same day his drones wiped out 60 villagers, most of them women and children, in Pakistan.

The Democratic administration has now reverted to the line of its predecessor, attempting to corral Russia and China - European acquiescence can be taken for granted - into an economic blockade of Iran, in the hope of so strangling the country that the Supreme Leader will either be overthrown or obliged to come to terms.

From Palestine through Iraq to Iran, Obama has acted as just another steward of the US empire, pursuing the same aims as his predecessors, with the same means but with a more emollient rhetoric. In Afghanistan, he has gone further, widening the front of imperial aggression with a major escalation of violence, both technological and territorial.

[Continued...]


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16181

The Pentagon Budget: Largest Ever and Growing

by Sara Flounders

Global Research, November 19, 2009
International Action Center - 2009-11-07

On Oct. 28, President Barack Obama signed the 2010 Defense Authorization Act, the largest military budget in U.S. history.

It is not only the world's largest military budget but is larger than the military expenditures of the whole rest of the world combined. And it is growing nonstop. The 2010 military budget--which doesn't even cover many war-related expenditures--is listed as $680 billion. In 2009 it was $651 billion and in 2000 was $280 billion. It has more than doubled in 10 years.

[Continued…]


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16488

Obama's Big Sellout
The president has packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders

by Matt Taibbi



Global Research, December 10, 2009
Rolling Stone - 2009-12-09

The president has packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders intent on turning the bailout into an all-out giveaway

Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers "at the expense of hardworking Americans."

Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.

Then he got elected.

What's taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy.

What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.

[Continued…]

---------------------------------

[dayalsoap]

Thank you for being the only other reasonable person in this thread.

You could be correct, point acknowledged.

Let's see how this issue develops.

[kerrymti]

Thank you for being the only other reasonable person in this thread.

I am having trouble finding the hospital, as listed.  If you go to the Hawaii Secretary of State site:  http://hbe.ehawaii.gov/documents/search.html you can search for inc's and llc's, ALL OF THEM are required to be listed, hospitals too, even if they are now inactive, dissolved or merged.  I found this one http://hbe.ehawaii.gov/documents/business.html?fileNumber=30954D2&view=transactions, but the name is not correct...I want to believe it is real, however, this is a glaring issue as well as the issue with the pdf doc when you open it obviously not right.  When it opens, the background matches the actual page exactly, even though the left margin appears to have come from a bound book...curious...

[dayalsoap]

More bullshit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapiolani_Medical_Center_for_Women_and_Children

Citations 2,3, and 4.  One of them is from 1925.

So, yes, his hospital is listed.

This is laughable.

I am having trouble finding the hospital, as listed.  If you go to the Hawaii Secretary of State site:  http://hbe.ehawaii.gov/documents/search.html you can search for inc's and llc's, ALL OF THEM are required to be listed, hospitals too, even if they are now inactive, dissolved or merged.  I found this one http://hbe.ehawaii.gov/documents/business.html?fileNumber=30954D2&view=transactions, but the name is not correct...I want to believe it is real, however, this is a glaring issue as well as the issue with the pdf doc when you open it obviously not right.  When it opens, the background matches the actual page exactly, even though the left margin appears to have come from a bound book...curious...

[donnay]

And the doctor died in 2003.  How do we prove he signed it then, have a seance?  

My point is there is no way to know whether the doctor's signature was forged.  Again, the foxes are guarding the hen house.  If the PTB want it to look like you were born from the ass of horse, it shall be so...

To all the alleged findings that his mother and father were legally married is also under question as well. 

From Wiki:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham

"At the age of 23, Obama Sr. had come to Hawaii to pursue his education, leaving behind a pregnant wife and infant son in his home town of Nyang’oma Kogelo in Kenya. Dunham and Obama Sr. were married on the Hawaiian island of Maui on February 2, 1961, despite parental opposition from both families.[5][14] Dunham was three months pregnant at the time of her marriage.[1][5] Obama Sr. eventually informed Dunham about his first marriage in Kenya but claimed he was divorced. Years later, she would discover this was false.[13] Obama Sr.'s first wife, Kezia, later said she had granted her consent for him to marry a second wife, in keeping with Luo customs.[15]"

From Law & Legal Definition:  http://definitions.uslegal.com/b/bigamy/

"Bigamy is the condition of having two wives or two husbands at the same time. The second marriage to someone who is already legally married is void and may be annulled, while there is no effect on the first marriage. A person who knowingly commits bigamy is guilty of a crime, but it is seldom prosecuted unless it is part of a fraudulent scheme to get another's property or some other felony. A marriage in another country is normally valid in the US; so, if someone is married in another country, they cannot get married again in the US or vice versa."

[Kilika]

The name of the hospital changed! That's why you can't find it. The name change has been mentioned before. NO conspiracy there. Now, incorporation papers and tax records should verify the name change as, in effect, a change in incorporation.

The problem here is that we have a troll using Wiki as their proof and source material. Interesting. Notice this person jumps into posting just as this document got released? Intersting timing. Didn't realize government agents were that prompt.

If that document is real, then what is that to the left in the image? There is more to the document on the left side.

Other state's documents don't serve as proof of what Hawaii does and did back then. Only Hawaii long-forms can serve as proof of what they issued and what's on it.

The doctor didn't work by himself! There were other medical personel there at birth that can be interviewed and verified. He may well have delivered babies there, but his name must be checked out as legit. What if the doctor was not int he area at that time? So it doesn't matter really if he's alive or not.

[EvadingGrid]

More bullshit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapiolani_Medical_Center_for_Women_and_Children

Citations 2,3, and 4.  One of them is from 1925.

So, yes, his hospital is listed.

This is laughable.

So tell please tell us all dayalsoap :

Why has it taken so long a time for this document to surface ?

[dayalsoap]

1) It didn't.  Hawaii releases the short forms; the long forms actually have no legal basis in Hawaii.  He actually released the legal document in 2008.

2) This stuff only helps his campaign.  THe people who actually bought the movement will NEVER vote for him anyways.  Now that there was a popular, Primetime TV star Donald Trump, moving on the issue, it was a perfect opportunity to squash Trump's credibility.  Trump might not lose credibility in your eyes (NOTHING will convince you away from the birther movement -- not even a real long form birth certificate), but for the swing independent voters, it's very easy now to paint him as a complete hysterical xenophobe.


3) The question "why didn't he release it" does nothing to establish your case that this document isn't real.

So tell please tell us all dayalsoap :

why has it taken so long for this document to surface ?

[EvadingGrid]

3) The question "why didn't he release it" does nothing to establish your case that this document isn't real.

No, but it established if you are for real or not.

[worcesteradam]

It raises new questions

Where does the name Barry Soetero come from?