Originally posted by: jonks
[-snip-
No, what you said was that if Obama produced the long form hospital birth certificate then it would "put a stop to all this" and all the truthers would go away. The fact that they called the fully certified and legally sufficient document produced above a fake/fraud/forgery ought to tell you something fern. These people don't care about truth and will never be satisfied. They KNOW he was born in Kenya and nothing you say, do or show them can convince them otherwise.
Umm, actually I didn't make that claim either.
One thing you ought to get straigt is that lumping all those in doubt, and who want to see the real BC into the same catergory is nothing but rank generalization and therefore bogus.
At the begining I posted because it's easy to mis-characterize those who want confirmation as the nuts believing the certification is forged, that the HA state officials are lying, and that there was a conspiracy 50 years to get an announcment in the newspaper. Nope, I was attempting to explain that's not what's it's about for most. really, the only reason to mis-characterize them is to be able to easily more dismiss them.
You see their concerns lie elsewhere. They know that there are (IIRC) 4 kinds of BC's issued by HA (They may still have 4, they get their laws into better shape in the 1970's and that was a result of SS# application changes). It's a unique state. They're aware that HA has (maybe stiil will) issued a BC for a foreign born child upon the parent signing an affidavit stating that they have been a resident of HA previously. They are aware of the 'call-in' BC's.
They also know that regardless of what type of BC you were intially issued, the (PC generated) certificate (short) forms all look the same. No way to tell what the original BC was.
What they do want is to know what kind of original BC Obama has. I suspect because they're not getting it they're suspicious. For the nuts, and I suspect those are few, perhaps nothing will change their minds. Regardless the rest, I suspect, have difficulty in understanding why if Obama has a 'regular' BC he won't show it.
I don't believe this will go away. The MSM has been mis-characterizing this (like this forum) for some time now (if not being downright inaccurate). Still hasn't stopped it. H3ll, hasn't even slowed it down. In my line of work I meet with a lot of otherwise perfectly normal upper middle-class types. Some are retired execs from the NE (and a lot from the Mid West) and others are business owners; I'm amazed how many mention this issue.
IDK, maybe mis-characterizing and ridiculing them will work, but then again maybe not. My guess, though, is that we'll see this again next Presidential election and they'll likely be something more fact-based (like info on HA habits wrt BC's) and less kooky.
As I wrote above, we currently have no system verifying a candidate's qualifications and there is proposed legislation to correct that. Quite likely the Dems will be able to quash it, but if not look for Obama to possibly have to produce the original (long form) BC next election. And if it's not a regular one look for more trouble.
EDIT: BTW, I've seen sites with Hawaiian law, copies of various BC's etc. They claim the way to tell (contrary to what I said above) a 'call-in' or late filed BC is by comparing the birth date with the registration date. If they are same it is likely a 'regular' BC. If the registration date is later it is a call-in/late filed BC. On the copies of his certification the registration date is (IIRC) 4 days after his given birth date. IDK if their info is correct or not.
Fern