How are the French-initiated kinetic military actions going? The Times reports that in Libya Qaddafi's troops have adapted to NATO airpower and are rolling back the untrained, poorly led, under-equipped rebels. Fortunately, that debacle reflects badly on NATO rather than the US since Obama is pretending we are not in a leadership role.
And in the Ivory Coast, we the US is really not involved, the embattled President is clinging to power and even regrouping:
Gbagbo Loyalists Regain Ground in Ivory Coast
By SCOTT SAYARE
PARIS — As the wily Ivory Coast strongman Laurent Gbagbo remained cornered in the basement of the presidential residence in Abidjan on Saturday, his forces retook the offensive in a series of military actions, belying recent predictions of his imminent downfall.
Since Friday, forces loyal to Mr. Gbagbo have recaptured territory in Abidjan, the economic capital, repelled a French military operation, attacked his rival’s headquarters and recaptured state television and radio, which resumed broadcasting messages of defiance.
Mr. Gbagbo was still surrounded by forces loyal to his rival, Alassane Ouattara, the country’s internationally recognized president, which were backed by troops from France and the United Nations.
But on Saturday evening, his forces attacked the Golf Hôtel, where Mr. Ouattara has maintained his headquarters since winning the presidential election in November. A United Nations official said it was the first time Mr. Gbagbo’s forces had attacked the hotel.
Let us hope that Rasmussen or another responsible pollster is asking the following question of voters right now:
"Who do you think deserves the most credit for averting last week's threatened shutdown of government. . . Democrats in Congress, Republicans in Congress, or President Obama?"
What's your guess? I'm curious about what others believe would be the voters' take overall. . . the percentage who'd make each choice?
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 01:47 PM
Fine, Dr. Fukino. Then Obama should just release the fukino birth certificate and end the ludicrous speculation.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2011 at 01:54 PM
I'll post the following, then I'll see who takes the bait. Let's see the fur fly:
"The Hawaiian state health official who personally reviewed Barack Obama's original birth certificate has affirmed again that the document is 'real' and denounced 'conspiracy theorists' in the so-called 'birther' movement for continuing to spread bogus claims about the issue.
"'It’s kind of ludicrous at this point,' Dr. Chiyome Fukino, the former director of Hawaii's Department of Health, said in a rare telephone interview with NBC.
"Fukino, sounding both exasperated and amused, spoke to a reporter in the aftermath of Donald Trump's statements on the NBC Today show last week questioning whether Obama has a legitimate birth certificate.""
So, basically, hawiian officials said nothing, again.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 10, 2011 at 02:00 PM
My take on the latest round of birther speculation--it's more serious than the last time, even though nothing much new has turned up that I'm aware of (loophole through which anyone can jump to correct me). The reason it's more serious is that Trump brings it closer to the mainstream and more people will assume that where there's smoke there's likely fire. One more problem Obama doesn't need.
Posted by: anduril | April 10, 2011 at 02:00 PM
OK, I'll take a guess, (Another) Barbara, and hope noone remembers if the poll is taken and I am way off.
Obama-26%
GOP-28%
Dems-14%
Both-12%
Neither-15%
Don' Know-5%
In other words, I don't think the GOP will get much credit in current polls. However, I think if the GOP holds it ground over the coming months, it will benefit in the 2012 elections for not caving to the progs.
I also think that many of the folks who would say Obama will favor the GOP in 2012, but are being deferential to the President, who is currently talking the game of budget reduction.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 10, 2011 at 02:01 PM
So far as I know, DoT (unless she said something different in the NBC interview you cite) Dr. Fukino has never actually claimed to have seen a birth certificate. Her statements have been carefully worded, or so it seems to me:
"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago."
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 02:01 PM
Story of a very brave woman: Mission Accomplished: SCO Loses, Groklaw Closes:
Eight years ago, SCO, a long-time x86 Unix company, which had recently been bought out by Caldera, a leading Linux business of the day, shocked the IT world by suing IBM for stealing Unix code placing it in Linux. A Linux company suing Linux’s leading enterprise partner!? While SCO/Caldera did have reason to be annoyed at IBM for how they had handled Project Monterrey, an effort to bring IBM’s AIX Unix to the x86 processor, SCO’s Linux lawsuit made no sense–except as an attack by anti-Linux enemies using SCO as a puppet. I, and others, said the lawsuit was nonsense, but at the time .many people still assumed that where there was smoke, there must be fire. Enter Pamela Jones, a Linux-loving paralegal who hated what SCO was trying to do, and so she started to methodically poke holes in SCO’s claims in a legal analysis blog she called Groklaw.
For the next eight long years, Pamela “PJ” Jones used her legal research skills, and the help of numerous others, day by day and claim by claim, to show just how baseless SCO’s claims against IBM, and later Novel, were. She also helped show how Microsoft financed SCO’s seemingly endless lawsuits.
During those years, she was frequently attacked by people who claimed she was an agent for IBM. Her privacy was attacked by so-called journalists. Others claimed, and still claim to this day, that there is no PJ. That’s utter nonsense.
...
Posted by: anduril | April 10, 2011 at 02:11 PM
Happy Birthday peter and Stephanie. Have a great day!
clarice:
Great srticle. You have out done yourself again!~
Posted by: maryrose | April 10, 2011 at 02:15 PM
should be article
Posted by: maryrose | April 10, 2011 at 02:15 PM
ask your self this about the former director of the Hawaii Department of Health "what the Fukino?"
Posted by: matt | April 10, 2011 at 02:18 PM
She did, indeed, say quite a bit more. I should have posted it originally, but was using iPad. Here's some more from the NBC item:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 02:19 PM
Thanks, Jim Ryan. Seemed a bit unusual since there are no values on either axis, but the point is well made.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 02:20 PM
"So, basically, hawiian officials said nothing, again."
I'm trying to remember the last time we heard things said by Democrats that were said in such a way as to make Obama look better than the truth would.
Having thought about it for 10 seconds, I believe it was the last time I heard a Democrat say something and every time before that, that I have heard a Democrat speak.
Posted by: pagar | April 10, 2011 at 02:24 PM
She doesn't say anyone but she saw it, does she? So why suggest Lingle would have to have been in on any cover up?
In any event, if it's all there and there's othing that would make O look bad why the fukino doesn't he arrange for its release. At this point he hasn't much marginal credibility to play with.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2011 at 02:28 PM
Thanks for posting that, DoT. I've followed Dr. Fukino's statements from the beginning and today is the first time, to the best of my knowledge, that she's verified seeing Hawaii's standard long-form certificate of birth for Obama. Her previous statements -- and she hasn't made many -- have always sounded cautious and lawyerly.
I'm persuaded.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM
OK, DOT, I'll take the bait. My view is that there is a 1% chance that a continuing controversy as to where Obama was born will hurt Obama in 2012, a 70% chance it won't make a difference, and a 29% chance it will change a 51%-48% popular vote, 65%-35% electoral vote GOP POTUS victory in 2012 into a 49.5%-49.5% popular vote tie and a close but clear Obama victory in the Electoral College. I think what could happen is that at a strategic time in a close race, Obama could authorize release of the birth certificate, which I suspect will show he was born in Hawaii to whoever (most likely Stanley Ann, but as to the father, as the old saying goes, motherhood is a matter of fact, fatherhood a matter of opinion). Even if there is embarrassing info in the original, MSM will play it that the racist, xenophobic right wing has used this controversy to try to deligitimize the first black POTUS, and has been been unsuccessful in that attempt. It won't have a really big impact in the popular vote, but it could turn closely contested states such as Ohio and Florida into Dem states.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 10, 2011 at 02:37 PM
I understand her to be saying that it was also seen by the unnamed health official whom she took with her.
I don't think any of it will change anything at all in the election.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 02:42 PM
With high unemployment and wages lagging price inflation, I doubt seriously that anything written a old piece of paper in a file cabinet with have much impact one way or another. When you look and act like Jimmy Carter, you are likely to see the same fate.
Posted by: Gmax | April 10, 2011 at 02:49 PM
TC-
My view is that there is a 1% chance that a continuing controversy as to where Obama was born will hurt Obama in 2012, a 70% chance it won't make a difference, and a 29% chance it will change a 51%-48% popular vote, 65%-35% electoral vote GOP POTUS victory in 2012 into a 49.5%-49.5% popular vote tie and a close but clear Obama victory in the Electoral College.
There's a "bookie" in the heart of every good attorney:-)
Posted by: glasater | April 10, 2011 at 02:51 PM
She says she saw it, but other than the fact that she says he was born in Hawaii, she doesn't say anything about what's on it.
I've always thought he was born in Hawaii. I think there's something else on the long form BC that is embarrassing to him or that directly contradicts some other aspect of his "official" bio. Fukino has said nothing so far to discredit that theory.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 10, 2011 at 02:54 PM
Happy Birthday Stephanie & Peter!!!
6 more days until Soylent is home!!!
Posted by: Janet | April 10, 2011 at 02:57 PM
John at Powerline says what I am thinking only of course a little more eloquently and with a poll to back him up:
Only 28 percent of likely voters say that they share Obama's political views, while 57 percent say Obama is more liberal than they are. Of course, that might not be fatal if voters believe that Obama's policies have been successful. (I haven't tried to dredge up the old poll data, but I'm pretty sure that in 1983, most voters said President Reagan was more conservative than they were, yet he won re-election in a landslide because it was obvious that his policies had been successful.)
Here is Obama's problem: in addition to disagreeing with him in principle, a large majority of voters don't believe his policies have worked. Currently, only 9 percent of American adults (not voters) rate the economy as excellent or good, while 56 percent say it is poor. This explains why Obama's approval ratings are falling among Hispanics and African-Americans.
There is still quite a bit of time for Obama to convince swing voters that he is a moderate and that his policies are effective, but he has a high mountain to climb.
Posted by: Gmax | April 10, 2011 at 02:58 PM
I'm persuaded that Fukino is cautious and lawyerly. There is no reason the information was not released in this detail the first time around. It still stinks and is another patch on the coat of invisibility our president wears.
Fukino said she took someone with her and not that they both inspected the BC. Parsing is a way of life with the Democrats. Pfui!
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | April 10, 2011 at 03:01 PM
Even if there is embarrassing info in the original, MSM will play it that the racist, xenophobic right wing has used this controversy to try to deligitimize the first black POTUS
They've already done that; they do it every day about this issue and any other that implies the smallest criticism of Obama. I agree that it's unlikely to change anything in the election, whether or not the prez ever releases his bc (which I believe he will not do). He demonstrates his "otherness" -- his departure from Main St. American values -- in ways far more important than whatever it says on his birth certificate.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 03:04 PM
Fukino was appointed by Republican Governor Lingle. I doubt she is a Democrat.
Posted by: Gmax | April 10, 2011 at 03:04 PM
anduril:
No matter how many folks at JOM narcisolate you, you'll always have me!
"As I said, honesty for internet forum purposes has to do with addressing issues. Avoiding distractions is not lack of honesty."
Says he, dragging in the dead horse of yesterday's complaints about being portrayed in "uni-dimensional" fashion by hit 'n run -- when a truly dedicated scouring of the internet could have uncovered the multi-dimensioned anduril instead.
Oddly enough, distractions are multi-faceted too! So in the nature of a Sunday driving divertissement, I thought this classic anduril protest from that same late night conversation deserved it's very own dragging in:
I didn't want to be overly self referential--as if this forum were all about me.
Irony be thy name! You've outdone yourself, anduril, and I just want to let you know that some of us do still pay you attention, especially when it's all about you.
And a Linux post too, bless your little undistracted heart!
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 10, 2011 at 03:06 PM
Since I will get blamed for the subject switch anyways, here is a challenge I posted yesterday:
“Walter cautioned me to beware of obiter dicta and I will do my best to recognize it from here on out. Is it still dicta if it is gratuitously included in a non-binding resolution by a former professor with a personal interest in the advancement of a fraud?
To resolve McCain’s citizenship woes Sen. Claire McCaskill with cosponsors Hillary Clinton, Thomas Coburn, Patrick Leahy, Barack Obama, and Jim Webb created SR 511
.
This cast of conspicuous characters employed disgruntled Ted Olsen and Larry Tribe (master of The Invisible Constitution) to weed through an issue that most will never have the fortitude, let alone the standing, to resolve.
Hope sprang eternal and McCain was saved! What better time for a sales pitch to be included in the record:
"And Senator Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961--not long after its admission to the Union on August 21, 1959. We find it inconceivable that Senator Obama would have been ineligible for the Presidency had he been born two years earlier."
Where did that come from?
If you are addicted to the conspiracy that went on while Barry was young and dumb, it should be very hard to ignore the actions of the man who taught Obama the Constitution as well as the actions of a Presidential candidate who employs his law professor to add favorable wording to a bill he is sponsoring.”
This should arouse those conspiracies chasers out there. If it is dismissible, so is ever other theory about his unknown past.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 03:08 PM
Well, glasater, I wouldn't know about "good" attorneys. Ask Jane or DOT or clarice or Boatbuilder or Appalled or Jim Rhoads or NK or some of the other good attorneys who are JOMers whether they like oddsmaking. As for me, as someone who grew up in the Providence, RI area when Raymond Patriarca ran New England organzied crime, and who spent time in my high school years playing poker on Federal Hill, I am always thinking about the odds! :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 10, 2011 at 03:14 PM
I Blame Threadkiller!
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 03:19 PM
--“I'm persuaded that Fukino is cautious and lawyerly.”--
Just as I am persuaded that John Bingham is cautious and lawerly. He was trusted with prosecuting Lincoln’s assassins and he is considered the father of the 14th amendment.
How does Fukino’s statement carry so much weight around here and Bingham’s statement is treated like garbage?
I guess being director of the Hawaii State Department of Health has a much greater value, when it comes to my civics lessons here.
Posted by: Threadkiller Uebergehirn | April 10, 2011 at 03:23 PM
"...here is a challenge I posted yesterday..."
You posted a challenge yesterday. Did no one respond to your challenge?
What a good idea, to post it again on a newer thread.
And, if no one responds to your challenge this time either?
Just keep posting it thread by thread until someone does?
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2011 at 03:26 PM
TK, this looks like a Sunday afternoon multi-subject thread, so I doubt you'll be blamed for a Switching the Thread To Birtherism attempt. As for me, I went to college with clearly blue blood Americans who were (and may still be) far more leftist and loony than Obama. So, whatever Obama's background may be, I think being stooge of Gramsci doesn't require a mysterious past. A tony private school education and a big trust fund serve just fine!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 10, 2011 at 03:27 PM
Hot Air Headlines links to this little bit of "progessive" thinking, which shows that the last 2 1/2 years have taught progressives nothing:
Why Progressives Keep On Losing and the Right Keeps On Winning
Here's one proud progressives proposed response to the Republican 2012 budget proposal:
Here's a start: First increase Social Security retirement benefits by 15%, across the board, by lifting the payroll tax cap and imposing a financial transactions tax. Second, increase income taxes on a sliding scale that goes up to 60% for the highest earners in the country. (It's been as high as 90% during periods of our greatest prosperity.) Third, add $500 billion to our stimulus spending over the next two years, and keep adding it until unemployment is down to 4%. Fourth, immediately add a public option, "Medicare For All" plan that's voluntarily available to Americans of all age brackets.
Yeah, cause what Americans want right now, in the face of a fiscal meltdown is more taxes and more spending!
Posted by: Ranger | April 10, 2011 at 03:27 PM
Masters heating up, Tiger is at minus 8 or 3 behind leaders and has a 12 footer for eagle
Posted by: windansea | April 10, 2011 at 03:29 PM
Thanks for the response to my challenge, ccal.
Posted by: Threadkiller Uebergehirn | April 10, 2011 at 03:29 PM
I meant to remove the "Uebergehirn" on my own but Ccal has shamed it from me I hope you saw the humor in that Frau. :-)
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 03:34 PM
The west's fetishization of virginity comes from the same root. ...
It does however reveal for the benefit of those who iconise all things African how alien to us African cultures are.
Huh?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 10, 2011 at 03:35 PM
Golly, Hawaii has strange laws. I have a certified copy of my original birth certificate from Texas.
More from NBC's Michael Isikioff's interview with Fukino:
But Wisch, the spokesman for the attorney general's office, said state law does not in fact permit the release of "vital records," including an original "record of live birth" — even to the individual whose birth it records.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2011 at 03:36 PM
Tiger is now one behind. It's a great Masters!
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2011 at 03:37 PM
Kantian ethics, like libertarianism, lacks intellectual foundations and grossly oversimplifies human nature.
That's one of those statements that should be preserved, as in amber.
Among other things, the only word I could swear you understand is "and".
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 10, 2011 at 03:39 PM
Fukino's statement addresses only the question of Obama's birthplace. She does not purport to address any other issue (why should she?).
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 03:40 PM
DoT:
"I don't think any of it will change anything at all in the election."
Perhaps not in any identifiably significant way, but the issue is now attached to Trump in a very high profile, no holds barred, fashion. He is the ultimate, sui generis, outsider candidate; whom the general public doesn't associate with the Republican party at all. I rather doubt that Obama will be making any more sly allusions to a Republican lunatic fringe by bringing the issue up himself. And that's one less tool in the "extremist" kit.
Birthing aside, I am highly amused by the thought of a face off between The One and The Donald, who could teach everybody lessons in the all-about-me department.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 10, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Chaco on why the budget cuts are enough to stem the tide
Sorry, but I don't buy this for a moment. What Charlie leaves out in that article is that this "cut" does nothing to change the slope of the curve going forward. If there's a day of reckoning based on the current structure (medicare, SS, interest on the debt, etc.), all this does is put that off by a few months. Of course it's better than nothing, it's a start, and I'm not complaining about it, but let's not make more of it than what it is.
You can see an alternative chart in the LUN
Posted by: jimmyk | April 10, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied
Do you need a state law to authorize such a thing?
Which state law proscribes it?
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 03:42 PM
The more I read Dreams From My Father, the more I figure it shoulda been titled Grievances From My Father.
He grew up in places that were pretty accepting of mix race kids...he went to a high end school & 3 colleges. What exactly is his racial gripe? What was he not allowed to do that he wanted to do?
The memories & anecdotes in Dreams are too fitting for the political points he wants to make....& they are way too complicated for a boy his supposed age at the time to have. A recounting of what his mom thinks & what some ugly American workers think when they meet???? Really, how does he know this? 6 to 9 years old. The book is fiction. Clarice is right about Rigoberta Menchu...or how about James Frey?
Posted by: Janet | April 10, 2011 at 03:43 PM
jimmyk -- your photo appears to be set to private.
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 03:44 PM
Tiger could not duplicate a miracle shot off of pine straw on 9 like Phil the Thrill did last year on 13. That is going to be one tough up and down for Tiger. But lets give him credit - he is playing well and it is evident that he is very comfortable at Augusta. I think Schwartzel is a flash-in-the-pan for his chip in on 1 and his eagle on 3. But going under par on the first nine is important to take advantage of the eagle and birdie opportunities on the back nine. It will be interesting to see if McIlroy is etiher under or over par for the first 9.
I smell playoff.
p.s. HB Stephanie and Peter.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 03:47 PM
In the first of Chaco's two graphs, i don't understand how to interpet the two horizontal spending-level lines in conjunction with the revenue and spending curves.
Sorry, DoT, I probably should have redone the chart but I've lost the original and it'd be a pain in the ass. If you refer back to the original article, the thought-experiment was to show that even if you raise spending 25 percent as a one-time step, if you then limit rate of growth, you eventually break even.
It's kind of convenient to the original article that Obama has succeeded in providing that spending step.
not so much for the rest of us.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 10, 2011 at 03:47 PM
This just in - Tiger is tied for the lead as the kid from Hollywood (NI) just bogeyed again. But then Tiger has a 15 footer for par on 9.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 03:48 PM
Fukino'sBingham's statement addresses only the question of Obama'sbirthplacecitizenship.Maybe the Director of Hawaiian Waste and Refuse will issue a statement on what happened to the Constitution.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 03:49 PM
Stephanie didn't stop by to tell me who she wanted to win. In her absence I've made my selection. But I'm not telling so as not to ruin it for the rest of you.
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 03:50 PM
OK, I'll take a guess, (Another) Barbara, and hope noone remembers if the poll is taken and I am way off.
Obama-26%
GOP-28%
Dems-14%
Both-12%
Neither-15%
Don' Know-5%
Thanks for playing the game, TC. My guesses would parallel yours: there would be a large aggregate both/none/don'tknow response because the public -- even screening for registered voters -- does not follow the details of these sorts of issues. The only difference between my take and yours is that you gave the GOP the plurality, with Obama closely following. I'd turn that around and put Obama in first place, GOP second. And I think his lead will grow, the more bows he takes, no matter how unjustified, and the more he focuses his speeches on the federal budget.
Sometimes we forget how different from the general public are we who are politically obsessed and study the details. JOMer-types (like Daily Kos-er types) are a pretty durned small segment of the population. Most Americans ignore politics except at election time. Hell, last week I asked my physician, my dentist and his staff, and two gym-class pals what they thought about the Wisconsin events and that election. Not one knew what I was talking about! They all asked me to summarize the whole tale, beginning with the Dems fleeing and the unions' occupation of that state's capitol. Hadn't a clue about any part of the story and these are not stupid people. They all asked me the same thing though: "How come I haven't heard about any of this?"
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 03:51 PM
TC-
Perhaps the reason I'm thinking of bookies and percentages is that we'll be in Vegas this time next week:)
Posted by: glasater | April 10, 2011 at 03:52 PM
"Maybe the Director of Hawaiian Waste and Refuse will issue a statement on what happened to the Constitution."
Why on earth would she do that?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 03:56 PM
your photo appears to be set to private.
Oops--fixed and LUNed again. Thanks.
Posted by: jimmyk | April 10, 2011 at 03:58 PM
Who said the director was a she?
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 03:59 PM
Go Tiger!
----------------------------------------------
What I would like to see happen with the birth cert mess is for someone to set down and figure the total cost to America for a fifty year old American not producing a $10 state government form. We know we have military members whose lives have been totally ruined. We know we have had numerous trials over other activities by various Americans who have spend dollars trying to find out what is being hidden by the individual who can't/won't produce the document.
IMO, the biggest loss is that every American citizen now knows that they (as an individual) have no standing in the eyes of the US courts. Now if you're an illegal immigrant or a terrorist than your biggest problem will be selecting one of the many leftist US lawyers who will be volunteering
to represent you(and of course) represent you pro bono.
Posted by: pagar | April 10, 2011 at 04:02 PM
One man's trash is another man's treasure, TK.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 10, 2011 at 04:03 PM
What Charlie leaves out in that article is that this "cut" does nothing to change the slope of the curve going forward.
Yes, Jimmy, if this cut is the last one and the rate of change in spending once again is greater than the rate of change in revenue, then it once again will increase faster than revenue.
Duh.
You might try reading the article, it's been relatively well-received.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 10, 2011 at 04:04 PM
"It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he said. Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied, Wisch said. If Obama wanted to personally visit the state health department, he would be permitted to inspect his birth record, Wisch said.
What??? That's insane. I got copies of all my children's long-form birth certificates via writing (in one case, visiting) the Hawaii State Department of Health.
Is he just playing with words. . . saying that the original will not be handed over to even an authorized person to photocopy on his own? That I would believe, but it's a deceptive way of saying it, if that's his meaning.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | April 10, 2011 at 04:06 PM
"Who said the director was a she?"
No one. The word as used is a synecdoche.
CBS has stopped overdubbing recorded bird-chirping at Augusta. Right?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 04:07 PM
"...every American citizen now knows that they (as an individual) have no standing in the eyes of the US courts."
Nothing in the law concerning standing has changed because of any challenges to Obama.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 04:09 PM
Great pieces, Clarice. Happy Birthday peter and Stephanie. And thanks to Chaco for trying to make sense out of the budget mess.
Reelection ad of the day: about 20 seconds of the first bounder leaping through a puzzled crowd waiting to get in the Lincoln Memorial -- complete with terrified Secret Service Agents with WTF written all over their faces.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | April 10, 2011 at 04:12 PM
Most Americans ignore politics except at election time.
Sometimes I get embarrassed with how much attention I pay to politics. If I didn't think that the commiecrats were actively trying to undermine the country, I wouldn't spend nearly as much time on it.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 10, 2011 at 04:15 PM
well, Jim the official slogan is wtf after all. (and thanks).
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2011 at 04:21 PM
Abstract of all abstracts.
If God came down and said you had to render a decision based on three statements how would you rule?
1.) “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” –John Bingham
2.)”As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948” –Barack Obama
3.)
"I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.” -Chiyome Fukino
If there is no response, I can repost as on the next thread, assuming someone else starts the birther topic, that I get blamed for.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 04:22 PM
Hit and Run:
Your story of the roses brought a lump to my throat. Your family sounds really special and you seem to appreciate and love them with all your heart. Once again your post has made my day! I also love roses obviously.
Posted by: maryrose | April 10, 2011 at 04:23 PM
Rangers win again with a shut out of the birds. Two more HRs to boot to tie the Yanks for the major league lead.
Posted by: Gmax | April 10, 2011 at 04:25 PM
I can repost
ason...Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 04:27 PM
Nerves are showing for everyone at Augusta and now Luke Donald is mounting a charge. This 4th round is changing faster than John Kerry's mind.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 04:34 PM
I just caught up on the last thread. This line by Captain Hate is too funny -
"...do they have a breeding farm for these grifters?"
Hahaha! I tell ya, this administration IS a bunch of grifters.
Posted by: Janet | April 10, 2011 at 04:37 PM
Duh.
Believe it or not, I did read the article. It's full of magical insights like
Talk about "Duh." Throughout the presumption seems to be that this agreement signifies some break in the trend, as opposed to a one-time cut. In fact, the title of the thing is "Actually, the budget cuts are enough." Well, they're not.
Posted by: jimmyk | April 10, 2011 at 04:38 PM
(Another) Barbara: Thank you so much for that info. Fukino and Wisch are either playing stupid word games or perhaps the famous journalist, Michael Isikoff, investigative reporter, is when he quotes them. (Won't be the first time an "unbiased" journalist did that.)
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2011 at 04:39 PM
pagar:
"IMO, the biggest loss is that every American citizen now knows that they (as an individual) have no standing in the eyes of the US courts."
A fellow-traveler, so to speak! I think that's the real elephant in the room, and it's a big elephant. If you could find a judge who will even accept jurisdiction & agree as to timeliness, you have to establish that substantive, unique and individual harm has already occurred, which is a virtual impossibility in this particular case because the harm is universal, even when it wasn't also prospective harm as it was in the early complaints. Even if you could actually do all that, by the time you could get a final ruling from highest court, it would be too late for any possible remedy.
The fact that there is no way to test the constitutionality of a law before irrevocable unconstitutional damage has been done, seems like a structural flaw in our adversarial system, to me. I have no idea how it could be fixed without monumental alterations which would endanger the whole edifice, either.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 10, 2011 at 04:40 PM
Believe it or not, I did read the article
Okay, then you just didn't understand it. If you had you'd have noted the main point: that rate of change in spending has to be less than rate of change in revenues which (all things being equal) is roughly the same as rate of change of GDP.
Sorry, I was apparently cutting you more slack than you actually deserved.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 10, 2011 at 04:47 PM
I'm always willing to talk about where Obama was born. I'm sworn never to discuss whether or not he is a NBC.
JMH, the same could be said about whether and how the president can take the country into war. The Founders did not intend that every last question be susceptible to adjudication; they understood that an aroused electorate would always have a remedy at the ballot box, and in the more immediate term an aroused congress would always have the remedy of impeachment and removal.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 04:50 PM
Its a revelation, I suppose, to learn that there is not always an available remedy at law or even a ready means to test its meaning, but this issue (and the war powers) are not singular in that respect.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2011 at 04:57 PM
Did you notice the british connection in afpak ngo work.O s sponsoring of a global gdp tax like his socialist pal..He bought into the british thing and should want his knighthood.
Posted by: refun | April 10, 2011 at 04:57 PM
The Irish kid is coming apart at the seams. Back nine at Augusta on Sunday...
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 05:00 PM
I understand her to be saying that it was also seen by the unnamed health official whom she took with her.
She said she took another official with her. She also said that she inspected it. She did not say the other official did so. I think that's implied, but she didn't say so explicitly. So it seems to me that the statement intended as a clarification actually adds to the ambiguity, and leaves us to wonder whether she's merely inexact or (if we are inclined to suspicion) carefully lawyerly.
This is what I'm basing my remarks on, from earlier in the thread:
Posted by: PD | April 10, 2011 at 05:03 PM
Too bad this thing won't be coming in November 2012 instead of November this year. LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 05:04 PM
If there is no response, I can repost as on the next thread
Or you could conclude the lack of response indicates lack of interest.
Posted by: PD | April 10, 2011 at 05:07 PM
JMH, if a person suffered "harm" in a SCOTUS opinion from Kagen or Sotomayor, would they have a shot at having standing?
Would someone have standing if they suffered "harm" from any of the cabinet appointees?
Ken Salazar and his policies have destroyed the Central Valley. Does a farmer have standing to ask if Ken was legitimately appointed?
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 05:08 PM
Thanks for the response, PD.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 05:09 PM
TK,
No. There are books you can read that will describe the results when people have made similar arguments in the past. Give them a glance.
Posted by: Walter | April 10, 2011 at 05:12 PM
TK, since I "responded," does that mean no repost on the next thread? :-)
Posted by: PD | April 10, 2011 at 05:17 PM
DoT,
I happen to know the area where his tee shot on 10 ended up. Some day I'll tell you why:)
I think my prediction of a playoff is looking better every moment. Even Tiger's nerves are showing even though he is trying to act intimidating. Not the same Tiger but still one to be wary of.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 05:18 PM
PD, ;-) You saved the day!
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 10, 2011 at 05:19 PM
Seems to me it's a truism that if the rate of increase in spending is less than the rate of increase in revenues, a future equivalence is a certainty, as is a subsequent surplus.
But nothing that's happened to date establishes that the required rates are in place or will remain so.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2011 at 05:24 PM
right now I'd bet on Angel Cabrera, Tiger is running out of holes and the rest look sketchy
Angel needs to get up and down from the trap
Posted by: windansea | April 10, 2011 at 05:26 PM
Tiger's nerves are showing even though he is trying to act intimidating.
I thought he looked as tense as Eric Holder announcing KSM wouldn't be tried in NYC after all.
Posted by: PD | April 10, 2011 at 05:27 PM
Walter! I am always happy to see you -- but this time of year? My golly.
Sounds like really really good news to me.
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 05:27 PM
BTW -- I just finished my taxes today. Went in figuring on owing a tidy sum. Turns out -- still going to double and triple check -- I am due an even tidier sum in refund.
Yay me. Look out adult beverage fund for spring break!
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 05:31 PM
AB,
For the last 5 weeks I have started off the radio show with Wisconsin. Every week Dick groans, and then is completely shocked when he hears what I have to say. He gets his news from ABC, USA today and Newsweek.
Imagine
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2011 at 05:33 PM
Cabrera loses a stroke. Ogilvy has an eagle for a share.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet | April 10, 2011 at 05:34 PM
WOW the entire Master's field is tied at -10. That is pretty amazing.
(Actually it is just the first page, and 3 of them are from Australia.)
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2011 at 05:35 PM
I just ache for the Irish kid!!
Dot--are you saying the bird chirps aren't for real? Everything regarding Augusta is supposed to be authentic:)
Posted by: glasater | April 10, 2011 at 05:36 PM
DoT,
Don't forget to include interest on borrowed money in the spending unlike the way this regime ignores it as part of the debt. Incredible arithmaphobes are haunting the halls of OMB and this presidency. It is the number one boogie man in the "dream" of this father not to pass on to his son.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 10, 2011 at 05:37 PM
Personally, I don't care if people continue to believe Obama wasn't born in Hawaii. People still claim Bush was AWOL, that Kerry is a war hero, the Kennedys lived in Camelot...there will always be a certain percentage of the population that believes the US was behind 9/11, we never landed on the moon and there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll. It's pretty fun as long as it doesn't control your life...chasing conspiracies, that is.
Posted by: Sue | April 10, 2011 at 05:38 PM
windansea:
Tiger is running out of holes
Hey! This is a family site!!!!!
Posted by: hit and run | April 10, 2011 at 05:44 PM