Do they all smoke crystal meth? Or inhale paint?

You're right, Burr, if the birther gallery is accurate, brown deer is a male.

That small crew is truly the most obnoxious of the birther bunch over there. Horrible people.
'

Which Birfer is this one?

A composite.

when is a lie not a lie?:

A synthetic truth now?

See, it pays to invest in gold.

Silver, too.

coming in late on the same thread, at least one birfer is feeling good about himself:

I've been posting on Doc C's for a lot longer than I have been here, and I have to say I feel bad for him sometimes. His site, more than any other birther debunking site (certainly a lot more than here, perhaps because you have to register?) is the place that birthers go to spout off the same talking points every other birther has ever already said, give zero evidence when challenged, then repeat the same points, call everyone Obots, declare victory by saying not one person responded to any point they made (generally by completely ignoring every post that did so) then leave, usually back to Freep or ORYR. To declare that they soundly defeated those Obots. Meanwhile, another half-dozen actual judges would go on rejecting the birther arguments in the real world.

Also equally common on Doc C's is the birther concern troll who comes in with "questions" but they aren't good enough to keep up the facade. Within two or three responses they're pasting response from Apuzzo or WND or the like. My favorites are the ones that don't seem to understand that if you change your name but still are connecting from the same spot, your IP address gives you away. It's happened quite a few times where a "new questioner" has come posting and Doc says "Yeah, (soandso), not gonna work." and they get quite indignant.

I don't recall Diogenes posting but perhaps he used a different name. I feel like given what I read from him on Freep - particularly his public insistence that no court ruling against him - even a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling - will ever convince him he's wrong - is something I'd have remembered.

Indeed, DL is completely un-phased by any number of judicial decisions that go against him. Those judges are wrong, period. He'll then wave Roe vs Wade from a long stick to show the company those judges are keeping. His (literally) hours of browsing on-line articles have already inflated his own sense of lawyerly competence versus, say, a constitutional lawyer with merely decades of scholarly study under their belt. I don't know what's more tiresome - that or his Obama was adopted schtick.

translation: "my butt's so sore i haven't gone back there in a year!"

Nasty birther Fantasywriter posted more nonsense this morning.

Since she reads this site, I'll rebut her delusions point by point, but I am certain she will continue to repeat the same
falsehoods, as birthers do.


There is no BC on file in HI for Obama. Not per se.

A quick visit to the Hawaii Board of Health website proves otherwise, Fantasywriter. Click the link and read up. It is as clear as a bell.

Two people have seen what is on file, and both described it as largely “handwritten”.

Total baloney. Birthers like to hang their hats on this. Dr. Fukino said in a TV interview that it was "half-typed and half-handwritten." Now look at the long-form. There are handwritten signatures, dates, checkmarks and Stanley Ann wrote her name out. No, it is not an exact 50-50 split, but it is not extraordinary for someone to say that the birth certificate is "half-typed and half-handwritten."

The entire world has seen what is on file, not just two people.

Also, the same day Abercrombie saw this curious notation, he informed a good friend that there is no original LF BC on file in HI for Obama. The good friend went public all over the place and repeated, on air, what Abercrombie said. Obots make much of the fact that the friend later retracted his words, but they don't have a leg to stand on. It's one-hundred-percent more likely that the man—a reporter—got the blockbuster story right the first time and then was threatened than that he misunderstood the painfully simple statement, ‘There is no BC for Obama on file’.

Fantasywriter is talking about Hollywood reporter Mike Evans, who retracted his story the next day. He never spoke to the Governor. Evans files quick phoned-in reports for radio stations and deals in hyperbole. That's his job, and on this he went too far. Fantasywriter's explanation is the enduring response that Evans "was threatened." We hear this time and again from birthers, mostly advanced by butterdezillion. The only evidence they offer is a blog written by Douglas Haggman who also believes that UFOs and Bigfoot exist. Why the media has only been threatened on the eligibility issue is a nagging question that birthers cannot answer. And we continue to see birther topics discussed, albeit lightly, by Hannity on his radio program, Rush on his radio show, the Drudge Report, World Net Daily, and now even Breitbart. The implication seems to be that they are taking their lives in their hands! Preposterous.

Fantasywriter is one of these freepers who is always demanding proof of a poster's assertions. She presents a list of questions tagged with the obnoxious "thanks in advance," she conjures impractical half-baked hypotheticals to prove her crazy positions, and does so with a mean disposition. I am fascinated by her hubris.

Further to your point, which is otherwise excellent: in the binder with the "original" hospital filing, I understand there is a "lower portion" of the vital records filing with additional, demographic and statistical data -- whatever was requested by the applicable state and federal agency(ies) for the purposes of population, mortality, and disease monitoring. Today I believe it is the CDC that promulgates these standards to the various states. As medical information it is considered extremely private and was never intended to be seen in association with individual identifiers -- only as aggregate data.

The point is -- anyone who had glance at the "original" form would have seen this lower portion (which none of us has seen) as well as the upper portion (the LFBC), and there could well be more handwriting in that section. The LFBC is roughly 1/3 handwritten and 2/3 typed. It's not a stretch at all to suppose that with the lower portion the proportion is precisely 50:50.

Of course, even if this were proven (which it never will be), and the phrase "half-typed and half-handwritten" turned out to be not an approximation but precisely accurate, would we hear an "oh, never mind then, I guess they did see it"? Not in a trillion years. There'd be some anomaly, or it would be "suspicious" that they got the 50:50 so accurately.....

Good thing for Fantasywriter that she stays under the radar by writing under her screen name.

Obama's people may be able to pull off a 50-year-Manchurian-Candidate-conspiracy, but they still haven't figured out how to overcome that hurdle. So she's safe.

Please. They're not people. They're OPERATIVES. You lose all sense of dastardly threat if you don't use the right words.

Now that is very interesting, verbaloe, and makes total sense. Thanks. I must ask where you got this information though.
I'd like to read more.

This gives you an idea of what kind of reporting is done on the registrations of live births that is collected by the CDC but does not appear on LOLB's or LFBC's.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vital_cert ... isions.htm

Here's the current CDC recommended form:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth1 ... al-ACC.pdf

Appendix I shows what the CDC required in the 1956 revision:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/usvss.pdf

Note that what the CDC requires is a minimum. States can add on their own data collection fields.

Here's an Idaho one that asks for info of whether the PKU test was collected, syphilis serology performed, eye prophylaxis done and consent for immunization enrollment obtained - to me, strange things to be on a BC (I am a former NICU nurse).

http://www.proliberty.com/observer/images/idbirth.htm

I can't for the life of me remember where I got the notion, perhaps from something at Dr C's, but my understanding has always been that the additional confidential stuff in a 1961 Hawaian birth record was to be found on a second separate page as opposed to in 'lower' or 'upper' additional sections on the same page as the standard birth certificate fields.

On this thread, Mr. Shoop, a sane Freeper, shows up in an attempt to talk sense to the crazy. His posts are intelligent, polite and well-sourced. Of course, he's called every name in the book. This thread features one or two gems from Fantasywriter, who swears that she never called President Obama's birth certificate a "forgery," but it is a "monstrosity." And she has never alluded to a conspiracy nor has she accused Hawaii officials of criminality, they're just corrupt. Fascinating reading. Shoop shows up at Post 14.

Hummm. Bet he doesn't last long.

Could it be John Woodman?

Doubtful. He stated he is done with the whole thing and hasn't been over at Doc's since then, so I tend to take him at his word. I think he was just burned out over the whole affair.

Fun-illy I did he same in the search engine in Firefox. The fourth hit was this article from salon that says...

http://www.salon.com/2009/08/05/birther_faq/


Gosh, its strange that BING didn't bring that one up...