I am not part of the right wing noise machine. I am voting for Nader.

I cannot help but notice you ignore the date and the word LASER on the bottom of this "proof" which was posted to counter the charges.

A real journalist does not ignore inconvenient facts.

I guess investigating stuff is not your forte.

Neither is it mine.

But it does have to be said,

I have a copy of the real one. I had misplaced it and i requested another copy. They sent me a copy of the real one. Now I have two copies of the real one.

At the very least tit was misrepresentation to use that as proof since it was not a copy of an original and the issue is the existence of a real one. Providing a 2001 version is disingenuous.

It doesn't make any difference since he is the one who has been chosen - our creditors are fed up with the Bush administration and our rulers are giving them something better for their business, not ours.

This is just as untoward and fishy as anything McCain and Palin have been racked over the coals for. This is a deceit and it was done in order to counter a charge of deceit so either way, deceit is on the table and we can see that before you elect the man.

No need to be in denial.

Within the first year a lot of people are going to be choking on their votes.

Obama is the president. Get used to the deceit.

I am not at all comfortable with being the subject of your lurid fantasies!

Klyterus is aggressive, obnoxious and writes terrible poetry. Worse than that she is a defender of the editor. The thought of sitting across a dinner table would cause me to loose my appetite unless it was some of that pumpkin panang and masamen pork.

Look at the bottom left of the document.

It says clearly

"OHSM 1.1 *Rev. (11/01) LASER"

Obama's "Birth Certificate" was printed in November 2001 on a LASER printer.

You refuse to acknowledge this. The Snopes article did not mention this. Using this as evidence is disingenuous. Those who do have no cred. All you have to do is look at the document.

Is this some sort of LACUNA to you?

Can you not see that it raises a question as to why it was posted?

Nah, you cannot see it, or you have taken a blood oath to never mention it in some crypt of the local hoohah club, or most likely you just are asleep and adrift.

Just proving the point.

Too bad you cannot wake up.

They fail to notice the text on the lower left side of the document as well.

"LASER" doesn't fit in with their "facts."

Snopes and factcheck are bogus.

The provenance of teh document is clearly stated on the bottom left and you do not find it curious at all that the debunking websites are unable to notice or report this in their evidence and conclusion? You do not find it curious at all that Greenwald refuses to even acknowledge it?

Maybe you do not think it is curious at all, but I say that

I realize that you are engaging in a worthy effort to smear the Republican party as racist reading from the same playbook as Mr. Keillor, but I hate to break it to you, but most of those KKK members were Democrats, not Republicans.

Don't let the facts get in your way, do continue smearing by false association. You are pretty good at it.

It doesn't matter to me since I consider both of them to be liars and unworthy for the light of day, but just show us a copy of the original for that is evidence and while a modern reprint is a legal document and recognized by the state of Hawaii, it is not the same as an original document for the purpose of establishing his birth place.

Enjoy the tribulations that Joe Biden has promised since they are far more significant than chicanery concerning a birth certificate.

Would Colin Powell ever steer us wrong?

How stupid is this country anyway?

Provide the document, don't ask me for evidence, my birthplace is not in question.

It should be simple.

You act as if you know that the document does not exist.

I guess you know more about it than I do.

"Sharks with LASER PRINTERS on their HEADS!"

Remember how everybody believed those Bush National Guard documents that Dan Rather brought up were fake? Based on what evidence? None, because I did the research and found out that typewriters did type just like that during the time frame - the IBM Selectric 2.

People don't believe the truth, they believe what they are told is the truth.

A birth certificate from 1961 would be the truth. You think we will never see it?

Not likely.

In 1961 the information would have been typed in with a typewriter. not typeset or laser printed. The document is from 2001 and is a computer generated document.

quick, someone higher a forger to make a 1961 style document with a typewriter from the period and purchased by one of the local hospitals. Be sure to include birth weight, name of attending physician. I'd change the time of birth to early morning. Then everyone will be happy.

That's Presidential!