Is the general public retarded or am I? 
So I guess I'm a bit confused on how people legitimately think that Obama was born in Kenya/Indonesia/whatever other random country they come up with (despite Hawaii health director saying she saw his US birth certificate)..
One of the requirements to become president is that you have to be a natural born citizen or be born to two U.S. citizens if you are born abroad. Am I dumb for thinking that this was a commonly known fact or is it actually a commonly known fact and in reality no body actually believes that Obama was born in Kenya? Also, dont you think that the appropriate agency would have checked up on this before he was sworn in?
Also, did you happen to see the Colbert Report on Monday?
"Obama's views on the Mau Mau revolution will be completely different than the normal American's view of the Mau Mau revolution, which is generally 'What is the Mau Mau Revolution?' "
You're retarded. OBVIOUSLY he
You're retarded. OBVIOUSLY he was born in China.
Not that it matters anymore.
"So who lost the hundy?" -Tom Montag
"WSO is like the 300 for anti spamage. None shall pass." -happypantsmcgee
there is no birth certificate
there is no birth certificate op , it is your job to prove he is born in the usa
Yea what was the despite his
Yea what was the despite his US birth certificate thing. (I don't believe he was born else where but last I knew, he hadn't shown the certificate yet either.)
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
For $20 bucks I know a guy
For $20 bucks I know a guy down on Lincoln and west that can get you an authentic birth certificate from any country. Premium prices for USA and Switzerland though
Mr. Cheese wrote: For $20
For $20 bucks I know a guy down on Lincoln and west that can get you an authentic birth certificate from any country. Premium prices for USA and Switzerland though
I'd think the leader of the free world could get one fairly easily as I am sure the CIA can make all kinds of crazy documents. ;)
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
You're saying BECAUSE he's
You're saying BECAUSE he's president he must have been born in the US. You have it backwards. People want to see a birth certificate because he needs to be a citizen to legally be president.
gop85 wrote: You're saying
You're saying BECAUSE he's president he must have been born in the US. You have it backwards. People want to see a birth certificate because he needs to be a citizen to legally be president.
lol as opposed to illegally being the president of the United States?
I personally think he was
I personally think he was born here. I don't see why it's so hard for him to show is original long form BC?
http://www.uspoliticsguide.co
http://www.uspoliticsguide.com/images/barack-obama-birth-certificate.jpg
I'll tell you who: sore losers who look fucking retarded when they think anyone is on board with them. Had the country been run properly from 2000 to 2008, this clown never would have been taken seriously. Jumping ship with the same set of values to become a teabagger doesn't make it better either.
This is how it is. Get over it.
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/small/0904/chill-out...
ModusOperandi wrote: gop85
You're saying BECAUSE he's president he must have been born in the US. You have it backwards. People want to see a birth certificate because he needs to be a citizen to legally be president.
lol as opposed to illegally being the president of the United States?
yes
Sorry guys, we're claiming
Sorry guys,
we're claiming him this time!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EADUQWKoVek
all signs point to yes
all signs point to yes
Where I unload on Twits and take verbal S***s
Teabagger? What are you 10?
Teabagger? What are you 10?
I do see the validity in the birthers arguments. Why has Obama spent MILLIONS of dollars to keep from showing his birth certificate?
I am not a birther. I believe he was born here, but do see the validity in the argument.
UFO, what do you align yourself with politically?
I don't believe he was born
I don't believe he was born elsewhere (well really, I choose not to even engage in the argument, since it's irrelevant - he's already president). However, gop85 is right on and your argument is kind of ridiculous. Are you really saying that because he is president, therefore he must have been born in the United States? As though it is totally, physically impossible for a person to be elected if they are not a natural born citizen? That's like me saying that because a person is rich, they must have won the lottery. Obviously that is ridiculous, since it is logically possible to become rich without winning the lottery.
The whole point of the "birther" argument is that they claim in reality he was not born in the United States, and thus was elected illegally, serves in violation of the Constitution, and should be removed from office.
You need a course in basic logic.
- Capt K -
"Prestige is like a powerful magnet that warps even your beliefs about what you enjoy. If you want to make ambitious people waste their time on errands, bait the hook with prestige." - Paul Graham
This argument is as worthless
This argument is as worthless as me posting this comment. Truly, who cares if he does or not
The entire argument is based
The entire argument is based off the fact that he has yet to prove he was born here. IMO he is the one feeding the movement by not just publishing his birth certificate and spending millions on lawyers to defend him from having to show it (making people believe he doesnt have it)
CaptK wrote: I don't believe
I don't believe he was born elsewhere (well really, I choose not to even engage in the argument, since it's irrelevant - he's already president). However, gop85 is right on and your argument is kind of ridiculous. Are you really saying that because he is president, therefore he must have been born in the United States? As though it is totally, physically impossible for a person to be elected if they are not a natural born citizen? That's like me saying that because a person is rich, they must have won the lottery. Obviously that is ridiculous, since it is logically possible to become rich without winning the lottery.
The whole point of the "birther" argument is that they claim in reality he was not born in the United States, and thus was elected illegally, serves in violation of the Constitution, and should be removed from office.
You need a course in basic logic.
I agree with your arguments, but I also find it ridiculous that for arguably the most powerful man in the world, they didn't do a background check to make sure he fit all of the criteria to become president...
I'm with HPM on this one.
I'm with HPM on this one.
"So who lost the hundy?" -Tom Montag
"WSO is like the 300 for anti spamage. None shall pass." -happypantsmcgee
ModusOperandi wrote: CaptK
I don't believe he was born elsewhere (well really, I choose not to even engage in the argument, since it's irrelevant - he's already president). However, gop85 is right on and your argument is kind of ridiculous. Are you really saying that because he is president, therefore he must have been born in the United States? As though it is totally, physically impossible for a person to be elected if they are not a natural born citizen? That's like me saying that because a person is rich, they must have won the lottery. Obviously that is ridiculous, since it is logically possible to become rich without winning the lottery.
The whole point of the "birther" argument is that they claim in reality he was not born in the United States, and thus was elected illegally, serves in violation of the Constitution, and should be removed from office.
You need a course in basic logic.
I agree with your arguments, but I also find it to be a reasonable assumption that for arguably the most powerful man in the world, they did do a background check to make sure he fit all of the criteria to become president...
PTS wrote: The entire
The entire argument is based off the fact that he has yet to prove he was born here. IMO he is the one feeding the movement by not just publishing his birth certificate and spending millions on lawyers to defend him from having to show it (making people believe he doesnt have it)
Why are people not arguing that he isn't 35 yet? It could be a Benjamin Button type deal, you never know
^^That's fucking weak bro.
^^That's fucking weak bro.
ModusOperandi wrote: gop85
You're saying BECAUSE he's president he must have been born in the US. You have it backwards. People want to see a birth certificate because he needs to be a citizen to legally be president.
lol as opposed to illegally being the president of the United States?
yes. why is this funny? if he does not meet requirement he cannot legally be president. he is president. so either 1) he meets requirement and is legally president, or 2) he does not meet requirement and is illegally the president.
natural born requirement is commonly known. a few people think obama does not comply, thus the issue. i don't see why you are confused (therefore, to answer your OP title, I'm leaning towards the latter).
OP, you are an idiot. The
OP, you are an idiot.
The argument for the birther movement is pretty simple.
President wont show his birth certificate. President spends millions to keep from showing it. Governor of Hawaii was pretty gunhoe about making it his duty to dig up the President's birth certificate, but after a few months he announced that he would not be showing the President's birth certificate.
Why the hell wont the President just show his birth certificate? That is what I am really lost about. If I had money, I would bet he is a citizen. Just do not undertand why the hell he wont show it. Maybe its to fuel the fire and help make a better case for the tea party extremism.
Need to Land a Job? Click Here.
txjustin wrote: UFO, what do
UFO, what do you align yourself with politically?
I don't. Party politics is the problem.
Do you think the CIA didn't check up on this guy before he ran? C'mon dude, the whole point of something grassroots like the tea party is that people are supposed to be thinking for themselves, not signing up for some mindless fanaticism.....
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/small/0904/chill-out...
1. Obama has shown his birth
1. Obama has shown his birth certificate
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
You'll see not only that the certificate is real, but there is also a news clipping archive showing his birth.
2. Has ANY president other than Obama been pressured by the public to show his certificate? Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr., Reagan, etc.? McCain would never have to have shown his. The fact that the one man who is from a different culture steps into office everyone asks for his certificate. The reason he doesn't need to show his long form is because (1) He has already shown his short form and (2) it is a matter of principle - why should he be forced to do something no president has ever done before in order to please an ignorant public?
Finally, the tea party public will believe whatever they wish to believe despite reality. If Obama showed a long birth, they'd say that's a forgery and ask for other records, then say those records are forgeries. Confirmation bias people, psychology 101. ignore these bastards and they'll shut up
Now, am I a liberal? I wouldn't say so, I'm more libertarian like most people here. But the ad hominem attacks on Obama are ridiculous and go a far way towards discrediting the right these days
bankbank
You're saying BECAUSE he's president he must have been born in the US. You have it backwards. People want to see a birth certificate because he needs to be a citizen to legally be president.
lol as opposed to illegally being the president of the United States?
yes. why is this funny? if he does not meet requirement he cannot legally be president. he is president. so either 1) he meets requirement and is legally president, or 2) he does not meet requirement and is illegally the president.
natural born requirement is commonly known. a few people think obama does not comply, thus the issue. i don't see why you are confused (therefore, to answer your OP title, I'm leaning towards the latter).
like i said earlier... i think its a reasonable assumption that for arguably the most powerful person in the world, a thorough background check was done making sure he met all of the criteria to become president. And the health director of Hawaii claims to have seen the birth certificate of Obama and asserts that he is a natural born citizen- I happen to think this is legitimate enough to quiet the haters.
Nobama88 wrote: OP, you are
OP, you are an idiot.
The argument for the birther movement is pretty simple.
President wont show his birth certificate. President spends millions to keep from showing it. Governor of Hawaii was pretty gunhoe about making it his duty to dig up the President's birth certificate, but after a few months he announced that he would not be showing the President's birth certificate.
Why the hell wont the President just show his birth certificate? That is what I am really lost about. If I had money, I would bet he is a citizen. Just do not undertand why the hell he wont show it. Maybe its to fuel the fire and help make a better case for the tea party extremism.
Can you show me a reputable source that shows he has spent millions to keep this issue hidden? I've looked but couldn't find one.
ModusOperandi
OP, you are an idiot.
The argument for the birther movement is pretty simple.
President wont show his birth certificate. President spends millions to keep from showing it. Governor of Hawaii was pretty gunhoe about making it his duty to dig up the President's birth certificate, but after a few months he announced that he would not be showing the President's birth certificate.
Why the hell wont the President just show his birth certificate? That is what I am really lost about. If I had money, I would bet he is a citizen. Just do not undertand why the hell he wont show it. Maybe its to fuel the fire and help make a better case for the tea party extremism.
Can you show me a reputable source that shows he has spent millions to keep this issue hidden? I've looked but couldn't find one.
GlEn BeCk is apparently very reputable. Him and Steven Colbert. There's also Akbar the soon-to-be-dead terrorist who does a weekly on Al Jazeera, he's good. And that guy on monster quest on the History channel.
sheesh
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/small/0904/chill-out...
PTS wrote: The entire
The entire argument is based off the fact that he has yet to prove he was born here. IMO he is the one feeding the movement by not just publishing his birth certificate and spending millions on lawyers to defend him from having to show it (making people believe he doesnt have it)
I'm not a 'birther' myself, and in all honesty, I'm pretty confident he was born here. The only thing that baffles me, as others have said, is that he refuses to show the long-form certificate. Why? That will only continue to fuel the flame of speculation, rumor, and hatred. If you have it, cough it up to quiet people down. I fully understand the right to privacy and all, but at some point you need to just be open for clarity's sake.
A lot of people do certain things to add days to their life. I do things to add life to my days.
I tend to find the arguement
I tend to find the arguement insane but what I find more insane is that he just wont show it. Who does he think he is spending millions of tax payer dollars to get out of something that is as simple as showing your BC? This equates to logic that any one who opposes obama is a racist just because he is black.
Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays
txjustin wrote: I personally
I personally think he was born here. I don't see why it's so hard for him to show is original long form BC?
Because I hope we don't have that giant of a beef curtain flapping vagina for a president that he would start showing all of his personal business to have some jimbob in buttfucksville go to bed a happier man.
I'm sure he had to present his BC before registering for the swearing in and whatnot.
More is good, all is better
GOD DAMMIT. WHO (other than
GOD DAMMIT. WHO (other than comedians) SAID HE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO HIRE LAWYERS?!
And why does he have to address every ridiculous claim (e.g. he is a terrorist, he is a Muslim, he hired people to blow the BP rig, etc)? Once he addresses this claim, another crazy one will come up.
UFOinsider wrote: txjustin
UFO, what do you align yourself with politically?
I don't. Party politics is the problem.
Do you think the CIA didn't check up on this guy before he ran? C'mon dude, the whole point of something grassroots like the tea party is that people are supposed to be thinking for themselves, not signing up for some mindless fanaticism.....
I agree with you. Again, I'm not a birther. I just said I see the validity in their argument.
^ and I see the point of it:
^ and I see the point of it: to use a bullshit issue to tie up the public debate so that nothing gets done.
he hired people to blow the BP rig
REALLY!?!!?!!? Did he use millions of dollars of taxpayer money? This must be from a credible source.....
See how that works? Now, put this on the air, and you've got buzz. Simple as one, two, sue me
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/small/0904/chill-out...
Can you imagine if Obama was
Can you imagine if Obama was found to not be a natural born citizen? I'd rather have that idiot than the alternative we would have...
UFOinsider wrote: GlEn BeCk
GlEn BeCk is apparently very reputable. Him and Steven Colbert. There's also Akbar the soon-to-be-dead terrorist who does a weekly on Al Jazeera, he's good. And that guy on monster quest on the History channel.
sheesh
What the fuck is wrong with people like you? You say you're a "libertarian" but you've taken a page right out of "Leftist Talking Points 101." In the middle of what was a very civil nonpartisan debate on the facts surrounding the mystery of a very important individual's place of birth, you decide to go off on this wild immature tangent where you use this nonsense to attack those who might actually have some legitimate questions about the issue.
It's funny too, instead of a tad bit of creativity, you people always resort to some kind of ad-hominem attack that references one of the following individuals or phenomena: Fox News, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Anne Coulter or "Teabagger." It never ever strays from one of those five things, no matter how unrelated to the issue they may or may not be. It's as if you've somehow, in your own mind, delegitimized the opposiing viewpoint by labelling them any one of those "horrible" five words. Way to hid behind a veil of namecalling instead of even slightly addressing anything that's been said or approach anything resembling a retort to certain valid points that have been raised.
Really fucking sad, grow up already. Notice nobody who held an opposing view even slightly veered off topic or stated anything that even remotely went near the level of maturity you've shown here.
By the way, for the record I'm an "agnostic" on the issue, as I really have no idea what to think because it's been handled in such an offensive "fuck you" manner by the media and the man himself. Really makes me wonder, though.
Argonaut wrote: I'm sure he
I'm sure he had to present his BC before registering for the swearing in and whatnot.
This I disagree with. At that moment, I highly doubt he had to answer to anybody. It's not like you have to register with some formal agency or anything. At the moment he becomes "President-elect" he is already "the man" and nobody really dares question him.
Regarding the person above who said that the CIA could check this stuff out. Sure they could, but again, they're under the president. If Bush never pursued the issue then it never got that far. What are they going to do, go on off their own and tell their own boss Obama that he's in big trouble with them?
Just to clear up something
Just to clear up something the OPs wrong about: no one born abroad can be President, even if both their parents are American citizens and they are therefore automatically an American citizen. The only reason McCain got a pass on the Panama thing was that the Canal Zone was a U.S. territory when he was born there.
Incidentally, I think it's a pretty stupid rule and the U.S. shouldn't be doing anything more than they already are to narrow the talent pool for that particular office. When George W. Bush is the best you can do for eight fucking years, it's time to cast a wider net.
And I'd probably vote for Arnold.
Edmundo Braverman wrote: Just
Just to clear up something the OPs wrong about: no one born abroad can be President, even if both their parents are American citizens and they are therefore automatically an American citizen. The only reason McCain got a pass on the Panama thing was that the Canal Zone was a U.S. territory when he was born there.
Incidentally, I think it's a pretty stupid rule and the U.S. shouldn't be doing anything more than they already are to narrow the talent pool for that particular office. When George W. Bush is the best you can do for eight fucking years, it's time to cast a wider net.
And I'd probably vote for Arnold.
You sure? I'm pretty sure if you have two Americans that went on vacation to Canada (one of whom is pregnant) and she had a baby while on vacation for whatever reason, the kid would still be eligible. I could be wrong though.
ModusOperandi wrote: And why
And why does he have to address every ridiculous claim (e.g. he is a terrorist, he is a Muslim, he hired people to blow the BP rig, etc)? Once he addresses this claim, another crazy one will come up.
This is also preposterous, as is the person above who said "not every president has to show their birth certificate." First of all, there are no other presidents who would not have met the requirements to be president as they were all born to two American citizens and grew up in American territory. It was never potentially an issue for other presidents.
Second, there is a big difference between attacks like "he's a socialist," or "he's a terrorist" (which they were saying about Bush as well, btw), and the elusive facts surrounding the mystery regarding his place of birth which would technically disqualify him from legally serving as POTUS if proven not to meet certain standards as stated by law.
Seems to me the OP is the
Seems to me the OP is the retard.
txjustin wrote: Seems to me
Seems to me the OP is the retard.
That's fine that you think I'm a retard for thinking the birther argument is kind of absurd. But I really don't see much validity in their claims is all I'm saying
1.) Obama hasn't spent
1.) Obama hasn't spent millions stopping the release of his birth certificate
2.) Do you really think Hillary would not have known if he wasn't a citizen? She was willing to do just about anything to stop him from winning the nomination
3.) People (idiots) believe he's a foreigner / secret muslim / sleeper cell terrorist because they want simple explanations and an easy villain to point to as the source of their problems. Also, because of all of the dog whistle type language used by the far right. Whenever someone like Boehner or whoever else is asked if Obama is a Christian, the answer is never "yes he is," it's always "I take him at his word." Shit like that.
The best part, though, is when you realize how frenzied people that HATE Obama are. They simultaneously complain that he went to an anti-American Church, is a secret muslim (already contradictory), is foreign born, wants to destroy our country and have the terrorists win (despite fighting two wars overseas, conducting bombing runs in Yemen and Pakistan, and still using Gitmo.) These people need to get put on a boat and have it blown up.
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
I voted for Ron Paul and am
I voted for Ron Paul and am no fan of the Dems, but when I see the wild-eyed mobs arrayed against Obama I see the dead-ender 25% that gave W his positive approval ratings through the deepest troughs of his presidency.
ModusOperandi wrote: You
You sure? I'm pretty sure if you have two Americans that went on vacation to Canada (one of whom is pregnant) and she had a baby while on vacation for whatever reason, the kid would still be eligible. I could be wrong though.
Yeah, I'm sure. And it's funny this came up because it was the storyline on 30 Rock a few weeks ago. Jack and his pregnant girlfriend (both US citizens, natch) were in Canada when she went into labor and the whole show was about their frantic attempts to get back to the US before the baby was born.
rebelcross
And why does he have to address every ridiculous claim (e.g. he is a terrorist, he is a Muslim, he hired people to blow the BP rig, etc)? Once he addresses this claim, another crazy one will come up.
This is also preposterous, as is the person above who said "not every president has to show their birth certificate." First of all, there are no other presidents who would not have met the requirements to be president as they were all born to two American citizens and grew up in American territory. It was never potentially an issue for other presidents.
Second, there is a big difference between attacks like "he's a socialist," or "he's a terrorist" (which they were saying about Bush as well, btw), and the elusive facts surrounding the mystery regarding his place of birth which would technically disqualify him from legally serving as POTUS if proven not to meet certain standards as stated by law.
Obama was born in Hawaii and lived there until he was 6. He then went to jakarta, but moved back when he was 10. He has lived in the US for more than 14 years since he moved back. How are the facts regarding where he was born elusive? The Health Director of Hawaii (politically affiliated with GOP, but not politically active. not that this is all that relevant, but just sayin) personally confirmed looking at Obama's BC.
TheKing wrote: 1.) Obama
1.) Obama hasn't spent millions stopping the release of his birth certificate
2.) Do you really think Hillary would not have known if he wasn't a citizen? She was willing to do just about anything to stop him from winning the nomination
3.) People (idiots) believe he's a foreigner / secret muslim / sleeper cell terrorist because they want simple explanations and an easy villain to point to as the source of their problems. Also, because of all of the dog whistle type language used by the far right. Whenever someone like Boehner or whoever else is asked if Obama is a Christian, the answer is never "yes he is," it's always "I take him at his word." Shit like that.
The best part, though, is when you realize how frenzied people that HATE Obama are. They simultaneously complain that he went to an anti-American Church, is a secret muslim (already contradictory), is foreign born, wants to destroy our country and have the terrorists win (despite fighting two wars overseas, conducting bombing runs in Yemen and Pakistan, and still using Gitmo.) These people need to get put on a boat and have it blown up.
There will always be rhetoric about every president. President Bush received some of the sickest and, I think you would agree, most unjustified personal attacks of any political leader in recent history. Obama is now getting a taste of that as well. I think we, sadly, expect that during this age of electronic media.
What I don't understand is how you are able to confuse ad-hominem character attacks by vicious zealots (which both sides are equally guilty of), and certain questionable facts about the man which are not, in and of themselves, character attacks but could lead people to believe that he is of bad character.
Example: "Obama is a terrorist" - clearly a character attack and fringe statement by those that have a deep-seeded hatred for him. Compare with: "Obama is associated with an anti-American church" - this is not a character attack, but, is instead, a truth concerning the nature of Reverend Wright's church of which Obama was associated with. However, the Left likes to file this kind of statement away under "crazy zealot hatred" because it is an inconvenient truth that may say something about his character. The issue regarding his place of birth is similarly a legitimate concern concerning the very questionable and, on his part, secretive nature of his background and citizenship. This has nothing to do with character assassination or "hatred" and is very much a question for those who wish to respect the integrity of the laws of the United States regarding eligibility to serve in certain political offices. Obviously, those who hate Obama and resort to attacks would be quicker to point this inconvenient fact out than others (as they will use every tool at their disposal to de-legitimize him,) however that, in and of itself, does not disqualify this from being a legitimate issue that should concern you as much as it concerns me and as much as it concerns those who hate him.
ModusOperandi
And why does he have to address every ridiculous claim (e.g. he is a terrorist, he is a Muslim, he hired people to blow the BP rig, etc)? Once he addresses this claim, another crazy one will come up.
This is also preposterous, as is the person above who said "not every president has to show their birth certificate." First of all, there are no other presidents who would not have met the requirements to be president as they were all born to two American citizens and grew up in American territory. It was never potentially an issue for other presidents.
Second, there is a big difference between attacks like "he's a socialist," or "he's a terrorist" (which they were saying about Bush as well, btw), and the elusive facts surrounding the mystery regarding his place of birth which would technically disqualify him from legally serving as POTUS if proven not to meet certain standards as stated by law.
Obama was born in Hawaii and lived there until he was 6. He then went to jakarta, but moved back when he was 10. He has lived in the US for more than 14 years since he moved back. How are the facts regarding where he was born elusive? The Health Director of Hawaii (politically affiliated with GOP, but not politically active. not that this is all that relevant, but just sayin) personally confirmed looking at Obama's BC.
There is a problem regarding his citizenship in Indonesia which I'm sure you have heard before (the dual citizenship problem.) No other president had a like problem and no other president spent such a large portion of their childhood and adolescent life in a foreign nation like Indonesia until 14 years prior to their presidency. This would be a lot easier if Obama, who has the power to clarify this issue, made these things public instead of saying "fuck you" to the public's concerns and, instead, having us rely on the word of some obscure political figure in Hawaii that nobody knows anything about or can vouch for. So yes, I feel "elusive" is a good word here.
ModusOperandi
Seems to me the OP is the retard.
That's fine that you think I'm a retard for thinking the birther argument is kind of absurd. But I really don't see much validity in their claims is all I'm saying
It was a joke regarding the way you worded this thread. Don't get ruffled.
I politely disagree with you
I politely disagree with you that 4 years is a large portion of ones childhood and adolescent life. Clearly this is an ad hominem argument on my end, but I don't remember shit nor did I begin having any legitimate political views between the ages of 6 and 10 and I'm pretty sure I can say with reasonable confidence that most people are in the same boat as me. That's just my opinion and is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
I agree that the issue would go away if Obama released his birth certificate but why would he waste his time on something so stupid just to appease a couple of ignorant people who will say/do anything to get him out of office? Like you said, they'll just start saying other dumb shit.
While no body knows the health director of Hawaii, she does have the authority to make this claim as a reputable source. Kind of a shitty analogy but, It would be similar to a medical examiner saying that someone had died from drowning. No body knows who the medical examiner but she has the authority and credentials to declare how somebody died. Clearly this is a shitty analogy because a medical examiner has the specialized knowledge of the subject, while the Hawaaiian lady just looked a piece of paper.