Skip to content

Tuesday April 12th 2011 Appointments for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: Vital Voices

April 12, 2011

Wow, get a load of this jam-packed schedule and notice the Vital Voices Global Leadership Awards at the Kennedy Center:

SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

9:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Qatari Amir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, at the Four Seasons Hotel in Washington, DC.

12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton co-chairs the closing session of the U.S.-China Consultation on People-to-People Exchange (CPE) with Chinese State Councilor Liu Yandong, at the Department of State.

12:40 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Chinese State Councilor Liu Yandong, at the Department of State.

2:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh, at the Department of State.

5:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with President Obama at the White House.

7:45 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at the 10th Annual Vital Voices Global Leadership Awards, at the Kennedy Center.

8:35 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at a gala dinner celebrating the U.S.-Islamic World Forum hosted by the Brookings Institution and the State of Qatar

34 Comments leave one →
  1. Thain permalink
    April 12, 2011 6:56 am

    Wow. Sort of makes my day seem not so busy.

  2. PCFS permalink
    April 12, 2011 7:32 am

    God Bless her. She works so hard. God Speed Madame Secretary.

  3. HillaryFan permalink
    April 12, 2011 9:23 am

    THanks for the heads up about her events this evening and also about her upcoming travel.

    I agree with Thain- I sort of feel lazy after looking at her schedule!

    The meeting she has with that Chinese official should be interesting after they accused us of being hypocrites on human rights- btw stacy I saw your comment over on Taylor Marsh about that- well put!

  4. Steve permalink
    April 12, 2011 10:13 am

    She has a lot on her plate today. I’m sure we’ll see some vids later!

  5. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    April 12, 2011 12:07 pm

    Head’s up – frivilous comment in-coming:

    I loooovvvvvvve that green suit and the expression on her face even more.

  6. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    April 12, 2011 12:13 pm

    OT, but I’d love to get your take, stacy and others, on the “Where’s the birth certificate?” movement recently resuscitated by Donald Trump (geez, at least Obama is from this PLANET). Maybe you don’t want to dignify it with a post, but I actually looked into this issue pretty carefully back in ’08, so I could sleep at night supporting our newly-elected President, and the whole thing isn’t quite as ludicrous as some make it sound. I could expound but if this is my pet obsession, I won’t bore you!

    • stacyx permalink*
      April 12, 2011 12:55 pm

      @Carolyn- I’m only speaking for myself so others can feel free to chime in, but I lost patience with the whole “where’s the birth certificate?” chorus a long, long, long, long time ago.

      Some people continue to think it’s a grand conspiracy and it doesn’t matter what kind of proof or explanation anyone gives, they will find a reason to say each piece of proof is part of said conspiracy. One of the reasons the debate bothered me was it seemed to be part of the whole “Obama is a closet-Muslim, socialist, terrorist-supporting, madrassa-attending Kenyan(or Indonesian or Martian or whatever)….” I just can’t get into that. I am not an Obama fan and never was but I wasn’t comfortable with the whole “he’s not really one of us” theme that we continue to hear and I always felt that part of this birther movement was an extension of that.

      I know several people who spent many days and nights researching this issue during the 2008 election and I would discuss it with them now and again but they lost patience with me and I with them.

      In demonstrating place of birth, the short form (that’s all I have for a birth certificate- I have no long form and couldn’t get one if I tried) is all that the State Dept. requires to prove citizenship. So, it’s good enough for me.

      People certainly have a right to continue to pursue the issue- I just think it’s a distraction.

      I know everyone has seen these but that’s ok:

      http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

      http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/donald-youre-fired/

      As I said, just because I’m not a fan of the birther arguments doesn’t mean you can’t wax angelic about it here. If you believe he’s not legally qualified to be POTUS, that’s ok with me. We’ll just agree to disagree. To each his/her own.

      • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
        April 12, 2011 7:40 pm

        Yeah, understood. Then I think I’ll spare you (and Thain) my further reflections on the subject!

        • stacyx permalink*
          April 12, 2011 8:23 pm

          No, just b/c I’m not sweet on the birther arguments doesn’t mean you or anyone else can’t expound on your theory. I certainly won’t criticize you or anyone else. I try to keep an open mind, including on this but thus far I haven’t heard a very compelling argument that makes me believe he’s not a legal citizen.

          • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
            April 12, 2011 10:36 pm

            OK, the short form (sic) of how I made peace with supporting Obama’s eligibility for POTUS:

            The founding fathers specified that only natural born citizens were eligible to hold the office of POTUS. They didn’t define what that meant, but it has since come to mean either you were born on US soil jus soli) or that you were born to US citizens (jus sanguinis). Taking jus sanguinis first, Obama was born to a US citizen, right? So why would it matter if he was born abroad? According to statute, even if that child was born in Kenya of a Kenyan father, he would still be considered a natural born citizen if his mother was herself a US citizen at the time of his birth (Ann Dunham was) – so far so good, but here’s the kicker – AND if she also met the requirements for residency specified by statute at the time of her child’s birth. In 1961, the statute specified that the parent who was a US citizen must have resided in the US for a period of at least ten years, at least five of which occurred after the parent attained the age of 14.  Obama’s mother gave birth at age 17, ergo she did not meet the residency requirement (she had only resided in the US for a period of THREE, not five years, after the age of 14), ergo if Obama was born in Kenya (or Canada as some have suggested), he is not a natural born citizen — he is a naturalized citizen, but not natural born, and is therefore
            not eligible to hold the office of POTUS. The REAL kicker is that the residency statute was changed in 1986 and now stipulates that the parent who is a US citizen must have resided in the US for a period of only FIVE years, with at least TWO of those years after the age of 14. If Obama had been born after 1986, we wouldn’t be having this debate. But alas, the revised law does not apply retroactively.

            But none of this matters if he was born in Honolulu as he, his family, and several officials at Hawaii’s Department of
            Health have verified. Wasn’t the “short form” certification of live birth postex on his campaign sufficient proof he was born on US soil? It was good enough for me — until I began to hear how much time, effort, not to mention millions in legal fees Obama spent toblock access to the so-called long form or “vault” birth certificate? Why? If he could produce the long form and establish he was born at Kapi’olani Hospital and delivered by Dr Rodney T West, why not publish that and save everybody all this wasted time and energy? I think team Obama has suggested the questions would never end. If he produced the long form, kooks would claim he and Hawaiian Department of Health officials conspired to plant a fake certificate. Maybe. But only the craziest, and only their crazy friends would support them. By with-holding the long form, unfortunately, he leaves more reasonable people like me wondering: Why?

            My theory (and it’s just a theory – no proof) is that Obama is holding back the long form because it verifies Obama was born in Honolulu (state officials have said so — I believe them) but I’m guessing it does not list the name of the hospital or of the delivering
            doctor. In other words, Ann Dunham (or her parents) reported she gave birth at home. So what? Even the long form showed he was not born ​in a hospital, I’m not sure you could prove he was actually born outside the ​US without some other corroborating evidence. What if his mother gave ​birth at home in Honolulu and decided for whatever reasons not to tell her ​children? Seems to me you need other records or testimony from Kenya, or ​wherever he was theoretically born, and so far those have not been ​forthcoming. The circumstantial (really hearsay) “evidence” includes a ​taped ​recording of his African grandmother saying she was present at his ​birth in Mombasa (I’ve heard the tape but who knows if its really his ​grandmother), a supposed interview with an uncle who also says he was at ​the birth, some other guy who supposedly has Kenyan hospital records but ​these never materialized.  The hospital records have since been sealed by ​the Kenyan government (again, this has people wondering why, if there’s ​nothing to hide?). In any case, it’s pretty thin stuff,
            IMO, not proof.
            So, to come full circle, unless someone comes up with clear proof Obama was not born on US soil, the Hawaiian BC stands and he is a natural born citizen, ergo eligible to hold the office of POTUS. But if proof emerges he was born somewhere else, well then Houston, we have a problem.

            That’s all she wrote. All that other stuff about being adopted by an Indonesian father, or having dual British/US citizenship is total bunk.

  7. Thain permalink
    April 12, 2011 1:51 pm

    I got blacklisted from some Hillary sites after the primaries because although I didn’t like or support Obama I thought the birther stuff was conspiracy bullsh*t. Every day it was something new- The “whitey tape” that never materialized, the claims that Obama did coke and had sex with Larry Sinclair, that he was born in Kenya, that he was really a Muslim, that he hung around and was bestest friends with terrorists. If you don’t agree with the guy’s policies then make an argument against them but STFU with all the race-baiting, liberal-bashing and stuff that is worthy of Karl Rove- and I don’t mean that in a good way.

    It’s sort of like all the nutcases who still really, really think Hillary killed Vince Foster. Or that think Bill Clinton was involved in some drug ring in Arkansas. It doesn’t matter how stupid the conspiracy is some people will believe it no matter what- because they WANT to.

    From a practical point of view I can’t help but think if the whole birth certificate thing was some big conspiracy the Clinton team would have found out about it and revealed it. Obama was a constitutional law professor- it’s hard to believe he’d run for POTUS if he wasn’t a citizen- natural born or otherwise.

    People are just grabbing at straws.

    BTW if anyone sees Larry Johnson from No Quarter, tell him I’m still waiting to see/hear the Whitey Tape😉

  8. stacyx permalink*
    April 12, 2011 1:58 pm

    @Carolyn-

    For your husband:

    http://forward.com/articles/136818/
    😉

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      April 12, 2011 6:37 pm

      Ooooo – perfect!
      I’m emailing it to him right now

      • April 12, 2011 6:48 pm

        Uh oh. Now, don’t let that be the source of any marital disharmony😉

        Remind him we point out these things because we care about Israel- friends don’t let friends drive drunk and that’s pretty much what Israel is doing.

        • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
          April 12, 2011 7:37 pm

           He’s just slightly alarmed — really more mystified — by my about-face.

  9. April 12, 2011 7:05 pm

    I’m home now relaxing and Hillary still has 2 public appearances and speeches left to give. I have no idea how she does it day after day. Can you imagine Obama with her schedule?

    • April 12, 2011 7:17 pm

      No, I can’t imagine him with that schedule.

      Of course, Obama’s been very busy these past few days capitulating to the GOP, selling the middle class down the river and tossing the Democratic base under the bus, all in the name of compromise. Of course, compromise usually implies that BOTH sides give up something of value as opposed to just one side making unreasonable, hypocritical demands and the other side giving in to almost all of them.

      On almost every issue, Obama has caved at the first sign of conflict so going forward, there is no reason for the GOP to act like adults or be reasonable. They know that he’ll do anything to be able to appear to be the post-partisan.

      I wish I could interview him- just five minutes- I’m a bit curious about the whole “change” thing in light of his new-found love of trickle down economics, military tribunals, an uber-expansive view of executive power, covert wars and the like. Just five minutes to discuss a few things, that’s all.

  10. April 13, 2011 9:31 am

    @Carolyn- I can’t help but think it has to stop somewhere. I think if the Obama people showed the long form then it would just begin a whole new series of conspiracies about it being altered, faked, etc. etc.

    Once that Hawaii newspaper birth nnouncement for Obama was inadvertently found by an anti-Obama, birther blogger, I thought “good, this finally ends it.” But no, then a whole slew of people rose up to offer more outlandish theories as to how/why Obama’s mother or family would have placed a fraudulent birth announcement in the Hawaii paper despite Barry not actually being born in the country. See, it’s never enough. So long as there is one person out there willing to come up with some alternative theory there will always be questions.

    Lets pretend for the sake of argument he was born in Kenya. Would I be correct in assuming that there would be a paper trail for his mother (passport, etc.)? Also, it’s not like you can just leave a country and enter another one with a baby without the appropriate paperwork- I assume that even a baby needs a passport or something that shows citizenship. You can’t just leave a country with a random kid (trust me, I have friends who adopted a child from Colombia and the paperwork and bureaucracy to leave with the child was incredible). Despite the fact that this was forty plus years ago, I can’t imagine documentation requirements were very lax.

    I can’t help but wonder if the birther movement is based in something else- do some (not all!) of those folks just not feel comfortable with a President in office that had a very diverse background? Look at that that book by D’Souza claiming Obama isn’t quite “One of US” because of the influence of his socialist, Kenyan, anti-colonial father. I guess Kenyans and other people from Africa are supposed to believe colonialism was a good thing? Now, I am not saying everyone who believes Obama is a foreigner is a racist, so please don’t anyone go there. But do I think there are some people who are uncomfortable with Obama’s diverse cultural, racial and religious background and feel threatened by it? Yes, I do.

  11. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    April 13, 2011 10:31 am

    To be honest, I don’t know any “birthers” personally (I don’t consider myself one!), so I have no grounds for speculating what drives them. But to say most are simply racist isn’t fair to the ones out there who are “constitutionalists” more than “birthers” — the ones who were equally perturbed that McCain might not be a natural born citizen. You have to remember, there was no big kerfuffle when McCain ran for Senate because you don’t have to be a natural born citizen to be in Congress, but there was a BIG kerfuffle when he ran for POTUS because he was born off-base in Panama while his father served there in the military. Ultimately, in April 2008, the Senate had to pass a special resolution certifying McCain’s status as a natural born citizen and his eligibility to hold office as POTUS. I always wondeted, with all the controversy swirling around about his eligibility, why they didn’t do the same for Obama.

    As for travel requirements for babies in 1961, can’t say I looked into all that because I wasn’t focused on proving he was born in Kenya (or Canada as others have speculated). I was more interested in establishing whether there was ANY sane, reasonable explanation for why Obama wouldn’t release the long form that didn’t involve wild conspiracies and you’ve read the theory I came up with: he was born outside a hospital and doesn’t want to publicize that because it will fuel speculation — however preposterous –that his mother gave birth abroad, then
    registered it as a home birth in Honolulu.
    Releasing the long form (assuming it shows he was delivered in a Honolulu hospital) would dispel such speculation. Then all the “birthers” would be left with would be even more preposterous claims that sworn Hawaiian officials conspired with the President to plant a forged or
    fake long form certificate. Maybe I give the American people too much credit but I don’t think very many — even Trump — would jump on that bandwagon.

    My main interest has been that there is a seed of a legitimate constitutional issue to explore here regarding the broader issue of how the citizenship requirement is
    enforced for presidential candidates.

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      April 13, 2011 10:36 am

      Last comment related to this, I promise!
       Wouldn’t you think that someone — a state agency, a federal agency, the Secretary of State for each of the states who has to put the names of presidential candidates on the ballot, the FEC — SOMEONE would be legally responsible for verifying that a candidate for POTUS is a natural born citizen? It’s in the Constitution they swear to uphold! I researched this (even going so far as to write many of the Secretaries of State around the country) and found out there is one entity responsible, one entity the others rely upon, for verifying natural born citizenship: the nominee’s party – in Obama’s case, the DNC. Did Dean & the DNC perform their legal responsibility? I actually tried to find out whether anyone in the DNC had actually seen Obama’s long form birth certificate. Believe it or not (here’s where I went a bit overboard), under the Freedom of Information Act, II petitioned to get any documents, minutes of meetings, records of calls or conversations by the DNC pertaining to the matter of Obama’s eligibility. My
      letters and calls were ignored and no further information was ever forthcoming.  

    • Thain permalink
      April 13, 2011 2:37 pm

      Good lord, a FOIA request?!?

      Basically, all that stuff about his mother’s age, jus soli etc. was rendered moot when a copy of the short form appeared, not to mention the birth announcement in the paper. Of course, that didn’t stop the tin foilers from claiming the short form was doctored and the birth announcement planted.

      The idea that there is some conspiracy that involves hundreds of people including government employees in Hawaii, strikes me as a tad off.

      With respect to the long form- isn’t it true that there can be no short form unless there is also a long form? In other words, how did he get the COLB that says he was born in Hawaii if the vault copy/long form says something different?

      • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
        April 13, 2011 3:50 pm

        I believe there’s a long form and I believe it states Obama was born in Honolulu and I refuse to believe that Hawaiian officials are in cahoots with Obama to falsify, fabricate, alter, invent documents. I am actually on Obama’s side here. If the short form says he was born in Hawaii and if Hawaiian Dept of Health have verified his original birth records confirm he was born in Hawaii, then he was born in Hawaii — unless someone comes up with solid evidence he was actually born somewhere else. After three years of intense scrutiny, nobody has come up with that evidence.

        The main point I’ve been trying to make is that I just don’t get Obama’s steadfast refusal to authorize release of the long form and, can’t help it, I’m the sort of person who has to find explanations that make sense to me. The only explanation that makes sense to me is that his birth took place outside a hospital, so the long form would not include stuff like the hospital where hewas born and the doctor who delivered him. Does that mean Obama’s “covering up” the truth that he was born abroad? No! But he may well be trying to protect himself from the avalanche of questions that would follow — like, could his mother have given birth abroad then registered his birth as a home delivery? My theory doesn’t involve deliberate conspiracies, distortions of truth, forgeries, fakes, criminel acts, etc. My theory suggests Obama, understandably, was simply trying to protect himself from another tsunami of accusations, demands for further documentation, commentaries from FOX pundits, etc. My theory makes it undetstandable why he has withheld the long form for so long — I just think it was the wrong strategy, that’s all.

        As for my hunting down who is ultimately responsible for verifying a candidate’s eligibility for the POTUS
        — I wasn’t on a witchhunt to trap Obama. I was genuinely amazed that no-one took responsibility and no-one even seemed to know who was actually responsible for verifying credentials, until one of the Secretaries of State — I forget which one — told me it was the DNC. It astonished me that we have nine justices whose sole task is to interpret and apply the words of our Constitution, yet we could be so lax in upholding them when it came to something as important as defining a candidate’s eligibility to hold the office of President. By the way, I spent nearly as much time researching McCain’s eligibility — until the Senate resolution made that a moot point.
        Personally, I advocate getting rid of the natural born citizen clause altogether, but that would take a Constitutional amendment and ratification by the states. For now, we’re stuck with it.

        OK, positively my last word on this topic!

  12. April 13, 2011 10:49 am

    @Carolyn-

    You said:

    But to say most are simply racist isn’t fair to the ones out there who are “constitutionalists” more than “birthers”…

    Nowhere did I say that most birthers are racist. In fact, I specifically made clear that I do not consider all birthers to be racist:

    Now, I am not saying everyone who believes Obama is a foreigner is a racist, so please don’t anyone go there.

    And that’s right where you went.

    I also said:

    do some (not all!) of those folks just not feel comfortable with a President in office that had a very diverse background?

    So I don’t think I was unfair at all in my comment. I was just asking a question- Is it within the realm of possibility that some people are uncomfortable with his background and maybe are willing to believe more outlandish theories about his place of birth? I think it’s a fair question.

    One last thing- if the short form is considered legal proof of citizenship per the State Dept. I guess I’m not really seeing why the issue should go further. It seems that the citizenship requirement is met if there is a legally acceptable birth certificate on record with the State. I think if the short form is valid then the requirement has been met because the short form is based on the long form. If it’s not enough proof for some people then aren’t they essentially claiming his short form, which has been certified by officials in Hawaii and analyzed by some in the press (who actually were given access to it- to look at it, hold it, etc.), is a fraud and everyone is involved in a cover up, all the way up to the officials in Hawaii?

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      April 13, 2011 11:44 am

      I apologize – you absolutely DID give those disclaimers, and I noted them. Even though it seemed like I was directing my remarks to you, I was really directing them to people who dismiss everything the birthers are saying, and dismiss the birthers themselves as racist, without pausing to ask questions. That’s not you, and I realized that.

      The short form is considered legal proof of citizenship for all intents and purposes, including obtaining a passport, even running for the Senate, assuming it includes the names of parents (as Obama’s COLB does). But I remember reading that the Hawaiian Home Lands Dept. will NOT accept a COLB, but rather requires a copy of the original vault certificate precisely because too many people were claiming home birth in Hawaii so as to be eligible for land distribution — the COLB would certify birth in Hawaii, the vault form would indicate it was a home birth, so applicants who claimed home birth had to come up with other sworn affadavits that the delivery took place at home in Hawaii. I’d have to refresh my memory on that, but the idea was that back in 1961 (before they tightened up requirements for registering home births), it was simply too easy to register an infant as having been born at home in Hawaii who could have been born, well, anywhere.

  13. Thain permalink
    April 14, 2011 6:39 pm

    @Carolyn-

    Looks like the whole “Obama spent millions to hide his birth certificate” stuff was not exactly true.

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/14/world_net_daily_mad/index.html

    World Net Daily is a kook site- they really played a big role in the rise of the birthers.

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      April 15, 2011 7:44 am

      World News Daily is a cut above the National Enquirer, which is why I’ve never relied on it for objective reporting. But it is a matter of public record that between 15-20 suits have been filed against Obama and/or the DNC seeking to compel Obama to release further documentation. It’s also a matter of public record that the political action committee ‘Obama for America’ paid $2.6 million to the Perkins Coie law firm for various legal purposes, some of which included fighting every request to release Obama’s original
      birth records. Even PolitiFact had to conced, “we don’t know exactly how much the Obama camp spent on their private lawyers [to defend against such cases],” they merely cite fata from other campaigns that it couldn’t have been the entire $2.6 million. OK, fair enough, but as Politifact also points out, quite a few taxpayer dollars have also been spent on federal cases related to the eligibility question that were handled by federal attorneys, at no cost to the Obama campaign.
      By the way, the fact that all of the cases brought before state, federal, and the US Supreme Court pertaining to the eligibility question were ultimately dismissed does not mean they were
      weighed carefully on the merits of the case. Rather, they ruled that the plaintiffs simply did not have “standing” to present a case about possible presidential election fraud. You’d know more about this than I do, but I gather that no voter can challenge a federal election in federal court, simply because he is a voter (along the same logic that no taxpayer can sue the federal government by virtue of his “taxpayer-ness”). The other mitigating factor in the SCOTUS dismissal was the issue of “injury-in-fact.” The plaintiff has to be able to demonstrate a “real and measurable injury.” The constitution merely states that someone cannot hold the office of President if the rules of eligibility are not met — since Obama was only running for office at the time the appeal was made to the SCOTUS, theoretically, nobody sustained actual injury. There can be no actual injury if there is only a chance the injury could occur. Actually, some in the Electoral College tried to raise a challenge after he’d been elected and before the electoral votes were counted in January 2009 but their challenge was voted down and never considered.

  14. April 15, 2011 2:43 pm

    Obama was asked about the birther thing in his interview with George Stephanopoulous. But get a load of some of the comments to the post:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/14/obama-donald-trump-interview_n_849499.html

  15. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    April 15, 2011 4:06 pm

    I do support this initiative (ducking) believe it or not:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/15/birth-certificate-arizona-legislature-approves_n_849523.html

    • April 16, 2011 8:52 am

      I don’t. I feel like these initiatives are being put out there to rally anti-Obama support, not out of any genuine interest in the Constitution.

      Maybe the FEC should be the one charged with determining eligibility so they can create one consistent standard.

      But I still think so long as he has the short form, it’s been certified and deemed legitimate and meets the requirements of citizenship per our federal govt, I really don’t think this is an issue anymore. I just don’t.

      I feel like this whole issue has been hijacked by the far right- the “he’s not really one of us crowd”. I think that view is more pervasive than many liberals are willing to admit. Even that idiot Ethan Bronner admits that many Israelis are concerned that Obama’s middle name, Hussein, is some sort of proof that he may harbor anti-Israel designs. *sigh* I was reading the comments over on HuffPo and some were speculating that he was hiding the long form because it said he was Muslim. *cough* You know, because that would make him, what, a terrorist? Never mind the BC doesn’t have religion on it.

      Yes, there are people like you Carolyn who are interested in this because they see a valid constitutional issue but I think those people are now in the minority. It reminds me of the Park51 controversy. There were some people who at the beginning had very sincere concerns (9/11 families) but then the issue was hijacked by the likes of Pam Geller, David Horowitz and it became a rallying cry for the Islamaphobes and Fox News (on in the same, really).

  16. Thain permalink
    April 16, 2011 4:27 pm

    @Carolyn-

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/15/debunking-the-birther-claim/?hpt=Sbin

    Others have seen his long form birth certificate.

    The End.

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      April 16, 2011 11:32 pm

      You’re right, Thain – I’m happy to say!
      I just read yesterday that in her most recent statement, the Hawaiian DOH official, Ms Fukimo, who examined the original BC said it included the name of the doctor who delivered Obama. So that is truly the end of the story. Heaving a big sigh of relief here, because the alternative would have been unspeakably awaful!

  17. Thain permalink
    April 16, 2011 6:14 pm

    More birther nonsense:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/16/marilyn-davenports-racist_n_850063.html

    Sorry but a lot of these folks are using the whole birth certificate issue to play out their racist fears of the Black Man. Oh yeah and Muslims even though he’s not Muslim.

  18. January 26, 2013 11:15 am

    She always knows the right color to wear.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: