Of course the birth certificate issue is all cleared up.  For example, we now know from official records that Obama was born at... uh.... some hospital.... in Hawaii... name unknown, and the doctor was... uh... well, it escapes me.

Must be only in Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin that this information is recorded on 'birth certificates.'

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/06/obama-birth.html

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

"There is a difference between a short form birth certificate and a long form birth certificate."

Right.

"The factcheck cite seems to be definitive: the authorities in Hawaii have confirmed that they have Obama's original birth certificate."

Right.  It would appear that they have the long form on file- and this is not the one that has been posted.  Remember, for awhile we were assured that what was made public was all that there was.  The Hawaii officials coming out and assuring us that there is in fact a 'long form' and that it is 'legit' is an admission of the fact that there is something more.

"There is also the matter of the birth announcement in the Hawaii newspaper."

But what does it prove?

It is obvious to me that there is something damaging to the Obama campaign on the 'long form' 'vault' copy.  If there wasn't then this is what would have been provided.   There is no other explanation other than stubborness.  Now, what is that damaging thing?  If it certainly shows that Obama was born in Hawaii then what harm is there in showing the long form?  Perhaps it shows a different father then we have been led to believe?  Who knows?

But at least we've got it all cleared away now that there is information being withheld.

As far as I'm concerned, the remaining question of significance is the verification of the eligibility of our presidential candidates.   It boggles my mind that there isn't some sort of independent procedure that candidates have to go through.  Really, the requirements are pretty low- a certain age and 'natural born' and that's about it.  It is self-evident to me that you cannot possibly allow this sort of issue to be 'verified' by the candidates themselves, for obvious conflict of interest reasons.  Nor can it be handled through Congress for the same reason.  Either people can complain that the Congress gave their guy a pass or they came after the other guy.

I will never consider Obama a legitimate president until I see the long form, period. 

And this long form should be provided, ideally, through a non-partisan/bi-partisan outlet. 

If the Obama campaign finally produces the long form and it is innocuous I don't think anyone will trust it, for it can be argued that if it was so innocent it would have been provided long before.  So, if everything is on the up and up, it would be better to have it released through a non-partisan/bi-partisan outlet of some kind.

Give it up, cimics.  Sntjohnny has no intention of letting facts get in the way of conviction. 

You silly man, the facts are on my side.

Fact:  Obama has not released his 'long form' BC.
Fact:  Up until recently, it was not even admitted that there was a 'long form' BC.
Fact:  Officials in Hawaii, in an attempt to defuse concerns that Obama wasn't a natural born citizen, admitted there was a 'long form' BC- saying they had seen it, but couldn't release it.
Fact:  Obama has a reason for not releasing his 'long form' BC.
Fact:  We don't know the reason.

These facts are indisputable.  Unassailable.  They are simple facts of reality.

Is this the long form?  http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate  ?

It is not.

What I have said to this point is factual.  Now for the matter of principles and conviction.

My view is very simple:  the cleanest inference from not releasing the 'long form' BC is that there is something on it that he wants to hide.  Presumably, the existence of the 'long form' provides assurance at least that he was born in Hawaii, but we only have the word of these officials that it really exists.  Nonetheless, in light of the numerous lawsuits filed requesting it, it is reasonable to infer that if it exists but has not been released there is something on it that Obama doesn't want us to see.

There literally is no other explanation except for pure stubbornness.   If all the information on the BC long form was innocuous it would have been released, period.

Just an added note to this Palin thing.. a friend wrote this after viewing a CNN report:

I just watched and heard your comments pertaining to Sarah Palin with regards to the lack of Republican Party support given, and the Party's involvement with the negative press that proceeded.
It was very disappointing to hear these accusations when on several occasions opportunities were taken on your part and that of several other reporters to place digs, innuendos and indirect/ direct insults to Sarah Palin's credibility, experience and character which could have easily been avoided had research taken place first.
Integrity and professionalism is lacking, including personal ownership. Your biased (even though you state your impartial) is evident.
My prayers go out to the Palin family who have endured much!

This was a reaction to the -  Full view - November 6, 2008 segment - Campbell Brown "No Biased, No Bull" CNN‏

I'm gonna add more to this later on due to what I've heard on CNN.  I'm thinking you heard these comments?