<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: United States v. Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/</link>
	<description>Thoughts and commentary on politics, technology, religion and current events</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 05:13:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52598</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 05:14:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52598</guid>
		<description>Truth asked: &quot;What scares you about seeing the real birth certificate?&quot;

Nothing scares me as to the eligibility of Obama to be President. What scares me are things that would make the conspiracy theory get more traction.

Having studied the law about birth registration in Hawaii and what has to be on certificates, there are some things that could be on the certificate that might be troubling.

Hawaiian law says that any certified copy of an amended certificate must say &quot;altered&quot; on it. Obama&#039;s COLB does not say this, meaning it hasn&#039;t been amended. However, Hawaiian law says that something not available on the original certificate can be added later without having this label. So it is possible that no father (NOT A DIFFERENT FATHER) is listed on Barack Obama&#039;s original certificate. If this were the case, it would start a firestorm of speculation.

The other possibility is that there is something troubling on the original form that is not one of the items on the short version. The only thing I can think of here would be that Barack Obama was born at home. If this were the case, again, a firestorm of speculation would result that his mother lied in claiming Obama was born in Hawaii. If this were the case, all documents would still say Barack Obama was born in Honolulu and nothing to contradict that.

In either case, Obama is qualified to be president, but the conspiracy mess gets worse.

If someone can think of another scenario consistent with the printed COLB and the statement by Hawaiian Health officials other than these two, let me know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truth asked: &#8220;What scares you about seeing the real birth certificate?&#8221;</p>
<p>Nothing scares me as to the eligibility of Obama to be President. What scares me are things that would make the conspiracy theory get more traction.</p>
<p>Having studied the law about birth registration in Hawaii and what has to be on certificates, there are some things that could be on the certificate that might be troubling.</p>
<p>Hawaiian law says that any certified copy of an amended certificate must say &#8220;altered&#8221; on it. Obama&#8217;s COLB does not say this, meaning it hasn&#8217;t been amended. However, Hawaiian law says that something not available on the original certificate can be added later without having this label. So it is possible that no father (NOT A DIFFERENT FATHER) is listed on Barack Obama&#8217;s original certificate. If this were the case, it would start a firestorm of speculation.</p>
<p>The other possibility is that there is something troubling on the original form that is not one of the items on the short version. The only thing I can think of here would be that Barack Obama was born at home. If this were the case, again, a firestorm of speculation would result that his mother lied in claiming Obama was born in Hawaii. If this were the case, all documents would still say Barack Obama was born in Honolulu and nothing to contradict that.</p>
<p>In either case, Obama is qualified to be president, but the conspiracy mess gets worse.</p>
<p>If someone can think of another scenario consistent with the printed COLB and the statement by Hawaiian Health officials other than these two, let me know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52590</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:56:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52590</guid>
		<description>Truth, as part of my jury service, I received a training course on topics that included &quot;reasonable doubt&quot;. That doesn&#039;t make me an expert, but it also counters your comment that I was &quot;clueless&quot;.

Ridicule (words like “prima fakie”) does not advance the argument.

You ask for the one millionth time, &quot;why won’t they show the real b.c.? &quot; The obvious answer is, that I answered you every time with reasonable argument. If my reasonable answers don&#039;t settle anything, why would you think any document Obama provided would settle anything?

To expect a conspiracy theory to go away in the face of evidence is not to understand the nature of conspiracy theories.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truth, as part of my jury service, I received a training course on topics that included &#8220;reasonable doubt&#8221;. That doesn&#8217;t make me an expert, but it also counters your comment that I was &#8220;clueless&#8221;.</p>
<p>Ridicule (words like “prima fakie”) does not advance the argument.</p>
<p>You ask for the one millionth time, &#8220;why won’t they show the real b.c.? &#8221; The obvious answer is, that I answered you every time with reasonable argument. If my reasonable answers don&#8217;t settle anything, why would you think any document Obama provided would settle anything?</p>
<p>To expect a conspiracy theory to go away in the face of evidence is not to understand the nature of conspiracy theories.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TRUTH</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52583</link>
		<dc:creator>TRUTH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:48:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52583</guid>
		<description>Served on a JURY?!  Since when does that make one an expert?  Its your civic duty, big deal. 

Very weak and sorry comparison.  For the 1 millionth time, why won&#039;t they show the real b.c.?  BESIDES the fact they shown this &quot;prima fakie&quot; version, WHY NOT show the real one?  What scares you about seeing the real birth certificate?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Served on a JURY?!  Since when does that make one an expert?  Its your civic duty, big deal. </p>
<p>Very weak and sorry comparison.  For the 1 millionth time, why won&#8217;t they show the real b.c.?  BESIDES the fact they shown this &#8220;prima fakie&#8221; version, WHY NOT show the real one?  What scares you about seeing the real birth certificate?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52579</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 04:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52579</guid>
		<description>A bit more on that jury. The experience was more about &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;/em&gt; evidence than about reasonable doubt. It was a drunk driving case where the defendant was over the legal limit. His blood alcohol was so high that BY LAW the prosecution&#039;s case was proved by that one fact alone unless the defense could refute it some way. The blood alcohol was &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;/em&gt; evidence of guilt. The defense had no real evidence, just the lame excuse that he was swerving all over the road because he was &quot;tuning the radio&quot;. Guilty.

In Obama&#039;s &quot;case&quot;, there is &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;/em&gt; evidence that he was born in Hawaii. His detractors are just &quot;tuning the radio&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A bit more on that jury. The experience was more about <em>prima facie</em> evidence than about reasonable doubt. It was a drunk driving case where the defendant was over the legal limit. His blood alcohol was so high that BY LAW the prosecution&#8217;s case was proved by that one fact alone unless the defense could refute it some way. The blood alcohol was <em>prima facie</em> evidence of guilt. The defense had no real evidence, just the lame excuse that he was swerving all over the road because he was &#8220;tuning the radio&#8221;. Guilty.</p>
<p>In Obama&#8217;s &#8220;case&#8221;, there is <em>prima facie</em> evidence that he was born in Hawaii. His detractors are just &#8220;tuning the radio&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52578</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 04:30:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52578</guid>
		<description>Truth, Whether Obama&#039;s hospital records will be seen or not will not rely on &quot;people like me&quot;. It will rely on people like the justices of the United States Supreme Court and members of Congress. If you are saying they are all &quot;clueless&quot; while you know better, then I suggest that you are indeed ready for full membership in the ranks of the conspiracy theorists.

And for the record, I served on a criminal jury once and took the course on &quot;reasonable doubt&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truth, Whether Obama&#8217;s hospital records will be seen or not will not rely on &#8220;people like me&#8221;. It will rely on people like the justices of the United States Supreme Court and members of Congress. If you are saying they are all &#8220;clueless&#8221; while you know better, then I suggest that you are indeed ready for full membership in the ranks of the conspiracy theorists.</p>
<p>And for the record, I served on a criminal jury once and took the course on &#8220;reasonable doubt&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TRUTH</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52576</link>
		<dc:creator>TRUTH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52576</guid>
		<description>Simply refusing to agree that looking at the real birth certificate, not even acknowledging someone should take a look at it to prove everything is on the up and up, you COMPLETELY Scoff!! the idea of doing THAT, amplifies your concern for what might be found &quot;if&quot; they look at it.  ALL you can do is keep repeating, we&#039;ve seen real proof, we&#039;ve seen real proof.  
 
Your clueless what &#039;beyond a reasonable doubt&#039; means.   I held a Top Secret clearance.  This chump you voted in will have the highest clearance in the country, and based on a piece of paper that had his mom n dads name and city born, and the National security of this country will never see the real one because of people like you..... &quot;We&#039;ve Seen Legal Proof&quot;    .... Clueless.       I can&#039;t wait until his Spread the Wealth lies slap each one of you right where it hurts the most.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simply refusing to agree that looking at the real birth certificate, not even acknowledging someone should take a look at it to prove everything is on the up and up, you COMPLETELY Scoff!! the idea of doing THAT, amplifies your concern for what might be found &#8220;if&#8221; they look at it.  ALL you can do is keep repeating, we&#8217;ve seen real proof, we&#8217;ve seen real proof.  </p>
<p>Your clueless what &#8216;beyond a reasonable doubt&#8217; means.   I held a Top Secret clearance.  This chump you voted in will have the highest clearance in the country, and based on a piece of paper that had his mom n dads name and city born, and the National security of this country will never see the real one because of people like you&#8230;.. &#8220;We&#8217;ve Seen Legal Proof&#8221;    &#8230;. Clueless.       I can&#8217;t wait until his Spread the Wealth lies slap each one of you right where it hurts the most.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52575</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52575</guid>
		<description>Truth, let me try to explain. 

Think about the Donofrio lawsuit. On the verge of the election, Donofrio tried to get an emergency injunction to stop it. This one guy was dissatisfied about how the Secretary of State in New Jersey did her job and wanted to stop the election in his state. Donofrio&#039;s objection involved a completely non-standard interpretation of the Constitution (that &quot;native born&quot; didn&#039;t imply &quot;natural born&quot;). But because this one guy thought everybody was wrong, he wanted to stop the whole election for everybody.

What I want to show in the preceding paragraph is that there has to be some common sense balance between small groups with odd ideas and the normal functioning of society for everybody else.

I personally think that the Obama citizenship objections are fringe thinking. I further believe that without the Internet&#039;s power to publish for free, the views about Obama&#039;s citizenship denial would have gone nowhere (similar to the demand for Chester A. Arthur&#039;s birth certificate in 1880). For years, people have sent me emails like sending a copy of the email to all my friends so that Microsoft would donate $1 to the American Cancer society, or opening a virus-laden package because the title was &quot;I love you&quot;. It takes just a little social engineering to get a million people be fooled. As Lincoln said &quot;you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time.&quot;

Based a lot of digging on my part, I have concluded that some people have been fooled. I generously put that number at 100,000, or less than one tenth of one percent of the number that voted in the general election. (You may say that if more people heard the citizenship denial story that more would be concerned, and surely they would under the Lincoln principle.)

This tiny percentage are demanding that government stop and take their concerns into account. (I believed you called for a &quot;Forensic Document Expert, along with two trusted agents from both sides, a law official and whomever Hawaiian Gov. mandates&quot; descending on the Hawaii Health Department). Meanwhile, the courts (both state and federal including the United States Supreme Court), states attorneys general, members of Congress are ALL in disagreement with these fringe claims. They are satisfied that the Constitution is being followed. The people whose job it is to defend the Constitution do not share your concerns. However, the Obama citizenship deniers, like all good conspiracy theorists, scoff at the idea of anyone in government doing their job right.

Put bluntly, a bunch of fringe conspiracy theorists, with no evidence of any wrongdoing, pretending nonexistence of a preponderance of evidence against them, have an overblown sense of their own importance, and so justify unreasonable demands and find it odd that the world doesn&#039;t come to a screeching halt on their account.

I will say this one more time. A document legally proving the facts of Obama&#039;s birth has been shown to the world. If that weren&#039;t enough, State officials have personally checked the archives. &lt;strong&gt;Asking for anything else is simply blindly refusing to accept facts.&lt;/strong&gt; I have no use for propositions which require ignoring the facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truth, let me try to explain. </p>
<p>Think about the Donofrio lawsuit. On the verge of the election, Donofrio tried to get an emergency injunction to stop it. This one guy was dissatisfied about how the Secretary of State in New Jersey did her job and wanted to stop the election in his state. Donofrio&#8217;s objection involved a completely non-standard interpretation of the Constitution (that &#8220;native born&#8221; didn&#8217;t imply &#8220;natural born&#8221;). But because this one guy thought everybody was wrong, he wanted to stop the whole election for everybody.</p>
<p>What I want to show in the preceding paragraph is that there has to be some common sense balance between small groups with odd ideas and the normal functioning of society for everybody else.</p>
<p>I personally think that the Obama citizenship objections are fringe thinking. I further believe that without the Internet&#8217;s power to publish for free, the views about Obama&#8217;s citizenship denial would have gone nowhere (similar to the demand for Chester A. Arthur&#8217;s birth certificate in 1880). For years, people have sent me emails like sending a copy of the email to all my friends so that Microsoft would donate $1 to the American Cancer society, or opening a virus-laden package because the title was &#8220;I love you&#8221;. It takes just a little social engineering to get a million people be fooled. As Lincoln said &#8220;you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time.&#8221;</p>
<p>Based a lot of digging on my part, I have concluded that some people have been fooled. I generously put that number at 100,000, or less than one tenth of one percent of the number that voted in the general election. (You may say that if more people heard the citizenship denial story that more would be concerned, and surely they would under the Lincoln principle.)</p>
<p>This tiny percentage are demanding that government stop and take their concerns into account. (I believed you called for a &#8220;Forensic Document Expert, along with two trusted agents from both sides, a law official and whomever Hawaiian Gov. mandates&#8221; descending on the Hawaii Health Department). Meanwhile, the courts (both state and federal including the United States Supreme Court), states attorneys general, members of Congress are ALL in disagreement with these fringe claims. They are satisfied that the Constitution is being followed. The people whose job it is to defend the Constitution do not share your concerns. However, the Obama citizenship deniers, like all good conspiracy theorists, scoff at the idea of anyone in government doing their job right.</p>
<p>Put bluntly, a bunch of fringe conspiracy theorists, with no evidence of any wrongdoing, pretending nonexistence of a preponderance of evidence against them, have an overblown sense of their own importance, and so justify unreasonable demands and find it odd that the world doesn&#8217;t come to a screeching halt on their account.</p>
<p>I will say this one more time. A document legally proving the facts of Obama&#8217;s birth has been shown to the world. If that weren&#8217;t enough, State officials have personally checked the archives. <strong>Asking for anything else is simply blindly refusing to accept facts.</strong> I have no use for propositions which require ignoring the facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truth</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52573</link>
		<dc:creator>Truth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:31:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52573</guid>
		<description>Back on the police thing again I see.   Your to funny.  He hasn&#039;t committed a crime, that anyone knows of.  It is a QUESTION of his eligibility, which time and time again I have admitted he is probably ok.  BUT, &quot;Probably&quot; isn&#039;t good enough in the government I used to work for.  &quot;Definitely&quot; was what we used to always have to abide by.  And not ONCE did we have to call the Police.

Tell us all again how 100,000 people out of a 100 Million isn&#039;t enough to matter.  That is as many people that are in a lot of medium-large cities.  And that many peoples concern &quot;doesn&#039;t matter&quot;.  Or is it your saying &quot;We Won, You Lost, now stop trying to find out something we&#039;re afraid you&#039;ll find out.&quot; ?   If you weren&#039;t afraid, you would support full disclosure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back on the police thing again I see.   Your to funny.  He hasn&#8217;t committed a crime, that anyone knows of.  It is a QUESTION of his eligibility, which time and time again I have admitted he is probably ok.  BUT, &#8220;Probably&#8221; isn&#8217;t good enough in the government I used to work for.  &#8220;Definitely&#8221; was what we used to always have to abide by.  And not ONCE did we have to call the Police.</p>
<p>Tell us all again how 100,000 people out of a 100 Million isn&#8217;t enough to matter.  That is as many people that are in a lot of medium-large cities.  And that many peoples concern &#8220;doesn&#8217;t matter&#8221;.  Or is it your saying &#8220;We Won, You Lost, now stop trying to find out something we&#8217;re afraid you&#8217;ll find out.&#8221; ?   If you weren&#8217;t afraid, you would support full disclosure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52571</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:40:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52571</guid>
		<description>Truth, I think it is you who doesn&#039;t understand what it takes to be proven guilty: evidence. Got any?

If there is a bank robbery, you go to the police.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truth, I think it is you who doesn&#8217;t understand what it takes to be proven guilty: evidence. Got any?</p>
<p>If there is a bank robbery, you go to the police.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TRUTH</title>
		<link>http://www.blogordie.com/2008/12/united-states-v-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-52570</link>
		<dc:creator>TRUTH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogordie.com/?p=477#comment-52570</guid>
		<description>Well you sure don&#039;t imply you realize what it takes to be guilty.  Unless 50% of everyone in the city sees me rob the bank, I guess I can get away with it according to your math.  Because Legal only matters according to you if MOST the people want it investigated.        

Don&#039;t confuse Running for a position with Qualifying for a position.  

For your Educational and Viewing pleasure:  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX7uuhHXs-0&amp;feature=channel_page</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well you sure don&#8217;t imply you realize what it takes to be guilty.  Unless 50% of everyone in the city sees me rob the bank, I guess I can get away with it according to your math.  Because Legal only matters according to you if MOST the people want it investigated.        </p>
<p>Don&#8217;t confuse Running for a position with Qualifying for a position.  </p>
<p>For your Educational and Viewing pleasure:  </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX7uuhHXs-0&#038;feature=channel_page" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX7uuhHXs-0&#038;feature=channel_page</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

