RDF:![[Valid RSS]](http://validator.w3.org/feed/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Supreme Court Refuses to Demand that the Obamessiah Proves Eligibility for Office
Posted by: Emperor Misha I in "Law" of the Land, The Obamessiah12:32 PM
Presumably they’re fine with just taking his word for it.
Let me go ahead and stand out as a kook from all my friends on the right. Thats what they are calling anyone that gives the question of Obama’s citizenship any merit. I give some merit on a few accounts. One, how easy it would be to kill this. All Obama has to do is provide a birth certificate. It only fuels the conspiracies by not providing it. Why doesn’t he? Second, it is a legitimate question the People deserve a solid answer on. The question will only continue to haunt him until he stamps out the fire. Obama’s refusal to show this simple certificate can certainly give an impression to some he is hiding something.
And the “can’t we all just forget about the Constitutional requirements so we can all get along?” crowd can add yours truly to the “kooks” as well.
Listen, it’s ridiculous on its face that this clown can’t be made to produce a piece of paper that, if he’s eligible, should cause him no more than a few minutes of “trouble” to come up with, the kind of document that millions upon millions of Americans are forced to produce every month for much less “trivial” reasons than proving that they’re eligible for the single most powerful job in the world.
I agree completely with the writer at Stop the ACLU that his stubborn refusal, his willingness to spend tens of thousands if not more of dollars over months to not produce a routine document can only lead a reasonable person to conclude that he’s hiding something. What I obviously cannot know, but he’s certainly hiding something.
Isn’t it reasonable for the citizens of this nation to demand an answer to that simple question before he takes office as our Commander-in-Chief?
Apparently not, according to some. It’s “kooky.”
Just as “kooky” as me insisting on selling a car while refusing to provide the buyer with proof of title. Hey, I mean, the buyer should just take my word for it, no? Surely he’s a conspiracy theory kook nutjob to think, even for one fleeting second, that I might not be the owner of the vehicle. And should he challenge it, the courts surely ought to force him to shut the fuck up and buy the vehicle anyway, the damn “kook.”
I’ll be the first to throw this issue off the table and consider it settled the moment those questions have been answered, questions that can and should have been answered in a matter of minutes months ago. Why wouldn’t I? Proof is proof, even if you don’t particularly like the proof and, in this case, I wouldn’t much care either way. There are plenty of reasons to oppose the Jug-eared Freak Marxist other than that one, but is it too much to ask that he provides us with his med school diploma before we make him head of surgery?
To some, apparently it is.
I surely hope that those people don’t submit themselves to bypass surgery based on the surgeon’s claim that “sure, I’m an expert surgeon, honest I am!”, but I have no reason to believe that they wouldn’t. After all, to not take his word for it would be unforgivably “kooky.”
Thatisall.
Entries (RSS)
I’ve read through Phillip Berg’s filing and it makes a persuasive argument. What he did in that filing was state that even if Obama WAS born in Hawaii, his mother expatriated him when she re-married and moved him to Indonesia. Apparently when this happens, you have to have a ’swearing’ in ceremony before any embassy (to become a US Citizen again) and there’s no record that such an event ever occurred.
I never understand why there can’t ever be an honest exposition of the facts with the Dems. It’s just like the Klinton impeachment. Starr amassed a good amount of evidence that Schippers was convinced that he perjured himself, suborned perjury, hid evidence etc. But we had this pathetic 3 day dog and pony show in the Senate where several Senators had already told Schippers that no matter WHAT evidence he had, he wasn’t going to get the requisite number of votes to remove him from Office.
So here we go again with the Democrats. This is why Bush was re-elected. People had an HONEST President that we could trust. And stuff all this crap about illegal wiretapping, WMD’s and every other liberal bleating platitude for the past 8 years. Bush protected us for EIGHT YEARS. I don’t care if the civil rights of muslims are compromised. They have no civil rights, and I don’t care what any liberal moron judge says. Waterboard them, torture them, get the truth out of these animals so that way we don’t have another 3000 Americans dead in the name of ‘political correctness’. We firebombed Dresden during WW2 and that sure as hell had an effect on the damn fascists. And the benefits of that were a lot less obvious. When you are at war with an enemy you kill them, his homes and cities, his wife and children. That’s how you fight a war.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:47 PMUsing
This is no surprise. What is surprising is that the subject has even been allowed to slip out since we acquired a new future resident to the White House (any bets he changes it’s name and color? “White House” sure sounds racist these days…)
Don’t worry though, the future resident of the White House will quash any dissent with his volunteer jackboot brigade in short order. Dissenters will be placed in public works camps, never to be seen again. The media that got him elected has already been thrown to the wolves. Reports are out that countless newspapers will be shutting down in the next three weeks, and the Chicago Tribune (owner of the L.A. Slimes and other papers) will be filing bankruptcy in the very near future. The new resident has no worries of dissenting voices popping up in the media at all. They are forcibly going away. What’s left will most certainly remain his Propaganda Wing.
George Orwell was right…except for the date.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:49 PMUsing
[...] Posted on December 8, 2008 Update: Emporer Misha joins me in the kook crowd! [...]
December 8th, 2008 at 12:49 PMUsing
Kooky Bill Richardson says B. Hussein’s an immigrant….
Bill Richardson Says Obama Is An Immigrant - Does He Know Something We Don’t?
December 8th, 2008 at 12:55 PMUsing
For God’s sake, you have to produce a certified copy of a birth certificate for a Social Security card, for a passport, for a driver’s license, to play Little League. Those records must exist somewhere else. Where’s the Republican version of Helen Jones-Kelly when you need them?
December 8th, 2008 at 1:07 PMUsing
This could turn out to be a trump held tightly by the Dems to reign in Prez BO should he have a lapse of conscience.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:08 PMThis from the TownHall website:
Using
Okay…let’s start this now:
IMPEACH OBAMA!
December 8th, 2008 at 1:14 PMUsing
The U.S. Supreme Court today announced it has denied bringing Donofrio v. Wells , but NOT the more detailed Berg case - yet. I’ve been counting on the latter, and had’t even heard of the former until a couple of days go.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:25 PMAnd even then there are a few states the Sec. of States of which may hold up their Electoral votes if the proof of the pudding is not revealed.
Keep the faith - praise the Lord and (if necesary) Pass the Ammunition!
Using
How dare you all question the SAVIOR of the entire world! He will move mountains, heal the crippled, cause the oceans to recede, reverse global warming!
But he can’t even produce ONE TINY document…
December 8th, 2008 at 1:32 PMUsing
LC Paladin @:
Unless those states have enough electoral votes to keep him from winning, it really won’t matter much.
And most likely, they are red states, most of whom don’t carry enough votes anyway.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:34 PMUsing
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
Only if there’s evidence supporting such a charge, which there certainly isn’t at this point in time.
But there is a highly suspicious absence of evidence for his eligibility for office, evidence that could be produced in a matter of days at most.
As anonymous hourly worker points out, you have to produce that document for any number of truly trivial reasons, yet somehow your word and somebody else’s say-so is good enough if you’re applying for the single most powerful job on the planet?
It’s not like anybody is demanding DNA tests to prove that his mother was really his mother, the way that Excitable Andy of the Atlantic was insisting that Governor Palin prove that she was the real mother of Trig.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:36 PMUsing
LC Paladin sez:
Yeah well, we’ll see about that. Wasn’t he ordered by Justice Souter to produce his original birth certificate by December 3rd? It’s December 8th now, for those who’ve been counting.
And I repeat: All of this would go away immediately if he were to do what millions upon millions of Americans do on a regular basis with very little trouble if any trouble at all.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:38 PMUsing
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
Maybe he should get Dan Blather to produce it? I’m sure he has an abundance of whole cloth
December 8th, 2008 at 1:39 PMlyingleft unused.:em02: :em69: :em93:Using
Well, there wasn’t any for impeaching Bush, either, but that didn’t stop the left. Why should THEY get to have all the fun?
December 8th, 2008 at 1:55 PMUsing
As the bard himself (not admiral bard, the REAL bard) wrote eons ago:
Methinks he (obama) doth protest too much.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:58 PMUsing
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
You do have a point there, Skye. :em93:
But I’ve been having so much fun pointing fingers and laughing at the verifiable kooks on the left for the past eight years that I’d truly hate it if they were given the opportunity to point their fingers right back at me for the same reason.
That being said, my motto remains: “I Aim To Misbehave.” :em93:
December 8th, 2008 at 1:59 PMUsing
When I first heard about this, I was leaning towards dismissing this as a case of, well, kooks, claiming that where there’s smoke there MUST be a fire somewhere, but the longer The Anointed One (TM) lets this go on, the more I have to wonder. Now you can count me in with the kooks as well, especially since this would be so easy for him to make go away.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:00 PMUsing
Something interesting to contemplate:
http://drorly.blogsp.....tment.html
Hopefully linky worky.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:00 PMUsing
Hm…that reminds me…Dave never DID answer Brendan’s challenge a month or so ago about providing evidence of Bush’s prosecutable crimes…both in and out of office, unless I missed it, which is possible.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:02 PMUsing
Okay. My son has three “birth certificates,” if you will: a certificate of live birth (provided by the hospital…not official); a certificate of birth abroad (provided by the DOD since we were military, also not “official” but official enough to get us a state-issued one); and a state-issued, certified birth certificate.
Certificate of live birth means nothing.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:06 PMUsing
Can I ask an off topic question without getting my head sawed off for hijacking? Normally I just peruse and admire the comments, but I need help.
I want to buy a semi-auto handgun and need advice. I lean toward the 1911 models but would consider anything and everything.
Sorry for going OT but I know quite a few of you have extensive knowledge in this area. Thanks for any assistance.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:26 PMUsing
ALConfederate sez:
…and I was the same way. I was thinking “yeah right, he’ll just put out the paperwork and all of the tinfoil-wearing ones will look like fools.”
And then he started fighting a routine request with all the power of the law.
Has anybody among you ever tried to retain a lawyer? Do you have any idea how much they charge, especially the high-powered ones?
That seems to be an awful lot of trouble to go to to avoid paying a few bucks for a notarized copy, doesn’t it?
December 8th, 2008 at 2:29 PMUsing
No, what is ridiculous on its face that one private citizen, or a group of private citizens, can demand of another private citizen that he provide private and personal information to them, in an unofficial capacity.
Where does it stop?
Can I go to court to demand to see your bank records? Shouldn’t I have a “right” to know any and everything I want to know about you or someone else?
It doesn’t matter that you aren’t running for public office, you don’t give up your rights as a citizen when you run for office. One private citizen cannot compel another private citizen to give up private information that the requesting person is not officially entitled to have.
This isn’t about a birth certificate — most people already know what that is going to show — that Obama IS a natural-born US citizen, eligible to hold the Office of the Presidency.
No, it is about precedence. You create the precedence to force information out of one person, and before long, it is a matter of routine to get that and more.
It is why each court on this and similar filings have each reached the same finding: the Plaintiffs have no standing.
It isn’t your job or my job to determine whether a candidate meets the minimum requirements to hold the office. That is the job of the government. They have the capability and the resources to quickly check out every candidate long before you realized they have done it. I can guarantee you that at least the FBI has a jacket on Obama that shows he meets the requirements under the Constitution. I can also guarantee that each and every one of us has such an FBI jacket.
I am not under any illusion that this silly conspiracy theory is going away anytime soon. Salon has a great article on this. Even Michelle Malkin considers this “Birthers” movement to be the same as the “9/11 Truthers” (of which Philip Berg was one of).
Still sounds a lot like the emergence of a new syndrome: The Obama Derangement Syndrome. It is too early to tell whether there is any treatment for it. :em01:
December 8th, 2008 at 2:30 PMUsing
Could he produce a certified copy of the long/vault form to the public to put this whole mess to rest? Yes.
There are two reasons that he might not want to:
1. Some small detail that exists on the long form/vault copy that is somehow personally embarrassing to him - this detail may have nothing to do with establishing his actual citizenship.
2. He can/has satisfied the requirement to prove his citizenship and by choosing to not release this information to the entire citizenry, he can help to create a maelstrom of paranoia amongst the ring-wing, and use that to paint ALL of the right wing with the taint of “They’re all crazy.” This is the one that worries me most because I think this will come back to haunt us.
Maybe it’s both.
I’ve done some research into this matter to settle the point for myself. I too latched onto this and wanted to see him produce the vault copy of his birth certificate for pretty much the same reasons as the rest of you want to see it. Why spend so much time and energy on this if there isn’t something significant to hide? It looks wrong.
Here’s the chain of evidence I have that makes me believe the sole fact of his actual citizenship is not in doubt:
Dr. Chiyome Fukino (Director of Hawaii’s Department of Health) has verified the legitimacy of Obama’s Birth Certificate. So what exactly does “verification” mean in a legal sense?
Per Hawaii Revised Statute §338-14.3,”…the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.
(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.
Further, §338-18 - Disclosure of records defines the valid list of parties who can request the desired information:
Note §338-18 338-18 (g)(1):
(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
(1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;
Since every voter is a person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record, it seems we’ve been given legal verification of the matters of fact, by the Director of the Department of Health for the State of Hawaii, within what Hawaii State Law allows.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:31 PMUsing
What is so hard about this, Dave?
McCain produced his; Hillary would have done so had she been asked, I’m sure.
So, what is he hiding? He is no longer a “private citizen.” It would be inappropriate for people to demand those of his wife or daughters, but not his.
Were you this concerned when Joe the Plumber’s records were hacked? HE is a private citizen.
BTW, were you on the bandwagon for Sarah Palin to provide a birth certificate and DNA results for Trig?
December 8th, 2008 at 2:41 PMUsing
DJ Allyn writes:
Deej has got a point folks… I was none too happy about those in the public service triggering unlawful searches of Joe Wurzelbacher’s records simply because he asked Obama a question on camera. It was invasive, wrong AND illegal. Those involved tried to unsuccessfully cover it up too. Not exactly a bright shining spot in the civil services’ record.
See my previous post. The original birth certificate has been verified, per Hawaii state law. They’re on record about that. At this point, if the Supreme Court of the United States is not interested in the challenge to make Obama produce the full long form/vault copy of his birth certificate, perhaps it’s because the challenge is without merit?
If they’re lying about this, and it comes out later? People’s careers/lives are going to BURN.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:43 PMUsing
AgTiger,
Since the constitution REQUIRES that a candidate be a natural-born citizen, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for anyone aspiring to POTUS to PROVE it. As I see it, once you run for the most public of public offices, you cease to be a private citizen, at least for the duration.
The problem here is in the wording. Did they verify the state-issued, certified copy, or the certificate of birth?
December 8th, 2008 at 2:52 PMUsing
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
and there you have your answer…..he is of divine immaculate birth, there are no birth records kept for messiahs. This is a moot issue you non-believers, you blasphemers, you eeeeevil right wing monkey wrench throwers.
/audition for CNN anchor
December 8th, 2008 at 2:53 PMUsing
DJ Allyn, ITW sez:
I think that I have the right to know that Barack Hussein Obama, “private citizen”, is Constitutionally eligible to assume the office that he has stood for election to. From where I stand, this is what the whole thing is about. It will stop when he demonstrates that he is, or is not, eligible.
So you’re saying that we must give up our right to know that the man who stands to be inaugurated as President on 20 Jan 2009 is actually eligible for the position? Tell me, do we have to give that right up because he’s black or because he’s a liberal and “it’s your turn now”?
I’d also be curious to know just how many of those Federal judges who dismissed were Clinton appointees. Just for the record, of course.
As a citizen of these united States and as one of those from whom the government derives its delegated powers, I submit that it is our responsibility to ensure that anyone who would lead us is indeed eligible to do so. Maybe the FBI has a file. Maybe they don’t. I don’t know, and honestly, unless you moonlight as FBI Director, neither do you. You might want to stick your head in the sand and let the “Almighty Government” direct all from on high. I believe, though, as an adult, as a citizen, as a taxpayer, and as a voter, it is my duty to help ensure that the Federal Government, as recipient of delegated powers, does what it is supposed to do. Part of that is making sure that those who would run things are actually eligible to do so.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:54 PMUsing
Also, if I am ordered by a judge to produce a certain document, aren’t *I* required by law to do so? He doesn’t have to put it on the internet. Let the supremes rule on it.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:55 PMUsing
Well, a COLB will not be sufficient as it has little detail; the one the Obamatrons posted having been proven a poor fake by professional analysis, along with several known statements from his own Kenyan relatives that he was born there instead plus he having attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, etc., would seem to add weight vis-a vis. Berg’s case to mandate Court action. Esp. in light of there being NO personal info on record about B. HUSSEIN Obama - by his own mandate.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:56 PMI was hoping the add’l weight of Electoral votes being withheld would spur the Court to put this to bed before later facts certain to come to light made an ass out of them if they failed to do so now, not to mention all the damage that would have to be undone. It seems reasonable to me under all these circumstances to have some Hope, without which we coud be up Shit Creek in other cases as well!
Using
Damn. Now I feel important. That’s the nicest thing anyone has said to me today.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:05 PMUsing
The POTUS is quite official.
I must provice equal docs each time I have to badge-in to work inside any school or defense industry properties and buildings.
I think it’s rediculous too, but if I want to keep my job….
‘Certainly hope Ah-nold is watching over there in Caleeforrrn’ya.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:11 PMUsing
That doesn’t necessarily mean he has born in Hawaii; it could merely state the date he was born elsewhere.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:12 PMStrange they never have said even which city and hospital, isn’t it? Why was the Secretary of State so vague in saying even less before? Why would anyone want to give them the benefit of the doubt when the matter is so urgent, when all of us have to surrender this info innumerable times in life, including on Passports.
Give me a break - after the primaries where B Hussein Obama failed to answer hardly ANY questions at all in detail, and has released NO INFORMATION WHATSOEVER about himself - congressional and school records even (but everyone knew all about Algore & Bush’s and every other candidate in mind).
I’ll be Damned if I’ll give ANY quarter, roll over on ANY issue relative to this S.O.B.
There are countless arguments as to why this needs to be vetted beyond the shadow of a doubt. Your research, AgTiger is sadly lacking - don’t take the word of those lying bastards that want all this to be a big F-ing secret!
Using
We of the Right already have sufficient cause to doubt Barack Obama’s suitability and capability to run a lemonade stand let alone govern the most powerful nation on the planet. There will be many, many more opportunities for him to show his true incompetence and anti-American sentiment.
Obama may be a good orator but sans executive experience, thus someone will be pulling his strings and telling him what to say. I suggest we start digging into who is the ‘Power Behind the Throne’.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:13 PMUsing
Deej,
I have to take issue with some of the things you have said on this topic, both here and in other threads, starting with your contention that his citizenship would have to have been verified with a bunch of government agencies and that they never would allow him to take office without it. If this were true, then it would have been a legitimate and decisive defense to raise in any responsive pleading filed by Team Obama. It was not. In the absence of any clear directive to any agency to investigate and ensure the citizenship of someone running for office, we, the citizens, have no assurances that any one who may be charged with securing said proof is actually doing so, and to continue to tell citizens that they do not have a right to demand proof their their candidates elect are actually Constitutionally qualified for the offices that they seek only does more in terms of actually disenfranchising us than any “concern” used to legitimize ACORN’s continued existence, if only because the concern at hand goes DIRECTLY to the legitimacy of the entire process.
As for your assertion that he is a private citizen and should not have to endure such fatiguing demands, you lose on two counts. First, he is no longer a private citizen. The public has a right to know if he is getting a little on the side in the Oval Office or snorting blow off a dead hookers ass, because either can affect his job performance or compromise his ability to represent AMERICA’S interests. His family does not have to subject themselves to the same level of scrutiny…we didn’t elect them, but when it is a qualification of the job, it is not unreasonable for citizens to expect proof of qualification. Second, this is not an instance that lends itself to repetition. With a press corps hanging on his every sigh, belch, and fart, it would be a very easy matter for him to publish the necessary proof and put the matter to bed once and for all. It would also be immeasurably less expensive than the continous resistence that he countinues to mount in various legal venues right now. And if privacy were a serious concern, he could always move for a protective order to let the Justices review it in camera, and announce their findings. Again, if he is legitimate, and he believes in the system, this is perfectly reasonable. For him to say otherwise makes him a hypocrite, because he sought the highest office in the land under a system of laws that he would be saying he does not have confidence in.
It comes down to this: Hopey-Changey can spread a little sunshine through honest and full disclosure, or he can continue to act as if he has something to hide, and serve with very real questions regarding his qualifications hanging over his Presidency. That ain’t change Americans can believe in, Dave.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:15 PMUsing
DJ Allyn, ITW sez:
in fact if i am applying for a job with a private citizen i am required to prove i am a legal resident of the United States. my citizenship status is not private information under the law. try looking at a job application form sometime. Mr. Obama has applied for a job. let him follow the same requirements i do.
your right.
apparently not. can you name the office responsible?
and you could personnaly guarantee the moon is made of green cheese without affecting reality one bit. the governor of Hawaii has guarateed the existence of Mr. Obama’s birth record but has never said he was born in Hawaii.
statement “I would like for you to believe me when I say that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.” did i just say he was born in Hawaii? no, i asked you to believe me if i should ever make such a statement. lying with a partial truth is an old trick.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:16 PMUsing
DJ Allyn:
A masterful example of chop logic, DJ. Here’s where it falls down: Am I entitled to see your bank records? Absolutely not — you enjoy the full protection of the Privacy Act. So does Barack H. Obama, but with one crucial difference: Unlike you or me, he sought election to and won a powerful public office. The people have the right to know exactly who they’re electing, and that implies a loss of privacy in very narrow circumstances. Some of those are well defined in federal law; others are by custom.
You and I aren’t required to release public financial disclosures, but those who would be or are president, senators and representatives must do so under the law. You and I have stringent protection against the release of any part of our medical histories by third parties, but those who wish to become president or vice president know full well that they must publicize this information lest their campaigns grind to a screeching halt (See: Palin, Sarah).
Please go back and carefully read Philip Berg’s brief. Some of his allegations about Mr. Obama’s actions after reaching the age of majority may render all this squabbling about the validity of documents from Hawai’i entirely moot. Is Berg a nut? Quite possibly, but that’s “above my pay grade,” to quote your pal the president-elect.
Personally, I hope all of this is resolved in Mr. Obama’s favor. Hear me out, the rest of you, before revving up the flamethrowers o’doom: If Barack Obama were to be disqualified from serving as president, that would mean we’d get Joe Biden in office. I repeat: JOE BIDEN! Mr. Obama is becoming the devil we know. Mr. Biden will forever be known as a loose cannon on deck. I’d rather not take that chance with my country’s future.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:26 PMUsing
C’mon, DEEJ, how many ROTTs do you actually think put any credence into anything Salon offers up? I wouldn’t give them 2 seconds of my time compared to ANY of my own preferences.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:30 PMThose arguments on this important issue that I have read have been sourced out by those who are much sharper than anyone I personally know, including me.
It’s otherwise like taking anyone’s word for everything without proof, and the position of POTUS is the absolutely most important thing anyone could insist on the proper credentials for.
I honestly think that Everyone that is balking at this issue is really afraid of what will come up - and it will eventually come up. B. HUSSEIN Obama is the problem; if he had provided this info like an other candidate would have, or did upon request, rather than spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting it, and causing others to have tone the same, the Country wouldn’t be facing this mess. And he isn’t really even in power yet to RULE, as he likes to say!
Using
LC Don_M @:
That’s true. But where do you draw the line? What about the next time, and the time after that? I’m wondering that if Bambi were unqualified to begin with, is the election even valid? In which case, Biden may be disqualified, as well.
OOOO. and then we get Nancy Pelosi! ROFL And THAT would frost hillary’s chops, i bet.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:32 PMUsing
LC Cheapshot911, Dept. of Redneck Tech @:
Yeah, he’s trying to see how it’s done for his own run!
Obama is illegitimate in more ways than one.
If he’s a natural citizen, show the paper. ??????
His parent s were “married” but his father was a bigamist- married to a Kenyan woman at the time he married Barrack’s mother.
His Kenyan relatives say he was born there.
He was expatriated by his mother and “adopted” by an Indonesian Muslim and attended Islamic ’school’.
He was influenced and educated by marxists, taught politics by terrorists and the Chicago Machine and ’spiritually’ inspired by a frothing racist
propagandistliar. Oh.. same thing.His subsequent ‘career’ involved little but figure head appointments and spoon fed, and crooked, political campaigns, most especially this last one!!! Illegal foreign contributions, Main Stream Propaganda Machine, government school ignoratii……
He will be among the most disastrous Residents ever. It’s possible that he will prove fatal to Liberty and to National sovereignty as well. The success of his stated goals would about guarantee it.
And no, DJ, I’m not going to “debate” you about it. The above are my conclusions from what we know or can fairly infer about Bambi. They are sufficient for me unless or until something new and verifiable (not just your opinion) like his thoroughly vetted birth certificate, comes to light. I won’t hold my breath. I already know where you stand and so does everyone else here. So spare us a page full of your counter assertions, redirections and dismissive derisions dressed up as facts.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:35 PMUsing
McPalin would then win by default?
Imagine the copies that would sell!
December 8th, 2008 at 3:35 PMUsing
LC Cheapshot911, Dept. of Redneck Tech @ 41:
December 8th, 2008 at 3:38 PMOoooo. Hadn’t thought of that. Leftist heads all over America would explode. And leftist heads would explode all over America.
Using
See the 20th and 25th Amendments. It comes down to timing.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:39 PMUsing
LC Don_M sez:
until the electoral college votes, Mr. Obama is not the president elect and Mr. Biden is not the Vice-President elect. if the supreme court does its job and determines Mr. Obama ineligible before the vote, Mr. Biden is not automatically in. the delegates would likely vote for the next highest nominee, Mrs. Clinton.
December 8th, 2008 at 3:50 PMUsing
Damn, got here too late to slap down DJ’s asinine arguments … Blackiswhite already did a masterful job. :em69:
December 8th, 2008 at 4:08 PMUsing
What do you base that conclusion on?
From the 20th Amendment:
How do you reconcile this with your conclusion?
December 8th, 2008 at 4:10 PMUsing
LC Don_M @ 37 sez:
As soon as Biden took the oath of office, Hillary would have him, Pelosi and Byrd him rubbed out a-la Vince Foster and assume the office that she was destined for.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:14 PMUsing
All the obfuscation and misdirection is to keep hidden the real reason The Chastisement® won’t reveal his birth cert.
His name is Aloysius Fey Dunham….
December 8th, 2008 at 4:55 PMUsing
Blackiswhite, Imperial Agent Provocateur @:47 read your blockquote, the twentieth says President elect. Mr. Obama is not the president elect until the electoral college says so. the electoral college will meet on Dec. 15. if Mr. Obama is proven ineligible after they vote then the twentieth amendment is relevant.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:00 PMUsing
Maybe BO won’t reveal his birth certificate because his parents actually weren’t married.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:20 PMUsing
DJ Allyn, ITW sez:
*ahem* Nice straw man, there. Tell me something, have you ever applied for a job where the employer requires all applicants to take drug screenings and/or provide documentation of eligibility to work? This is exactly the same situation. Contrary to your attempted distortion of the situation, this is not simply a case of one citizen demanding private information from another. This is a case of citizens of our nation demanding that a candidate (now wrongfully elected, in my opinion) prove that he is eligible to hold the position as prescribed by the Constitution. We The People are the “employer”, and it is our right to demand that the applicant prove his eligibility to hold the highest office in the nation.
Oh, right about where the applicant proves his eligibility under the Constitution.
Quite right. However, you intentionally ignore a very important fact: There is no right to the office of POTUS. You have to prove your eligibility under the Constitution. If you refuse to do so, you cannot, constitutionally, be considered for the office. Obama had the choice of proving eligibility or not running. He chose to cheat and ignore the rules, and now people like you want the rules changed after the fact to accommodate him.
This is about the birth certificate. Unlike you, most of us aren’t arrogant enough to presume knowledge we don’t have. Therefore, we demand this knowledge in accordance with the Constitution.
Simply, pathetically wrong.
Really… We The People are being denied the right to demand that our government comply with its own constitution and you think this is A-OK?
When the government fails to do its job, the citizens must step in. Show me where it has been confirmed by the FBI that Obama is a natural-born citizen and I might drop it. Ok, actually I won’t, because Obama must prove his eligibility to US, not the rest of the government.
Proof please? Anything? No, I thought not. Quit blowing smoke and assumptions.
Frankly, I no longer give a rip what is actually on Obama’s BC. If he’s disqualified or embarrassed by it, whoop-a-dee-doo. I simply want that man to be bound by the same laws as the rest of us. Having had him appointed by an affirmative action mentality and complicit media was bad enough, but he is adding insult to injury by refusing to obey a constitutional requirement. Hence, I will refuse to acknowledge him as my president until such time as he has complied with the Constitution proven his eligibility to hold that office.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:24 PMUsing
considering the potential crapstorm should my doubts be correct, i think i would rather see Mr. Bergs suit completly disproven.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:36 PMUsing
If Obamanation were to be disqualified and just hear the conversation between Hillary and Nancy.
Hillary leans over close to Nancy and says, Its a nice day, you up for a walk in the park?
December 8th, 2008 at 5:53 PMUsing
I certainly hope Mr. Berg’s suit gets picked up by SCOTUS and this issue is laid to rest one way or the other. It is idiotic to suggest that, if Obambi doesn’t meet the CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS for POTUS, SCOTUS is somehow disenfranchising the millions of fools who were duped into voting for him (I’ve been wanting to modify one of those HOPE posters to say DUPE). If a court convicts a grifter of fraud, does that mean his victims were better off defrauded? The bottom-line truth is that if Obambi can’t establish citizenship, we have a fraud of massive proportions committed or at least suborned by the DNC and many others. The perps need to be prosecuted and the Obamanchurian Candidate needs to be removed and prosecuted.
In fact, regardless of whether it’s true or not, if the Obamanchurian Candidate won’t prove his qualification even to run for office, he should be removed. If anyone else, including McCain, were in this position, the hue and cry would be deafening and unstoppable. Does anyone seriously think that they could go down to DMV and just say they were who they claimed to be and were X age and get a D/L with no birth certificate? If this goes by the by, it won’t be the death knell for the U.S., it may not be a catastrophe–maybe it’s time to repeal that qualification and give da Ahnold a chance and maybe Joseph Cao, Saigon born, recently elected Congressman from N’awlins (who actually looks promising). But until the REQUIREMENT is LEGALLY repealed, it stands and must be enforced.
Of course, we could take the other approach and not F with any requirements or standards at all–kinda like Obambi’s whole life and that of most of the Fs that surround him–just surfing the waves of affirmative action and gummint waste. No need to hold a real job. No need to achieve anything. No, flaunting the NBC requirement won’t be the death knell, but what it says about the rule of law and both the “majority’s” and the “powers-that-be’s” willingness to ignore the law in favor of appeasement of the left, their own comfort, “hopefulness,” but most of all, their POWER–that’s the death knell, right there. And it tolls for thee!
December 8th, 2008 at 6:21 PMUsing
L C hilljohnny @:
Give me the ‘crapstorm’ any day. The lid has to blow sometime, the sooner, the better. Before he ‘takes’ office and begins to ‘rule’.
I would rather see blood in the streets than that lying incompetent marxist impostor in the White House.
Imperial Librarian Azygos @:
Fixed it fer ya. :em01:
December 8th, 2008 at 6:33 PMUsing
AyUaxe @:
Bravo. I wish you weren’t right, but you are.
December 8th, 2008 at 6:38 PMUsing
LC Skychild:
From what I read from the statement in the article, combined with the Hawaii state law about what “verification” actually means, it looks like they verified the original birth certificate for authenticity. Since Hawaii has issued a birth certificate for Obama, it’s pretty much a slam dunk at this point: He’s a Natural Born United States Citizen.
LC Paladin:
I understand your strong desire to vet the original vault copy of Obama’s Birth Certificate, but it will require someone mentioned in §338-18 (b)(9) of the Hawaii Revised Statutes in order to get that released. The State of Hawaii isn’t going to violate its own law on the release of that information. Obama doesn’t want to request its release, so we’re pretty much left with one of the other relatives who is qualified under §338-18 (b), or §338-18 (b)(9) which allows a court with proper jurisdiction to designate an individual.
Assuming that Obama was born out of State (or out of country) for a moment, §338-17.8 covers the issuances of Certificates for children born out of State. The parents must have declared Hawaii as their legal residence for one year prior to the birth.
The out-of-state/out-of-country argument doesn’t seem to hold up, however. The Certification of Live Birth list the county and island of birth as Honolulu and Oahu respectively. If the original Certificate was issued under §338-17.8, why would the Certification of Live Birth list a different place of birth (domestic/Hawaii) than the original Certificate? That doesn’t make sense to me.
The city and hospital that you want to see information on are probably listed on the vault copy/long form of the Birth Certificate, and the Certificate has not been released.
If the Kenyan relatives are making claims that Obama was born in Kenya, then let them provide a Kenyan birth certificate for all to see. That would be sufficient evidence to considerably heat the issue up enough that the courts might well want to designate a person under §338-18 (b)(9) to request a certified copy of the long form of the Birth Certificate.
As to the Constitutional requirement for “Natural Born”: This basically means: Not Naturalized, but born so that the rights of American Citizenship flow naturally from the parent to the child either via Jus Soli (right of the land) or Jus Sanguinis (Right of the Blood). See the requirements of United States Code § 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth. Were Obama born abroad, section (g) would seem to apply. Please note that you can see the revisions of this section at this link: http://law.onecle.com/uscode/8/1401.html and in 1986, section (g) reduced the pre-birth residency requirement to 5 years from 10. Obama was born in 1961, so the pre-residency requirement for the American parent (Ann Dunham) in force at that time would have been 10 years. I believe she was in the United States more than long enough to satisfy the requirement, so even if born abroad, Obama Jr. would have been entitled to Natural Born American Citizenship via that section of the USC, and the legal concept of Jus Sanguinis (the right of the blood).
However, again I revisit the fact that the Certification of Live Birth lists his place of birth in Honalulu County on the island of Oahu, so without specific evidence to the contrary, Obama was born in the State of Hawaii, and is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States by Jus Soli (right of the land).
Either way, he’s a Natural Born Citizen, which meets the constitutional requirement for serving in the capacity of POTUS.
Please note: I’m quite willing to be proven wrong, but that will require actual evidence to sway me; allegations and accusations aren’t going to cut it.
One final note: I’m NOT pro-Obama. The guy’s a lightweight, he changes his position/statement on things so often that you can’t trust him on any agreement made, and I don’t think he has the spine to be the CinC. I think the primaries for both the Democrats and the Republicans were done in such a way that they did not allow the cream to rise to the top, and better candidates were forced to drop out of the races. (I was hoping for Fred Thompson, myself.)
December 8th, 2008 at 6:47 PMUsing
AgTiger sez:
No. It will never satisfy any of you and you know it. It will never be enough, and even when it DOES prove Obama is eligible, everything will shift and he will be accused of having it tampered with.
Too far fetched? We have already heard Rush Limbaugh and the Savage Wiener accuse Obama of flying to Hawaii under the cover of visiting his grandmother for the real purpose of tampering with the evidence.
Oh good gawd. Another researcher “researcher”. Is there a magazine you can get a “researcher” certificate out of? An online “Church” like where I got my “Ordained Minister” certificate and for an additional buck I could then perform marriages?
And what “research” pray tell, did you do? And why? Aren’t you in Canada?
The bigger question would be, why would YOU waste your time on this?
The problem is, most of the fringe will not accept that verification because they demand the “cold hard original”. As I said earlier, this is NOT about the birth certificate or even his ‘eligibility’. That has already been established as much as it is going to be.
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
McCain produced his because he was actually born outside of the United States. Obama was born in Hawaii, and officials of the state of Hawaii have verified that fact. Hillary would never have been asked because it is assumed that by her being born in Illinois made her a US citizen, just as Obama being born in Hawaii would make him a citizen also. Besides, Obama DID provide a certified copy of his birth certificate that the State of Hawaii has later issued a statement saying that the copy provided Obama by the State and posted on his website does, in fact match the information found on the original in the state vault.
The problem is, you don’t like that copy because it isn’t a copy of the original. It is what most states print out and certify as containing the true information found on the original. But because that copy was probably copied and then scanned for posting, all of you “document experts-at-large”, with all of your “training” and expertise in these types of things, have determined it to be “fake”.
Okay, try this on for size: Show me in the Constitution where it says Obama gives up his rights under the Constitution that are afforded to other private citizens. Also, show me in the Constitution where you or I have a “Right” to have access to this information. You all talk about “strict constructionalism” when it comes to interpreting the Constitution, but you seem real eager to throw it out when you are wanting to pry into the private life of another citizen.
And I challenge you or anyone else here where there is a law or constitutional provision that says one private citizen has a right to demand personal information from another private citizen for the purpose of making such information public.
Does this mean I can go to a court and demand access to your medicine cabinet, your underwear drawer, your bank account information for the purpose of making it public? I don’t care that you aren’t running for public office or not, you are not entitled to demand and receive that kind of information.
You DO have a right to know if Obama is eligible for the office in which he ran. The government has indicated he is. Hawaii has certified that he is a natural-born citizen, and that the copy of the computer-generated certification of information relating to Obama’s birth (commonly referred to as a certified “copy” of his birth certificate) is, in fact a reflection of some of the information found on the actual original hard copy found in the vault in Hawaii. The director herself has made that certification, and you can’t get much more official than than.
Your right to know has been satisfied. But that isn’t enough for you nor will it ever be.
It is also telling about the kinds of people the petitioners are in these cases. Philip Berg, I might remind you, is one of the people who claim George W. Bush planned and executed the attacks on the WTC on 9/11. The New Jersey idiot in the case the Supremes just turned down has similar history of strange legal challenges against the government. I know an attorney just like them. Before he got his law degree and admitted to the bar, he went by the name “Zamboni John“. He is one who filed in Washington on Obama citizenship.
You are in great company.
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
Have you been able to name any other presidential candidate EVER who has been required to “PROVE it”?
Isn’t it YOU who are making the accusation that he isn’t a natural-born citizen? If so, then the burden of proof is on YOU. The problem is, you don’t have any legal standing to force Obama to provide YOU with that documentation because he is not required to do so. However, the government can, and most assuredly did, research everything there could possibly be known about the man LONG before he became the presumptive candidate for his party. He doesn’t even have to give the government that kind of permission — they are sure to have complete and unlimited access to just about everything there is to know about you, me, and Obama.
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
First of all, the “Supremes” just did rule on it — by choosing not to hear the case. That means it is their intent to let the lower court ruling stand. In other words, that is their ruling also.
Second, a court is only going to grant a motion requiring you to produce a certain document if the court finds that the opposing party has a need and standing to be provided with that document. The lower court(s) in all of these cases have consistently ruled that there is no such standing.
LC SkyeChild G.L.O.R., Imperial Grammar Hun sez:
All three. Try to wrap your mind around the concept: Hawaii says they not only have a real, actual hard copy original certificate attesting to the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii to at least one American parent. Here is some more on it:
L C hilljohnny sez:
And that would be what, filling out the I-9 form? Basically, all you need for that is a valid driver’s license or state ID card and a Social Security card. IF a person wants to use his birth certificate, he would be able to use the following:
But here is why you are still talking apples and oranges here: you are technically not Obama’s employer. Sure, “We the People” make up the “government” of this nation, but as far as “employer/employee” relationship, we are not part of that relationship. We are not paid employees of the government, hell, we are not privy to much of its workings. You might have had the chance to vote for the man, but that doesn’t put you in the employer/employee relationship.
Also, you will notice that the I-9 does not go to the Office of the curious partisan private citizen who “wants to know”. Instead it goes to the US Government’s Homeland Security, where they already have this information and more on Obama.
ALConfederate sez:
Actually, you have an expectation that he is a citizen, not a “right to know”. Again, I direct your attention to the US Constitution and show me where you actually have that “Right”.
The enforcement of the Constitution is with the US Department of Justice, and you can bet your bupkiss that they have looked into it.
I am first waiting for you to establish that you have that “Right”. But assume for a moment that you do: What is the scope of that right? Are you unfettered to continually ask for and expect to receive evidence that you choose to discard and demand more?
Here is some inescapable FACTS for you: Obama provided a photocopy of a Certificate he claims came from the State of Hawaii that represents some of the pertinent information attesting to his birth and his eligibility for the office of the president based on being a “natural born citizen”.
The State of Hawaii, on two separate occasions state that the information included in the posted birth certificate is true and correct when compared to the original birth certificate located in the “vault”. This was not only attested to by the head of the state Health Department (whose authority is one that certifies such things under penalty of perjury, yadda yadda yadda), but also followed up a couple of days later in a series of newspaper interviews by the spokesperson for the department.
THAT, my friend, is all the knowledge you NEED to know, but apparently you feel there is no limits to your “Rights” on this.
How about the most recent: The 5-4 Conservative Supreme Court needed the “gang of four” to take this case on. Not one signed on.
Really? Where is that responsibility written down again? I was unaware you had special powers given to you that way.
We ALL have FBI files. Every last one of us, and I DO know this for a fact, and I mentioned how I know this in another thread so I don’t need to be repeating it here again. But rest assured, they know more about you than you think they do, almost to the point of knowing MORE than you about yourself. If you are interested, file a FOIA request to see your FBI file(s). It will take you a couple of years and several denials, but there is an appellate process involved and after about four years and three appeals, you will get to see a redacted file that you cannot copy or take notes.
LC Paladin sez:
Professional? Are you kidding me? A professional document forensics expert will be the very first to tell you that pulling a document off of the Internet and having any kind of meaningful analysis is virtually impossible. You would need the original document, and there are people who HAVE analyzed the original COLB and determined that it was real.
LC Don_M sez:
There is absolutely nothing — custom or otherwise — that requires Barack Obama to give you a copy of his original birth certificate. There wasn’t even the requirement that he had to show you the one he posted on his website. But he did. Not only that, the accuracy of the information found on that copy posted on his website has been attested to by none other than the Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, whose job is to keep and certify such records that are in her charge. In other words, he has had independent verification BY THE STATE WHO SAYS THE MAN WAS BORN IN IT.
This isn’t good enough for you, and frankly, there is NOTHING that is going to be good enough for any of you on this matter.
You just need to get over it. President Obama will be our President for at least the next four years, and most likely for the next eight.
Even the Supreme Court — who appointed George Bush on his petition — has agreed there is no “there” there.
Come up with a candidate to beat Obama in four years. I don’t see it happening, but you can at least try. Meanwhile, you are starting to look like the fringe element hanging out on the outskirts of Area 51.
December 8th, 2008 at 9:01 PMUsing
Ahhh. I see. Got it, Deej. He won’t put it to bed because he enjoys spending piles of cash to “protect his privacy”, despite the fact that there are ways to do it that will “protect his privacy.” Of course! Being an attorney myself, why didn’t I see the wisdom and reason in his
December 8th, 2008 at 9:30 PMdivineasinine course of action?Using
:em01: You donks can dish out your bullshit for eight years and you can’t take it for even one blog thread. :em01:
Strap in and enjoy the ride until jugears fucks up enough to get his ass bounced via impeachment or 25th Amendment.
P.S. Fuck your pretender-in-chief and the corrupt filth that handed him the Presidency on a silver platter.
December 8th, 2008 at 9:45 PMUsing
God bless our future President.
Once he has dealt with this “global warming” thing, and pays my mortgage, I will KNOW that he is the Messiah.
And by the way, President-elect-Obama:
Could you stop it from getting colder and colder in Minnesota? You see, the temps have DROPPED in this state for the past ten years, and I’m waiting for the global warming thingy to affect ME.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:09 PMI know that’s kind of selfish, but what the hell, I’m an American, and I WANT what I WANT, and I WANT it NOW.
You know, like those car guys in Detroit.
Using
DJ Allyn writes:
And here I thought I was being clear and stating that the existing released documentation was sufficient to convince me that his American Citizenship is established and not in question.
That’s not my position.
I hadn’t seen those accusations. They are definitely sensational, and should be met with a request for actual evidence of same. They’re the ones making the accusation, it’s up to them to prove it. If they can’t, then they’re just spouting off for ratings.
That was uncalled for.
I read the relevant law from the Revised Statutes for Hawaii, the U.S. Code and the U.S. Constitution with regards to natural born citizenship, and how the government recognizes the existence of same, or how it can be conferred.
Why? To figure out how it all fits together, of course. This is very interesting stuff.
Yes.
My wife and I spent 7 years in Kansas City and had the pleasure of dealing with INS approval paperwork for my job, and her dependancy-status on me every single year of those seven years. While we were there, we had two daughters who are natural born American citizens, as well as Canadian citizens through a naturalization process we initiated for them when we all moved back to Canada in 2002.
This makes me more interested than most in the issues of citizenship, how it’s recognized, conferred, or removed by the Constitutions and laws of various nations.
That is why I wrote that the release of a certified copy of the original would have put the whole mess to rest. It would have shut this firestorm of suspicion down except for the most die-hard conspiracy theorists who wouldn’t have even accepted that proof.
Perhaps where some people are concerned, you are correct. I was satisfied with what I found out.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:09 PMUsing
Hey Misha, Charles Johnson has banned all links on his site to anything that defends the point of view opposite of his on the birth certificate issue. If you link to the “kook” opinions, ie opinions disagreeing with his, then you are subject to being banned. I learned this the hard way.
I think he was feeling merciful towards me. I didn’t know these links were banned, and I was using his link thingy on post where he was calling people kooks on the “nirth certifikate” and linked my post, your post here, and one in which Ace agrees with us. They were on different posts that I linked them. He removed those links.
He didn’t ban my account, but if I try to link Stop the ACLU over there it now tells me that links from that site are not allowed!
Charles Johnson is a kind lord to be so merciful to a pion like me and still allow me to have my account there. I definitely don’t need an enemy from such a big whig, but I was only doing a bit of friendly sparring. I didn’t realize he was so sensitive. I hear he is real sensitive about opinions that don’t believe in evolution too. I wonder if he thinks believing in a creator is kooky too?
December 8th, 2008 at 10:10 PMUsing
BisW, sorry to disappoint you, but Dave knows way more about the law than you do. Never mind that you are a practicing attorney, and he isn’t. If Dave says it’s true, then, by God, it MUST be true.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:30 PMUsing
Jay,
Charles is a mental defective with psyche issues. He’s not sensitive he’s an ass.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:39 PMUsing
DJ Allen says:
Yep, you’re right there. Eight more years of not being satisfied…you’ll see. :em58:
Sure, just ask the Klintoons for their copy of the FBI records they absconded and look it up, right?
I say, continued and deliberate harassment beyond anything ever before heard of. Any air time a 48% gets should be harsh criticism and negative, bumper stickers, graffiti, circuitous rants on blogs, deliberate refusal to obey his edicts, sabotage of all of his websites, dismantling of his ‘Get out the Vote’ campaigning machine, systematic destruction of the long haired academic elitists, everything the LLL’s plugged President Bush with whether it even has a grain of truth or not. Unrelenting, vulgar, hateful, senseless, nonstop ridicule. If my health fails, I am satisfied that my children will continue until he is no longer the Coward in Chief.
That’s a laugh I’ve had, for over a month, when my wife said to me, “We’ll just serve them some of their own pie. They can call us sufferers of ODiouS, because he sure is, isn’t he?”
December 8th, 2008 at 11:12 PMUsing
Jay sez:
Oh ferchrissakes, Jay, don’t goad him or he’ll post 489 posts spread over two weeks about his prehistoric wonder fish, riki-tiki-taalik, or whatever it is that it’s called. I just know that, thanks to that one fossil, Christianity has been forever proven to be a total hoax and that there is only one non-god, and Darwin is his prophet. :em01:
Oh, and every single European opponent of the caliphate is a Nazi, Christofascist or both.
Really, it’s his site to do with as he pleases, and if people were mass-spamming him with links to stuff he doesn’t agree with, I could see the point. But permanently banning a site because you put a link to an article relevant to the post you’re commenting on?
*Shrug*
His site, his rules, and I’d be pissed off if somebody told me what to do around here, so that’s all there is to it. Won’t keep me from chuckling and shaking my head from time to time, though. :em93:
December 8th, 2008 at 11:21 PMUsing
DJ Allyn, ITW sez:
Here’s my right, sir:
Article II Section 1 United States Constitution: No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
That clear enough for you? And, no, I’m not prepared to meekly accept your assumption — assumption, sir, you cannot prove this assertion — “that they have looked into it.” If I were in his shoes, I’d release the paperwork. He hasn’t. Hence, I’m starting to wonder what he might be hiding. Now, it may well be nothing at all except the work of some kooks — but why won’t he release the paperwork and put it to rest?
Please see the above for the establishment of my right to know. That is the full scope of my rights in this matter. As for the rest of your statement, please do not presume to put words in my mouth nor thoughts in my head. Documentary proof that he is indeed eligible will be sufficient.
I’ve heard about those documents and reports. From what I’ve seen and heard, the release was a statement of live birth, and there’s been enough doubt shed on the completeness of those documents here and elsewhere that I believe he’s going to have to commit to full disclosure and release all of it.
Deej, there you go again, putting words in my mouth. Argumentum ad absurdio does not become you, and does not help your argument.
You should do a little more research. SCOTUS did not grant certiorari in the Donofrio v. Wells case because it was more a matter of New Jersey state law and therefore outside the SCOTUS’s appellate jurisdiction. Donofrio is an idiot, anyway. He’s claimed in this filing and others that NO ONE who ran this year was eligible. We’re still waiting to hear on the Berg case.
But SCOTUS wasn’t what I was talking about. I’m more interested in the judges on the Federal circuit level and appellate levels. Again, just for curiosity’s sake, of course. I would never want to accuse such fair-minded public servants of bias on the bench.
:em98: So when you don’t have an argument you resort to insults and sarcasm? Come on, Deej. If we follow your line to its bitter end it takes us to a place where the Federal government is the master and we are all slaves to it. Do you really want to live there? I know I don’t. This is why I believe it is the duty and responsibility of every citizen to at least keep an eye on what the government is up to. The government is a creature of the People, not the other way around, and it has to be watched if we want to keep it that way.
Point me at that thread, then, and I’ll go look. I still think that the statement that they have a file, one each, on all three hundred million of us is patently absurd. But whatever. The mere existence of a file really doesn’t prove anything, now does it? Of course, maybe your Savior will be happy to release that as well.
All your tapdancing does not disguise the fact that there is a problem. All your man has to do to make that problem go away and make it’s adherents look like a bunch of wingnuts is release a simple document in its entirety. He has refused to do so, and has instead chosen to fight, spending money and lawyers. It -looks- like he might have something to hide. So why doesn’t he do the reasonable thing and just release one little document?
December 8th, 2008 at 11:58 PMUsing
DJ et al.
So many posts… so little knowledge. Since I work from home, I’ve read EVERY document, legal brief, Constitutional phrase and Amendment applicable on this issue. Here’s how it goes:
1. (From Donofrio’s case) Obama is born of one Stanley Anne Dunham, and one Barack Obama Sr. This is not in dispute.
2. (From Berg’s case) SAD was, by all accounts, only 18 at the time of Jr’s birth. By law, in 1961, she had to be 19 to be considered a full “US Citizen” (5 years past the age of 14 and residing in the U.S.). By LAW, that would make Barack Obama a “ward of the state” and a US Citizen by statute, not by right of birth on U.S. soil.
3. (From Donofrio’s case) Barack Obama Sr. was a British Citizen. By British law (the British Nationality Act of 1948), anyone born of a British Citizen (and particularly a father) was a British citizen at birth.
4. In 1963, when Obama Sr’s Brit Citizenship became Kenyan, so did Jr’s. Barack’s own website proudly states he allowed it expire in 1982. (www.factcheck.org Don’t laugh)
5. (From Donofrio’s case) In the Constitution (and Amendments), you can be considered a “natural born citizen” only when you are born in the US to US Citizen parents, and subject to US jurisdiction.
6. (From Donofrio’s case) Since Jr was born subject to British jurisdiction, as his dual citizenship through is father would have to grant, then he CAN NEVER BE NATURAL BORN.
Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. That’s the end of the trail folks. That’s what Leo Donofrio was arguing.
Now, cagey ol’ Leo asked for an “Emergency Stay” of the pending election in New Jersey, and later amended that in the SCOTUS brief into an emergency stay of the Electoral College vote on Dec 15th. This stay was denied summarily, without explanation. This does NOT mean that SCOTUS agrees. There were lower court procedural issues with Donofrio’s case, and a second similar case on Justice Scalia’s desk (which as of today has been forwarded to the entire court for a hearing in council on Friday). This is important because this is a “clean” case. It does NOT ask for a “writ of certiorari” as the media keeps hyping (which means arguments would be presented in person to the court). It asks for a STAY OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE until the matter is resolved. I believe this will be denied too.
Here’s why:
If you go back and read the Constitution, we vote, then the Electoral College CERTIFIES the candidates and votes, then Congress certifies the election results. That’s the process. Did you see anywhere in there where it says a candidate for President MUST be certified BEFORE the election? Only STATE election laws say that, and each state differs. That’s why Wrotnowski’s case before Scalia has been referred to the court. However, since FEDERAL law, governed by the Constitution clearly says the Electoral College must certify the candidates for President, it’s likely that SCOTUS will do NOTHING until that point. They can’t. It must truly become a “Constitutional crisis” before they CAN intervene.
So what will happen?
I think that after the Electoral College sheep vote on Dec 15th, WITHOUT doing any certification research of their own, any member of the U.S. Armed Forces currently serving COULD take President-Elect Obama to court to FORCE SCOTUS to act. Only at that point, after the process has run it’s course, but before the Inauguration (overseen by SCOTUS, btw) would this be a Constitutional issue. Military personnel are directly under oath to protect and uphold the Constitution of the United States, and as such, would have the legal Federal merit to DEMAND that SCOTUS rule on what exactly constitutes a “natural born citizen”. In other words, they should be compelled to act, but prevented from physical action by the Secret Service. Legal recourse is their only option. If, as I suspect, SCOTUS were to offer any ruling in such a case, they MUST find that the clause “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment, Section 1, first sentence of the Constitution eliminates ANYONE of dual citizenship. If you were born subject to ANY foreign jurisdiction, in any way whatsoever, you are still a US citizen, and can serve in Congress, but you can never be a “natural born citizen” nor President of the United States of America.
Barack Obama Jr has one British Citizen father, and will for all time, be able to claim a British Citizenship, by their Nationality Act of 1948. Not all the votes in every state in this Union can change that at this point.
BTW- Donofrio also argued Calero (a Honduran) and McCain (born in Panama and made a U.S. citizen by a law passed by Congress a year after his birth) are equally ineligible… and he’s right!
Don’t call me a kook for pointing out an inconvenient truth… Research my points and debate on those, but be aware, you’re going to lose. Barack Obama Jr can never legally be President, and he knows it.
BTW-Michelle Obama was correct when she said “I know of know law which would prevent my husband from being President.” The 14th Amendment, Section 1, first sentence of the Constitution of the United States is not “case law”.
The only way his Birth Certificate issue is valid is if, and when, the Electoral College should ask to see it. They are the only Federally-charged body allowed to do so.
December 9th, 2008 at 12:04 AMUsing
Here’s an interesting take on the situation over at the American Thinker.
December 9th, 2008 at 12:15 AMUsing
DJ Allyn, ITW @:
Wait a minute DJ, this nimrod is about to be inducted into the highest job in the country with absolutely NO qualifications, and now you say he doesn’t need bona-fides either?
Come on man, would you hire someone like this? If so show me to the executive section for an application, at least I HAVE led men before and have a VALID Birth Certificate.
This is going too far for even a DhimmicRAT
December 9th, 2008 at 1:20 AMUsing
How much fun is this shit? I mean here we are discussing this issue again, and we have DJ expounding his bullshit about “privacy” and “he doesnt have to” and show me the “LAW”.
And here’s my final answer on that kinda stupid fucking argument. You’re RIGHT DJ…”he doenst have to” and I know of no “LAW.” BUT WHAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO? THE HONORABLE THING? THE THING THAT WOULD BRING COMFORT TO THOSE QUESTIONING?
And your speculation about what would and would not make me (or anyone else for that matter) happy.. is just that… You dont know a fucking thing about me or what makes me happy… so save that bullshit. And then you have the fucking never to ask AgTiger if he’s in Canada? The tone being as “what business is this of yours”? Hey did you forget your DUAL citizenship? You been on quite the little tear today … leads me to believe that its possible you feel very threatened by this conversation.
Tell you what I’ll settle for… I’ll settle for knowing that Obama has been vetted and met the same requirements for TOP SECRET clearence as wuld be applied to me. Thats what I’ll settle for…. lifestyle polygraph and all….. When the CIA & the NSA publically announce that they have vetted Obama and he is qualified to have access to Top secret material then I will leave the issue alone. THATS WHAT WILL MAKE ME HAPPY. Until then I’ll settle for knowing that this purposely hiding POS that wants to be our President meets the minimum quals as outlined in the CONSTITUTION. And I want the Supreme’s to verify that to be the case. Further more.. I want them to verify every nominee that makes it past the primary before the actual election from now forward.
December 9th, 2008 at 1:52 AMUsing
@DJ #23
I realize this is late in the discussion, but,…
What part of Government OF the people, FOR the people, BY the people do you NOT understand????
I have to provide a BIRTH CERTFICATE to renew my DRIVER’S license in the state of Tennessee!!!
I’m not in any shape fashion or form in CONTENTION for the office of POTUS!!!!
So, if I have to provide PROOF that I am a US citizen to drive, then WHY shouldn’t “TEH MAGIC ONE” have to provide PROOF that HE is a citizen to run THE MOST POWERFULL POSITION IN THE FRIKKIN’ WORLD!!!!
That’s BESIDES the point that I, as an American Citizen, AM THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT!!!
December 9th, 2008 at 3:28 AMUsing
@DJ
It’s not a RIGHT that has to be established you Maroon!!!
“TEH MAGIC ONE” has a DUTY to PROVE that he is ELIGIBLE for the office of POTUS!!!
December 9th, 2008 at 3:48 AMUsing
To make that a LITTLE more CLEAR fo you DEEJ…
WE, as American citizens, do NOT have the DUTY to accept ‘TEH CHOSEN ONE’ as our president without PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP!!!
December 9th, 2008 at 4:36 AMHE, as teh chosen one, has the DUTY to show US (The People) that HE is eligible to be our PRESIDENT!!!
Using
Jay sez:
Jay, I gave up my LGF account over a year ago. Realize that Charles Johnson is not a Conservative; he is a liberal mugged by reality after 9/11. CJ is a long-haired, musician, programming bike-rider from California doesn’t that sum it up? If not also note that discussion about abortion will also get you yellow-carded on his site - doesn’t discussion abortion, and people who believe in God are weak-minded in the eyes of CJ. Ever hear him give an opinion on any other Conservative matters: Smaller Government? Gun control? Government spending? Personal responsibility? no? Sure do know his opinions on Islam though, right?
December 9th, 2008 at 8:18 AMUsing
where are the rights? try the Ninth Amendment.
December 9th, 2008 at 8:34 AMUsing
xenophobic @:
I see I am late to this discovery. Too bad I can’t leech off his traffic anymore though.
December 9th, 2008 at 12:24 PMUsing
Not fer nuthin’ here, guys:
If a job requires that you be able to meet certain criteria, it encumbent upon you to demonstrate that you DO meet said criteria before you can have the job.
How simple is that?
Birth certificate aside - in Obama’s own book, he has himself going to Pakistan in ‘80-’81 (part of that much-vaunted “international experience” of his)…
Problem - he couldn’t have entered Pakistan in ‘80-’81 with an American passport - Americans were banned from travel to Pakstan @ that time.
He could have gone with a Kenyan passport - or an Indonesian passport…
Problem - neither of those countries have reciprocal dual-citizenship with the US.
So - he couldn’t have entered Pakistan with a US passport - but he couldn’t have used a passport from either of the other countries if he were a US citizen.
So, who was/is he defrauding back-then-or-now?
Not that ANY of that matters nearly as much as the fact that the SCOTUS has decided that they simply refuse to hear a case directly questioning the Constitutional-qualification of someone for the Office of the President.
Our form of government is set up as a series of checks-and-balances for a reason - what are we to do when one branch simply refuses to execute theirs?
Personally?
I’d far rather that the Constitution void 64 million invalid votes - than have 64 million invalid votes void the Constitution.
Seems that something by Ben Franklin, about trading Freedom for Security, would be in order here.
- MuscleDaddy
December 9th, 2008 at 1:00 PMUsing
When I applied for a job as a teaching assistant, I had to provide transcripts and letters of recommendation…proof that I was qualified.
When I applied for a teaching job, I had to provide transcripts from all of my schools. I could have told my employer…no, YOU have to prove that I’m not qualified to teach. Yeah, that would have gone over really well.
Every job I’m aware of, YOU have to prove that you are qualified. I don’t believe it’s incumbent upon the employer to prove that you are not.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:25 PMUsing