I wrote on the topic of Constitutional Fundamentalism a few weeks ago, about how some Tea Party members carry around a pocket copy of the United States Constitution as a sort of talisman. I must confess that until recently it had been a very long time since I read the Constitution all together at one sitting. It’s a rather interesting but quirky document for the lay person.
I don’t know the precise motivation, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ALCU) recently has started mass mailing pocket copies of the Constitution also. (I carry an electronic copy on my iPhone.)
I see “just read the Constitution” often in comments here as a justification for something that is not in the Constitution. I think perhaps some of them should “just read the Constitution.”
Listening to the current argument about the construction of an Islamic community center, and the heat President Obama has taken over it, reminds me that in the popular mind the Constitution says to some folks what they want to hear. It says that speech is free so long as the speech is agreeable. It says that the President must have two citizen parents because they don’t like Obama and Obama doesn’t have two US citizen parents. The birthers, and the Tea Partiers adopt the trappings of patriotism but deny the substance of it as defined in the Constitution.
Liberals are not immune from reading their own prejudices into the Constitution either. Many liberals quit the ACLU in 1977-78 when it supported a neo-Nazi group’s right to march in a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Illinois.
“Liberals are not immune from reading their own prejudices into the Constitution either.” That’s true. In my case, the text of the Second Amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” seems to me to say that the right to bear arms is limited to those who are members of a “well regulated Militia” and who take up arms to protect their fellow citizens. That’s why I didn’t have a problem with Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns, and was disappointed when the Roberts Court struck down the ban as unconstitutional. Nevertheless, I found the constitutional arguments against the ban compelling and reasonable, and I didn’t start screeching that the Court was corrupt or illegitimate, and I didn’t I call for armed insurrection or parade around with insulting signs. Ah, if only the birthers . . . could be like me. Guess that’s my second prejudice.
I like the part where opponents of Health care attack people for calling Health care a ‘right’. It isn’t listed in the Bill of Rights, they say, the Feds have no authority for ‘finding new rights’. The 10th Amendment draws a line in the sand and says that can’t happen.
But they miss the 9th amendment altogether that says that just because some rights are listed in the Constitution it doesn’t mean that those are the only rights that exist.
Husbands (like me) are often accused of selective hearing. Clearly, some people are guilty of selective reading. Then they fill in the gaps with whatever offal happens to come along first, like a duck hatchling identifying its mother.
Arthur the way that I read it is “the security of a free State.” I which a interpret to mean the militia. Which is similar to yours.
Dr. Conspiracy,
Can you tell me why Obama won’t allow Kapio’lani Hospital to confirm his birth?
Why has Obama lied about being born there if he is so transparent and truthful?
It would cost him zero and it would be a third party verification for them to confirm. But they won’t, because he wasn’t. Forget all these documents.
The lies all begin at Kapio’lani.
The issue here has nothing to do with conspiracy. It has everything to do with transparency of documents which are not private IN THE LEAST.
I’m sure you’ve never explained that. Like all the true believers, you’ll say something like, “He doesn’t have to.” or “It’s obvious.” Something totally devoid of solid ground.
Who says Obama isn’t allowing the hospital to confirm his birth? He hasn’t lied. People who believe like have reasoning “devoid of solid ground”. He’s already proven his birth but now you want him to keep proving it more and more, beyond what you’ve asked of the previous presidents before him. Why is that?
I’m all behind politicians releasing otherwise private info when there is a reason. It’s become common for Presidents to release their tax returns, so we can see if they’re ripping us off. McCain released much of his medical records because there were valid concerns about whether he was healthy enough. And the President released his birth certificate, because his childhood was complicated enough to feed rumors that he wasn’t actually born here.
We’re still left with birthers insisting they need more, but the birthers are unable to articulate a reason why. And I mean “reason” in the sense of something that makes some kind of rational sense.
Then perhaps you can explain why no judge will go along with any birther lawsuit, and why out of over 200 GOP Congressmen not one single one has called for an investigation into the President’s eligibility, without invoking a conspiracy.
the law sees to have a different view than you do.
Joseph Maine, you should read the Constitution. There is no requirement that the president be born in a hospital. The Constitution requires that the president be born a citizen, so that’s what Obama showed.
Is a Hawaiian record really good enough? How much faith should we have in it, and how much credit should we give it?
“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” — U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 1
So Mr. Maine, how about showing some respect for the Constitution? And as your implication that President Obama lied about where he was born, we’ve seen more than enough to know who the liars here are.
as dave stated above, how ? please explain how a birther fantasy is possible without a conspiracy.
I’m sorry to bust your conspiracy bubble but the Hospital has said that Obama was born there and further some folks do remember him being born there as well.
Joseph Maine, can you tell me why you care about what hospital President Obama was born?
Can you in anyway validate your claim that President Obama has lied about his birth?
Can you in anyway prove he wasn’t born in Hawaii
Can you tell me- actually can you prove- that you asked any previous President to prove what hospital he was born in?
Joseph Maine- I suspect you just dropped off your lies before running off, but on the off chance that you actually intend more than just smearing the President, I look forward to your response
Actually the correct term is conspiracy theory.
Joseph, what proof do you have that “the lies all begin at Kapio’lani?” Do you have anything to back up your claim? Like a document or something else factual.
Come on just admit you have absolutely nothing to support your arguments. Joseph, no wonder you wrote “Forget all these documents.” It makes it easy to push your feeble attempt to distort the truth. Keep on ignoring the facts, it wouldn’t make your arguments stronger.
Can you tell me how this has any relevance to a blog post about reading the Constitution?
Can you help me in my reading of the Constitution and point me to the clause that says a President has to be born in a hospital? Or to the part that says the President is not allowed to benefit from the same rights as every other citizen as related in the Constitution?
Thanks. I’ll wait.
From a 2004 article:
http://archives.starbulletin.com/2004/03/21/news/story4.html
“Punahou grad stirs
up Illinois politics”
>> Born: Aug. 4, 1961, Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children, Honolulu.
End Quote:
James Grissom, 70, a retired physician and Obama campaign volunteer from suburban Chicago, marvels at the candidate’s accomplishments and potential.
“I really think he could be president someday,” said Grissom. “Can you imagine that — our first black president — and he’s from Hawaii?”
Why was the Star-Bulletin in on the conspiracy in 2004? Obama wasn’t powerful enough to threaten their lives, nor rich enough to buy them off…
LOL! That is a great analogy and I like your term – “selective reading”. I’m going to use that.
Isn’t this covered under the UIPA?
i am wholly with Arthur on this, the Constitution is NOT a Pick ‘n Mix.
My PERSONAL views are in general (relative to much of the USA) to the left side of the spectrum however I take the opposite stance on Second Amendment.
It was written by the Founding Fathers (with all their good, bad and indifferent qualities), placed in the Constitution then was roundly ignored until Reconstruction.
From this point it was regularly subverted or abused to disarm a black, ex-slave populace via Jim Crow Laws all the way through to the Sullivan laws in NYC to disarm predominately Italian immigrants by corrupt Irish-American politicians.
Firearm control laws in many occassions have been aimed squarely at the poor, deisenfranchized, politically weak or “other”.
Now, that is MY personal opnion, Arthur and I could cheerfully and heatedly argue until the cows come home but neither of us would advocate armed insurrection or tout sedition because of it unlike the Birfers and their lust to destroy chunks of the Constitution.
Would I be angry and motivated to oppose a Constitutional Amendment to over rule the Second, would I (with probably bad grace) accept it if passed, yes.
Herein lies the difference.
Joseph, no, I cannot tell you why President Obama hasn’t signed an authorization for Kapi’olani Hospital to release his medical records, as Obama doesn’t confide such things in me. It may be that Kapi’olani doesn’t have have the records now almost 50 years after the event. It may be to protect the names of individuals (like the doctor) from harassment by the fringe of the fringe of the birther movement. It may be that the President doesn’t want to legitimize the issue by responding to it. I just don’t know. But just as I don’t know the reason, you don’t either and for anyone to claim that failure to authorize release of the records is proof of guilt of something is substituting wishful thinking for facts.
If indeed the lies start at Kapi’olani, then Obama must have been born there. So what’s your point?
” I hate Illinois Nazis.”
– Jake Blues
The Constitution clearly states, “No religious test for public office”. Now I realize it applies only to the government, not to individuals, but aren’t those who vote for or against someone based on their religious view (real or perceived) violating the spirit of the document at a minimum?
BTW the Sullivan act is still enforce.
well, no. as long as i’m eligible to vote i’m free to pick whatever criteria i see fit to choose my vote. whether it is or isn’t constitutional doesn’t matter….. the constitution protects my one vote.
….. now i have to get back to the talking magical rainbow unicorn about our picks for november.
First challenge in NY underway as we speak.
Second challenge in hand to Chicago and Daley et-al as Emperor Daley didn’t take kindly to the Supreme’s telling him his enforced laws were unconstitutional
I’m sorry. I will answer any and all questions. I don’t visit this site much and wasn’t sure if when I posted (late last night) anyone would respond.
Which questions would you like me to address first?
I will say this to start. Dr. Conspiracy, please, then tell me where it is appropriate to continue this conversation (on a different thread perhaps). I’m not trying to hijack anything here and I’m not accusing anyone of anything except a) ignorance of common sense and b) Obama of being fraudulent regarding many accounts.
Obama has done nothing to legally prove anything he claims. The Constitution is a legal document. The onus is on him, not me. We can find out tomorrow that he’s lying about being born at Kapiolani. All he has to do is show us the original documents. But he won’t, because he’s lied about a great many things. There is no conspiracy theory.
Answer my question first: Is it unreasonable to ask a president for his original birth certificate?
Remember when snopes also said he was born in kenya. Wait, then he was born at Queens hospital. Oh, what now? Sorry, he was born at Kapio’lani.
Suuuuure. He’s the president and easily the least transparent person in the public domain.
It’s funny that he has the gall to say this when he comes into office:
“On all of these matters related to the disclosure of sensitive information, I wish I could say that there is a simple formula,” Obama said. “But there is not. These are tough calls involving competing concerns, and they require a surgical approach. But the common thread that runs through all of my decisions is simple: we will safeguard what we must to protect the American people, but we will also ensure the accountability and oversight that is the hallmark of our constitutional system. I will never hide the truth because it is uncomfortable. I will deal with Congress and the courts as co-equal branches of government. I will tell the American people what I know and don’t know, and when I release something publicly or keep something secret, I will tell you why.”
The man is a joke.
Wow….Confirmed Birther Joseph Maine coming to Doc’s site to repeat the same disproved lies…Amazing…I guess he got tired posting the same crap at the Post and Fail and the other birther sites…
All you can do is malign and give ad hominem, a strategy typical of true Obama believers. He will be exposed. It’s just a matter of time.
You’re a despicable liar, coward and a troll.
You are questioning U.S. law and the authority of the state of Hawaii without any credible evidence.
You are a troll without evidence. You have been exposed as an enemy of the U.S.
Okay, I’ll bite. Where does the Constitution say that “the onus is on him” to produce the hospital records of his birth?
And please provide us with a list of previous Presidents who have produced the hospital records of their births.
What state authority? The Hawaii DoH has never confirmed anything about Obama’s supposed COLB. He showed it to Jess Hennig and Joe Miller of factcheck. What do they know about Hawaiian brith documents.
No authority has ever seen the COLB or deemed it legitimate.
The Constitution says you must be a natural born citizen. Forgetting the fact that NBC isn’t defined in every case, that means that one must prove that he is born here, under less stringent criterion. Even you guys agree with that.
Are you not aware that there is no agency that checks NBC status (whatever it means)? Not one. That’s the problem here.
No former president was questioned (although the first birthers were you guys accusing McCain of not being natural born) because no one had such a history of growing up elsewhere. You can malign me all you want, but please be honest.
No one had a father who was never a citizen (that was known and proclaimed) and no one was the adopted son of another man while he grew up in a foreign country. At least be honest to yourself. Otherwise, why are you asking questions for a reasonable discussion?
You guys? I never once doubted that McCain was eligible to run. I doubted his mental faculties after he picked an incredibly stupid running mate.
My evidence is common sense. Why should I trust Obama? Give me one good reason.
Again, please tell me how showing your original birth document(s) is a violation of privacy, particularly for the leader of the free world.
Other than spend millions defending charges, just tell Kapiolani to show their birth record. But he won’t. And I know why. I’m surprised your drunk on the kool aid, disinhibiting your common sense.
And I’m not a confirmed “birther,” to correct that attempt at insult.
The only thing I know for certain is that he wasn’t born at Kapiolani. I don’t know the rest of the details. Just knowing that makes him a liar, though, and worthy of being skeptical of
Who also took high resolution photographs that clearly show the state embossed seal and signature. Any rational person would accept that as proof that Hawaii does indeed confirm that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. However, birthers do not seem to be rational people.
So Joseph- first of all- you never answered my questions.
But I will respond to your additional input:
“Obama has done nothing to legally prove anything he claims.”
Actually Obama has done everything legally required to prove that he was eligible to be President. And the voters agreed- which is why he was elected.
“The onus is on him, not me. ”
Show me any requirement that he did not meet? He is already President- he has already satisfied the voters that he is eligible, and Congress and Chief Justice Roberts. You? He has no responsibility to prove anything to you once the voters have voted him into office.
“We can find out tomorrow that he’s lying about being born at Kapiolani. ”
Unless President Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii, what hospital he was born at is immaterial. But if you find any evidence that he wasn’t born in Hawaii, let us know. I would call for his impeachment too.
“All he has to do is show us the original documents.”
No he doesn’t.
“But he won’t, because he’s lied about a great many things. There is no conspiracy theory.”
What did he lie about- what proof do you have he lied. Since your basis is without proof, yes it is a conspiracy theory.
“Answer my question first: Is it unreasonable to ask a president for his original birth certificate?”
It is not unreaonable to ask all candidates to show their original birth certificates. It is unreasonable to ask only one candidate to show his, and it is unreasonable to ask a sitting President for his.
“Remember when snopes also said he was born in kenya. ”
Snopes never said he was born in Kenya- they debunked that claim. Are you lieing or misinformed?
.
“Suuuuure. He’s the president and easily the least transparent person in the public domain.”
Your opinion- I know more about Obama than I ever knew about George Bush when he was elected.
“It’s funny that he has the gall to say this when he comes into office:”
Do you not understand the difference between governmental transparency, and releasing personal information to satisfy a few malcontents that never voted for him in the first place? I don’t care what his kindergarten grades were.
“The man is a joke.”
Your opinion. I felt the same way about Bush, but unfortunately he got re-elected. I suspect you will also be disappointed.
“He will be exposed. It’s just a matter of time.”
Time goes by so slowly and time can do so much
.
However, time won’t be favorbale to a hatefilled troll!
“The only thing I know for certain is that he wasn’t born at Kapiolani.”
Since you are certain- you must have proof? Please share.
How do you know this for certain?
Common Sense? Who do you think you are fooling here?
And even accepting your ‘common sense’, the evidence shows unequivocally that President Obama was born on US soil, in Hawaii.
That you insists on finding some evidence of a ‘lie’ justifies the title ‘birther’ I’d say. In light of all that is known, you focus on that which remains unknown.
Fascinating…
Reality Check,
Those two know nothing about legal documents. Why would you hide a document and only show it to two people who know nothing about it on a cold night in Chicago? It proves nothing except that you are shady.
If it’s real, open it up to everyone. But, it’s not, so they didn’t.
There you go again, making up facts about ‘millions being spent’. Luckily you have already admitted that all you know for sure is that he was not born in Kapiolani Hospital, undermining your own claims…
As to privacy, there is nothing that prohibits President Obama from releasing his birth records, which is in fact what he did when he made his COLB available.
Somehow that seems to not have been enough for some.
And then those in charge of the records confirmed Obama’s natural born status by virtue of being born on US soil, and yet, somehow that seems to not have been enough for some.
Instead, some insist that ‘common sense’, a notoriously unreliable method, established that President Obama was not born on Kapiolani, even though no coherent argument is provided.
That is also easily disproven by facts: Not only did the DoH confirm initially the authenticity of the document, only later to realize that this may have been in violation of privacy laws, the DoH confirmed the date of birth, the location of birth, the father and mother, and the name of the child.
Common sense indeed…
It was open to inspection and the photos and the scans allow you to ‘inspect’ it as well. These two where apparently the only ones who really cared about seeing the document. Of course, the fact that the relevant information on these documents has been confirmed by the DoH of Hawaii is something that should not bother you?
“My evidence is common sense.”
Oh wow- funny my commono sense says Obama shouldn’t shouldn’t indulge in your whims. I guess our common sense cancels each others out. Thats why in the real world we rely on actual evidence.
” Why should I trust Obama? Give me one good reason. ”
I don’t care. I didn’t trust Bush, but I did accept he was our legally elected President. So whether you trust Obama or not is really your issue- not mine, not Obama’s.
“Again, please tell me how showing your original birth document(s) is a violation of privacy, particularly for the leader of the free world.”
Try to keep up. It is a violation of anyone’s personal privacy for a hospital or state to release private documents to people without a legal interest.
If the President chose to obtain a personal document and release it he is free to do so- as he did with his Certificate of Live Birth. If he doesn’t feel like releasing other documents- the same as other Presidents- he doesn’t have to.
“Other than spend millions defending charges, ”
What milions?
“just tell Kapiolani to show their birth record. But he won’t. And I know why. I’m surprised your drunk on the kool aid, disinhibiting your common sense.”
Such Birther talk. He is our legally elected President. If you don’t believe it, find some evidence to the contrary- other than your ‘common sense’.
It’s only an insult to the extent that the term often describes someone who lacks in evidence and has to appeal to ‘common sense’ and lack of evidence to further her case. It further includes people who see evidence as a weakness, and would rather resort to speculation and innuendo rather than to a straightforward description of the facts.
Fact:
The COLB shows Obama born on US soil
Additional evidence:
The DoH of Hawaii has confirmed that President Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States by virtue of his birth on US soil
Hearsay evidence
The birth announcements also support the fact of President Obama’s birth on US soil.
Really simple
So what effort did you make to inspect the document? Describe your attempts to indicate that, like the people from Factcheck you made an effort to see the original?
And absent that, explain why the documents, including the scans and photos should be ignored in favor of your ‘common sense’ when the former is supported by independent statements of the DoH and the latter lacks in any foundation of fact, logic or reason?
“What state authority? The Hawaii DoH has never confirmed anything about Obama’s supposed COLB.”
Yes they have- indirectly but yes Dr. Fukino has. Dr. Fukino has also specifically stated that she has seen his original birth documents and President Obama was born in Hawaii. That confirms it for me.
” He showed it to Jess Hennig and Joe Miller of factcheck. What do they know about Hawaiian brith documents.”
Enough to satisfy my curiousity. It was no obvious forgery. And the voters were clearly satisified that President Obama had provided enough evidence.
“No authority has ever seen the COLB or deemed it legitimate.”
We actually don’t know that. Maybe they haven, maybe they havent.
“Are you not aware that there is no agency that checks NBC status (whatever it means)? Not one. That’s the problem here.”
I am not aware of any agency that checks any Presidents eligibility- not only whether they are a natural born citizen but also whether they meet the age or residency requirements. But I didn’t worry about that for Bush, so why would I worry about that for Obama?
“No former president was questioned (although the first birthers were you guys accusing McCain of not being natural born) because no one had such a history of growing up elsewhere. You can malign me all you want, but please be honest.”
I don’t worry about Obama’s 4 years living in Indonesia because a) it doesn’t affect his eligibility and b) I think knowledge of a foreign culture would be an asset for any President.
“No one had a father who was never a citizen (that was known and proclaimed) and no one was the adopted son of another man while he grew up in a foreign country. At least be honest to yourself. Otherwise, why are you asking questions for a reasonable discussion?”
And? None of those things affect eligibility- though just to clear up the point- he wasn’t adopted in Indonesia, and spent most of his childhood in the United States.
DoH never confirmed the legitimacy of the fraudulent COLB place online.
I was in Chicago and tried to see it. They didn’t let me. It’s not like you’ll believe me anyway so why are you asking?
Joseph Maine who has admitted that “The only thing I know for certain is that he wasn’t born at Kapiolani.”, has thus confirmed that he is not sure when he makes any other claims about President Obama, such as questioning who Fukino is?
As Brygenon explained: she is the Director of Vital Statistics for the State of Hawaii and she has confirmed that President Obama was born on US soil, just as his COLB shows. That this makes him a natural born citizen is just a logical extension of the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States, common sense, and the opinion of countless legal scholars and contemporary writers.
Here comes de Vattel in 3-2-1….
Funny how your concept of evidence focuses around absence thereof… Not to mention how your “common sense” continues to abandon you whenever convenient.
Which they may be unable to do so without violating privacy laws. But they did one better, they confirmed almost every single detail found on the COLB, including the location of Obama’s birth.
Not bad eh..
“We actually don’t know that. Maybe they haven, maybe they havent.”
At least you have somewhat of an open mind.
Obama has to prove that he was born in Hawaii to fulfill the highest law of the land, something called the Constitution.
That doesn’t affect eligibility?
No third party (hospital or doctor) has verified his story. None.
Why are you guys against him opening up the documents? Why all the hiding of every last document of his?
Boy, the BS alarm sure goes off on that one. The people who filed eligibility lawsuits against McCain were Republicans who didn’t like him. Far as I know, none of those people are posting here.
Yes, the President spent part of his childhood outside the country. And apparently his campaign felt that fed rumors enough that he released his birth certificate. You would like to pretend there is still a question, but you can’t explain why. You think someone with only one citizen parent is not eligible, and the fact that the President has only one citizen parent is well documented, but you want more documentation anyhow, and you can’t explain why. We’ve been over all this before.
And since you admitted that you only knew one thing for sure (“The only thing I know for certain is that he wasn’t born at Kapiolani.”), how come you call the COLB fraudulent when there is NO evidence thereof?
We don’t know how she came to the conclusion that he is a natural born citizen. We don’t even know what definition she is using. We don’t know if he can prove he was born in Hawaii, even. The story is complicated.
If he was born by a midwife, he would have just said it and then taunted people saying “Try to prove me wrong.”
But the reality is much different.
Actually, that is not really a requirement. The only burden the Constitution places on President Obama is that he is eligible and that Congress determines if a President has qualified.
There is no legal requirement that Obama proves to anything here. Of course,
by any evidence, Obama meets all the requirements of being natural born: location of birth, age and residence.
Do you not believe in the Constitution which provides that Congress is responsible for qualifying the President and that no Court can revisit this as the Constitution explicitly charges Congress with this task?
Do you by any chance have an abridged version of the US Constitution?
I will not believe that statement until I have seen these documents:
Travel documents with receipts.
Dates, names and locations of people you asked to see the COLB.
Signed affidavits from those you say refused to allow you to see the COLB.
The story is simple:
President Obama was born on US soil, which makes him by any legal standard a natural born citizen. It’s the same legal standard which caused Congress to find President Obama to have qualified.
As to President Obama ‘proving’ he was born on US soil, the evidence shows that indeed he provided such evidence and that said birth was confirmed by the DoH of Hawaii.
There’s plenty of evidence that it’s fraudulent.
I’m not the one that is trying to prove something false. He’s the one that has to prove something is true, in any case.
I can put up an image online that says he wasn’t born there. I can also photograph 3 pictures at weird angles and claim that they are legit and have seals, signatures, etc.
And that proves … what?
See how your argument just silly? I doubt you do, you’ve got blinkers on.
How is his BC accepted before, but numbered after Nordykes? Why does his official COLB say BHO II and his passport say BHO
Something’s not official …
And you can’t explain that. So why are you acting like I’m nuts.
He won’t be transparent. End of story. Will you at least agree on that?
Indeed, reality seems to diverge from what you call ‘common sense’ in that it shows unequivocally that President Obama was born on US soil.
Having established this, I am sure that you will now retreat to arguing that NBC requires birth to two US citizens. So why not skip the ‘common sense’ part, most of which you are not even certain about and skip ahead to the next goalpost?
Why linger any longer amongst the wreck that used to be your ‘argument’?
Again you make claims that remain, as was the case with your ‘common sense’ argument unsupported by any fact. Which explains why you change the argument that President Obama has to provide something is true. And yet, under US law, a defendant is presumed innocent and it is up to the accuser to present evidence that undermines the case established by a prima facie legal document, the COLB, and confirmed by the DoH of Hawaii.
Reality Check,
Obama’s Chicago headquarters on 233 N. Michigan Avenue, 11th floor.
I don’t know the secretary’s name, but Robert Gibbs was there with assistant in communications, Bill Burton.
They let Hennig and Miller in, because they were on the “in.”
Check yourself. I am very well acquainted with Chicago.
Joseph Maine:Obama has to prove that he was born in Hawaii to fulfill the highest law of the land, something called the Constitution.
Oh, but he has. He furnished all the documentation that anyone asked of him during the election season, vote-counting and verification of the results by Congress. Name one instance that any authority demanded documentation that he failed to deliver. Thus no one has the right to come along, ex post facto, and demand anything further. The COLB was enough to meet any proof — see what it says at the bottom about being prima facie evidence in any courtroom proceeding. ANY courtroom proceeding.
See, our system is based on reaching finality at some point. It’s like in the criminal courts: once your conviction is final and you’re behind bars, you have a vary tall hurdle to leap to get your case considered again. The burden shifts dramatically. As Justice Scalia said, mere claims of actual innocence are not enough to revisit the results. And mere claims that the president hasn’t proved to your satisfaction that he’s a natural born citizen isn’t enough to revisit his eligibility to remain in office. It’s up to you –or your side — to prove with clear and convincing evidence that he’s not eligible. So far you haven’t got squat.
Why do you accept that his BC is dated after the Nordykes but refuse to accept that it also shows him born on US soil. As to the explanation as to why his BC is numbered after the Nordykes, without knowing the actual procedures explaining how the BC’s are numbered this is at best a minor mystery. What is relevant is that his BC is extremely close to the ones assigned to the Nordykes, making the claim of birth even more supported by indirect evidence.
As to BHO II, and his passport saying BHO, are you saying that this is somehow relevant? Please explain? Most of BHO’s documents show his name to be Barack Hussein Obama, where the II has been dropped. Is that your best ‘evidence’ that President Obama was not born on US soil?
Fascinating.
He applied for privilege of being president, This isn’t criminal law, ding dong.
He blacked out the cert number. Kos uploaded a different image. There are so many different scans it’s head spinning
I don’t think he’s a NBC but I’m not using that argument because I don’t need to (and it wouldn’t get anywhere anyway, as has been proven)
No, it just shows inconsistencies in “official documents”
who cares what date it was issued? why blur the document out
the documents don’t make sense. I’m not believing some parts and not believing others
the fact that it doesn’t make sense is proof it isn’t real, not the other way around, as you put it
You can prove that of course? I still want to see the documentation. Anyone could have gotten the address of his campaign HQ on the internet. That proves nothing.
From the FAM
a. You must verify that the name to be written in the passport is the name which best identifies the applicant as reflected in the citizenship and identity documentation submitted. Generally, the name requested by the applicant on the application is the name that should be written on the passport. (See 7 FAM 1316 Appendix C.)
b. The name on the application need not be exactly the same as the signature on the application and the name shown on the identifying document(s).
Which are dealt with by FAM.
And he was found to have been qualified by Congress.
Bummer dude…
As to the requirement that you believe requires the President to ‘prove his innocence’ please provide legal precedent. This is not about criminal law either unless one takes seriously the claims of fraud, or treason… Regardless, it’s upon the plaintiff to provide the foundation for the complaint, as Judge Land had to explain so carefully to Orly.
So instead you rely on “common sense” arguments 🙂
Which not only lack in evidence but are also contradicted by established facts?
Fascinating.
You have as much admitted that there is no case to be made here. That you also abandon the NBC argument shows that you indeed do have some ‘common sense’ remaining
Selective Services: Barack Hussein Obama
Social Security: Barack Hussein Obama
Passports: Barack Hussein Obama
Illinois Law License: Barack Hussein Obama
DNC Nomination Barack Obama
Arizona Declaration of NBC Barack Obama
Joseph:
Yours is a false hope, built on illusion and prejudice.
President Obama has been in office for nearly two years. Meanwhile, birther’s have been exposed as cheats and liars (e.g., Lucas Smith and Major Stephen Cooke); their legal record stands at 0 and 70; and, prominent representatives of the movement face fine (Orly Taitz and Mario Apuzzo), disbarment (Orly Taitz), and imprisonment (LTC Terry Lakin and Lt. Cmd. Walt Fitzpatrick, ret.). Simultaneously, Republican politicians like Ken Buck mock birthers behind their backs, and prominent right-wing media figures (e.g., Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly), who eagerly ascribe to the most far-fetched anti-Obama conspiracies, characterize birthers as incompetent, deluded twits.
It’s at a time like this, Joseph, that birthers would do well to remember what the ancient Greeks had to say about false hope when, according to Thucydides’ “History of the Peloponnesian War,” the Athenians warned the straw-plucking Melians: ,
“Hope, danger’s comforter, may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources, . . . but hope’s nature is to be extravagant, and those who go so far as to put their all upon the venture, finally see [hope] in its true colors at the moment they are ruined . . . let this not be the case with you, who are weak and hang on a single turn of the scale; nor be like the vulgar, who . . . when visible hopes fail them in extremity, turn to invisible, to prophecies and oracles, and other such inventions that delude men and lead to their own destruction.”
I “hope” I don’t have to remind you of what happened to Melos.
They all show the same document. Common sense again… And of course, a comparison of the documents.
But unlike President Obama, you cannot put online an official document which data has been verified by the DoH of Hawaii.
That’s the difference.
So even if your ‘argument’ that the COLB is fraudulent, (something you believe to be the case but you are not really certain), the fact remains that the DoH of Hawaii has confirmed his natural born status.
I forgot
Dunham Passport Amendment Form Barack Hussein Obama
Divorce Decree Dunham Obama Barack Hussein Obama II
Divorce Decree Dunham Soetoro No mention
Has Joseph left the building 🙂
He is busy scanning his travel documents to Chicago.
He did prove that fact. He proved it as a small child by providing an official, state-issued record of birth to the US State Dept. in order to get a passport — and we know from recently issued FOIA documentation that the birth record was produced in connection with his step-father’s visa application.
That is “proof”.
The Hawaii Dept. of Health is the government agency charged with maintaining such records, and if they say he was born in Hawaii… then you have your proof.
In Obama’s case, there is a second agency, the US Dept. of State, that also maintains such records for any American born citizen who has ever obtained a passport — and the White House has quite recently released an image of Obama’s official Presidential passport, also showing that he was born in Hawaii. So you have your proof from two sources.
A poster by the name Joseph Maine posted elsewhere
3 USC 15 comes to mind
Amendment 20, clause 3
I am not even sure that Kapiolani would be able to do so. But Obama confirmed that he was born in said hospital, even though the letter was later removed by the hospital.
And what would it prove other than another moving of goalposts to argue that he is still not a NBC?
Why cater to the foolish amongst us and set an unnecessary precedent?
And do not forget that Governor Lingle confirmed the hospital as being Kapiolani…
YES.
NBC,
She speaks untrue things in that very quote. They never issued a news release that he was born at Kapi’olani. Seems like something very important to have never said. Go look back to Oct31 and July29. Never says anything about that.
US Code 3,15 is counting of electoral votes. How does that prove that he is Article 2 eligible? It means that the Constitution is waived if no one objects (that is, is ignorant of the facts, perhaps)?. Of course not.
If someone did check, then please tell us. Someone with Federal Authority. It is a federal election. Yet I know as well as you should, from the national archives (.gov) that the Feds don’t bother with it. They leave it to the Secs. of State, who do nothing (and even let guys like Roger Calero on the ballot, who are Communists and are known to be born in foreign countries).
anything credible ? honestly. anything ??
I’m not the one that is trying to prove something false. He’s the one that has to prove something is true, in any case.
that is 100% against the US constitution. seriously !!! you are absolutely trying to say guilty without evidence. please, prove me wrong.
I can put up an image online that says he wasn’t born there. I can also photograph 3 pictures at weird angles and claim that they are legit and have seals, signatures, etc.And that proves … what?See how your argument just silly? I doubt you do, you’ve got blinkers on.How is his BC accepted before, but numbered after Nordykes? Why does his official COLB say BHO II and his passport say BHOSomething’s not official …And you can’t explain that. So why are you acting like I’m nuts.He won’t be transparent. End of story. Will you at least agree on that?
curious …. may had some tech issues ….. ??
You don’t think any detraction from the evidence is credible. So why are you asking me for “credible” stuff? Nothing is credible to you. If I offer reasons why the document is clearly false, you say “Well, we don’t know how they made it.”
Why would I want to continue? The point is you don’t know and you can’t explain problems with the COLB.
Now please name the Federal Authority who checked for NBC status for Obama. Wait, no one did? That’s what I thought.
Notice how Lingle lied there. Nothing he has produced says Kapi’olani.
Obama was elected president. Of course he was issued a passport. It proves nothing. Why did they black out the dates? The passport wasn’t from before he was president. It proves nothing. Why would you need to black out date of issue information?
BECAUSE IT WAS CREATED AFTER HE WAS PRESIDENT
Yes, Governor Lingle, speaking off the cuff on a radio talk show, was mistaken about the content of Dr. Fukino’s press release. Lingle knew the name of the hospital from another source. Lingle was not the primary witness, Fukino was. But Lingle’s mistake doesn’t erase the fact that the State Department of Health’s web site in Hawaii contains multiple statements that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. Lingle’s error is a diversion from the inescapable facts.
The lack of objection to Obama’s election: from the stats secretaries of state, from the Electoral College, from the Congress, from the Supreme Court and the mainstream news media doesn’t make Barack Obama eligible. It makes the birthers cranks.
Yes it does, Dr. Thanks for at least recognizing the truth (about Lingle and her statements).
Dr., when you have a state that recognizes out of state births as being in state (and foreign or witness births) why should we not get the original documents to see how you come to your conclusions?
At the very least, you guys should say indeed that it is disturbing that the man goes to lengths to not show the original documents. He’s obviously hiding something.
What he’s hiding is that he can’t really prove he was born in Hawai’i, regardless of what they accept.
They went against their own UIPA laws too. If you are making a public statement, you better tell us how you got to that conclusion (with the documents you viewed). She even said he was NBC. Well, according to whom and what? Okubo even said that she reviewed it with the Hawaiian AG before making the statement. Well, what was the issue, Chiyome?
The letter is still on the Hospital web site. See Page 6.
good job…… i’m looking into the same bloke for GWB…. still missing……. huh……. nor clinton… bush….reagan….. carter…. ford….. nixon….. johnson… kennedy… IKE…. truman…. FDR….
What will also blow Joseph’s & the other birthers’ minds will be what happens during the campaign season for the 2012 Presidential election. For those states that enact additional requirements of proof of eligibility to run Obama will simply have HI DOH send the states a copy of his COLB. By the FF&C clause the states will be required to accept it. This will cause head explosions & bursting aneurysms in all the birthers. Game over!
Where did you ever some up with such an idea? Only a moment’s thought would show that such a thing would be totally impossible and worthless as a policy, since (if it were true) the state’s birth certificates would be worthless, and why would a state produce worthless birth certificates? The short answer is, they wouldn’t.
A DOH spokesperson said that out of state births are labeled “Certificate of Foreign Birth”, not “Certificate of Live Birth.” The law says that the place of birth has to be accurate and in any case, the out of state registration law didn’t to into effect until two decades after Obama’s birth was registered in Hawaii.
Obviously Dr. Fukino wanted to make sure that her disclosure didn’t violate any laws. No mystery there.
It appears that you have been hanging out in places that are not careful about checking facts. There is only one scan of the Obama COLB published: it appeared at Politifact.com, The Daily Kos, FactCheck.org and the Obama Fight the Smears web site. Since they are all the same, the certificate number is blacked out in all. The only differences in these images are resizing and cropping. There is a very tiny spot on the scanner bed that shows that they all have the same source. FactCheck.org additionally photographed the COLB and published that. The photos, of course, show the certificate number.
Bullshit. You’re lying and that’s disgusting and unAmerican.
Again, Joseph Maine, you state as a fact something that has only been asserted, never proven –“a state (Hawaii) … recognizes out of state births as being in state.” Funny that only the Obama family ever took advantage of that provision. Or at least, no one has surfaced to date; Can you name one? Looks like there would have been hundreds or even thousands who could step up and say, “I’ve got a birth certificate (genuine) showing I was born in Los Angeles (or Tokyo), and I’ ve got an official one (though false) from Hawaii, stating I was born there. Why can’t you show even one?
When people make claims here, I expect them to provide their own supporting evidence, not expect others to do their work for them. I’ve seen birthers make up convenient facts too many times to trust such things. (A certain travel ban to Pakistan comes to mind.)
There are no problems with the COLB my dear friend.
Funny how you continue to revel in absence of evidence or ignorance when it comes to the issue which is simple:
Obama was born on US soil, as supported by his COLB and the DoH of the State of Hawaii.
So she was wrong about what was released and revealed information that she may not have been able to release. So what?
She is right that Obama was born in Hawaii, and mentions something the official release could not have revealed namely the hospital of birth.
It means that once the president is found to have qualified there is only one way of removing him.
Read the constitution.
That’s too kind..
You had to neme your valid e-mail address to post here. Where is it? What are you hiding?
NO, SERIOUSLY. What are YOU hiding?
YOU L-I-E. That is simply not true.
YOU L-I-E AGAIN.
Obama ignoring you and your nonsense requests doesn’t take any effort at all. You have no legal right to any person’s private and personal records, so they are simply protected by the proper privacy laws. Obama doesn’t have to do a thing or even be aware of your silly efforts.
What is disturbing is that you birthers go to great lengths making up stories and spending all of your times trying to create false smears and spread lies on an issue that you have absolutely no ability to change – He’s president and you can’t do anything about it except try to vote for someone different in 2012. So yeah, to be arguing nonsense 2 years after an election is over – this IS disturbing that you and your ilk are still wasting all your time with this nonsense.
He’s hiding nothing. All evidence supports his birth in HI and makes him NBC by default.
What you are hiding from is that the burden of proof lies on you, the accuser and you’ve got nothing to support your arguments. Just hollow and meaningless speculation, L-I-E-S and sideshow distraction arguments that are completely irrelevant. Hurts to be you, doesn’t it?
*waaah* Another worthless sideshow distraction argument because your mad that her words go against your claims…
Get it through your sad little thick skull – the COLB clearly states place of birth as Honolulu, HI and all actual evidence has corroborated that. It doesn’t matter if he was born in a barn or a hospital …it is still on US soil – Honolulu, HI and therefore he’s NBC by that alone. you simply cannot get around that little fact, thus all you can do is make useless nonsense distraction arguments that are irrelevant. Until YOU have solid evidence that would override the COLB, the newspaper articles and all of the HI officials statements and govt records shown to date – YOU’VE GOT NOTHING. Nothing else matters to eligibility, so tough cookies you delusional birther.
Yes. we have an adversarial system. A law that might be unconstitutional stands until someone challeneges it. If you don’t like it, YOU run and file a challenge. Otherwise, you are nothing, you don’t exist, you aren’t even a speck of intrastellar dust. Them’s the facts, Jack. Read those cards and weep, my friend. Your opinions are non-factors. Without weight. Sans valeur. Got it? I could go on if you’d like…
Please do.
Mr Maine-Unless YOU are willing to put your fat, wrinkled ass on the line and run yourself you are simply a nullity, a piece of dog poop on the body politic, less than zero. We implore, nay demand, a Candidate Maine, with of course, a complete and full disclosure of your birth (at least 2 witnesses + video), your scholastic records beginning with pre-school, all financial records, including but not limited to that greasy deli receipt for the bologna sandwich that gave you indigestion lat Thursday, religious bona fides, including testimony from at least 3 ordained clergy as well as a vouchsafe from the guy upstairs himself, records of all sexual partners, including positions attempted and success rates, orgasm obtained or faked and any vidoes thereof, a complete list of all movies watched in the last 20 years, your favorite songs, colors and ice cream flavors and a complete cache dump from all websites visited (and deletions will be severly punished). The people demand to know.
Should I go on?
Duhh, what gave that away? The statement by the staffer that the passport had been updated to properly reflect Obama’s new position as POTUS?
What it proves? Place of Birth: Hawaii…
Whoa. Nice doggy. Good boy. Stay . . . . STAY. 🙂
When people scan a document more than once it causes your head to spin?
Often, people drop the designation “Jr” when the “Sr” is no longer alive.
It’s a diplomatic passport which requires a valid birth certificate along with 2 other forms of ID. The requirements are the same as a regular passport, except the fees are waived. The fact is that Barack Obama has 100% valid papers showing birth in Hawaii. If you wish to contest that, get off your butt and run for President. Then you can contest his presence on the ballot. Your case will be thrown out in less time than it takes Lindsay Lohan to go through rehab, but that’s your problem not mine.
The courts not deciding a case on merits has nothing to do with my points. I’m not a sore loser. I don’t have any real control of what Obama or the courts do. He’s going to go down as one of the worst excuses for a president since Jimmy Carter, so I’m glad he won, broke all his promises, and put the country into worse shape. The American people, subsequently, won’t get fooled again. I’ve found the silver lining.
That still doesn’t make him honest or transparent, however.
If someone on the ballot (Keyes) can’t get a court to verify a birth document to a public/legal authority, it shows the courts are corrupt or at least scared of the new power at Pennsylvania Ave.
Because he can’t be touched means nothing regarding the false birth story and his transparency. His lies (C-Span covering medical coverage) and diversions, as well as shady tactics are as well documented as his broken promises. That’s why he’s a failure as a president. It’s only going to get worse.
Let’s stick to the discussion, though, shall we
Yes, JM, let’s see the proof you were in Chicago and couldn’t see the COLB. Dates, names, affidavits. It should be so simple Joe.
The early line from historians has him somewhere around #10 out of 43. He has passed more substantive legislation in the first 18 months than some 2-term Presidents. And most of that was rather close to what he campaigned on. The only major campaign proposal that hasn’t been done is energy. Given the crisis that he took office in, he gets a B.
What kind of loser are you then?
I gain nothing by being unkind.
Correction: Obama is ranked #15. Bush is 39…
http://www.mediaite.com/online/presidental-scholar-survey-ranks-obama-ahead-of-reagan-as-greatest-american-president/
Please lets… Of course, you’re not doing to well so far.
Or it shows an unfamiliarity on your part as far as the legal foundations of our Country? But that’s just too much ‘common sense’ I guess….
Your true motivations help understand why all you have is your ‘common sense’ arguments and why you seem to be so unfamiliar with the facts.
Well you needn’t thank me for doing what any rational person does, accept facts. Being rather deep in this conspiracy theory business, I am quite familiar with Fukino’s statements, and the moment I read Lingle’s comment, it was obvious that it wasn’t right. It did take a while to remember the Lingle had been at the Kapi’olani Hospital’s 100th Anniversary Gala, where Congressman Abercrombie read the congratulatory letter from Obama that mentioned he was born there. I think that this or what the newspapers describe as common knowledge in Hawaii is the source of Lingle’s reference to Kapi’olani, rather than the more unlikely scenario that Dr. Funkino disclosed it Lingle privately.
There aren’t any “problems” with the COLB. There is nothing about the COLB at odds the facts as best as they are known. Yes the Obama certificate number is not in strict chronological order with the Nordyke certificates, but there is nothing that says they have to be.
I must strenuously object to your remark “notice how Lingle lied there.” Surely Lingle was wrong about what she said, but a “lie” is an intentional falsehood. No one can rationally believe that a public official would intentionally misrepresent the contents of a document that is posted on their own web site and published in the newspapers.
One must ask, though, if you intentionally said that Lingle lied knowing full well that she didn’t. That wouldn’t be very nice.
I have a bad habit of attempting serious replies to frivolous comments, which I am again failing to restrain. Carter was certainly not a good President, but he was far from being the worst President. So your comparison to Carter doesn’t particularly frighten me. But getting back to our current President, let’s examine just how much the American people hate him. His current approval rating is in the low 40’s. Not good, huh? To see just how bad this is, let’s compare to a really good President — Ronald Reagan. At the same point in Reagan’s first term, his approval rating was, let me see… in the low 40’s. Hmm.
Really good by what standard 🙂
See, you always make yourself foolish when you spout off stuff like this that just proves you don’t know what you are talking about. Part of the legal “merits” of a case include determining if a case is brought before the proper jurisdiction and that the plaintiffs can meet the minimum thresholds of standing and injury. Those are the initial tests of any cases “merits”. When cases FAIL to pass these initial tests, they are properly thrown out and are often frivolous, as all these birther cases clearly are.
Let’s also not forget that the Ankeny case DID weigh in on the underlying NBC issue and issued an opinion on it, which was upheld on appeal. So there, you lose that argument too.
You sure come across like one – constantly. You also are obviously in deep denial about the facts and reality of all of these issues. As long as you continue to keep your head in the sand and pretend in your birther make-believe, you will just cause yourself endless disappointment, as all of your rants amount to nothing and all of your birther hopes fail as easily and predictably like all rational people told you from the get go. And Obama will still be President. You don’t have to be happy about it. Just deal with it and move on with your life. The only honest thing you said was your statement about not having any real control in this situation. Accept that and move onto focusing on things in your life that you can control and you’ll be much better off.
Well, you are fully entitled to an opinion of not being satisfied with his presidency or his policies. As are others who are equally entitled to an opinion that differs from yours. Obviously, you never intended to vote for him in the first place. However, a significant majority of American voters did and hence, he became our 44th President. You are fully free to vote again for someone else in 2012.
However, you need to understand that many do not share your views or opinions and you could just as easily find yourself having to deal with his being reelected for a second term. That’s simply how things work. We vote and someone wins and everyone else loses. All people running usually get a certain number of votes and sometimes it can be very close (like it was in both of GWB’s elections). Therefore, quite simply the person you want for office won’t always be the choice that the population as a whole prefers. Deal with it and stop acting like such a sore loser. You seem to have some desperate insecurity need to create a fantasy belief for yourself that a majority of folks agree with you and think like you do. Sorry, that’s just not the case.
Wow, how sad, childish and un-American. You just basically said that you WANT this country to fail. I can’t think of a more sore-loserish and unpatriotic position to champion that when you (and folks like Rush Limbaugh) make statements like this.
Of course, I fully disagree with your positions about this country being in “worse shape” than he received it. You seem to have a very selective memory of what occurred prior to his taking office.
Also, your “broke ALL his promises” and such are just FALSE statements and pure bunk.
Unlike your MADE UP nonsense, here’s the actual record on tracking how his campaign promises have turned out so far:
http://politifact.com/
Promises Kept: 121 (24%)
Compromise: 39 (8 %)
Promises Broken: 22 (4%)
Stalled: 81 (16%)
In the Works: 240 (47%)
Not Yet Rated: 3 (about half a percent)
So, in less than 2 years of his first term, he’s already succeeded on roughly 1 out of every 4 things he campaigned for and made progress on nearly 8 out of every 10. A 4% failure rate is about as far from “all” as you can get.
So sorry, the record shows an extremely impressive record for his accomplishments and you again are just making things up that are not true.
Face it, what really bothers you is that you can’t stand how successful he’s been….
Keyes fails in the courts because he doesn’t have a leg to stand on with his crazy claims. He’s nothing but a deluded sore-loser, like you. You and him do nothing but childishly whine because the courts disagree with you. When you and he cry “corruption” all that really means is that you are a sore-loser and can’t deal with the fact that you are simply wrong, wrong, wrong.
Obama can’t be touched by your crazy claims because there is no actual merit behind any of them. Reality is on his side, not you birthers and your nonsense.
You have been told multiple times that transparency has to do with how government runs and has nothing to do with any person’s personal records, including the president. Once again, you just present a sore loser cry-baby argument that is completely wrong and only makes you look like a big fool.
“and even let guys like Roger Calero on the ballot, who are Communists”
Since when has it been illegal to be a Communist and on the ballet in the United States?
“He’s going to go down as one of the worst excuses for a president since Jimmy Carter, so I’m glad he won, broke all his promises, and put the country into worse shape. The American people, subsequently, won’t get fooled again. I’ve found the silver lining.”
Wow, just wow. I voted against Bush, but after he was elected I wished nothing but the best for his Presidency, because as a patriotic American I knew that a failed Presidency would harm America. Even as Bush spiraled down during his terms, I still was not ‘glad’, I was sad to have my apprehensions confirmed, i was sad about the damage he was doing to the United States.
I am always amazed that those who hate Obama would prefer to see America burn rather than see Obama succeed.
Joseph Maine is clearly a L-I-A-R (or possibly a lunatic or both) because virtually all the points he’s made, including being born at the hospital, have been thoroughly discredited. He just keep repeating the same untruths as if somehow that was enough, without actually responding to or confronting the evidence of his L-I-E-S when brought up here.
Further Joseph Maine is a bigot and a racist who can’t stand the idea that he got his ass kicked fair and square by a n*** and is twisting the truth like a pretzel to convince himself that that’s not possible without fraud. It’s revolting and undemocratic.
As for his assessment of the Obama Presidency, one can only wonder how much better your country might have fared under a McCain/Palin regime.
I totally agree on all accounts.
Considering his erratic behavior when the financial market began to collapse, his temper, his policy towards Iraq, his attitude toward Iran, GOP “policies” and Palin’s ineptitude & views…
I’d seriously doubt that the Recovery Act would have been passed, we definitely wouldn’t have health care, the auto industry would have collapsed, financial reform wouldn’t have happened…and all of the Bush Tax Cuts would have been made permanent already.
In other words, we probably would be dealing with a 2nd Great Depression instead of trying to pull out of the “Great Recession”.
On the foreign policy front, our engagement in Iraq would have been extended or made permanent, we would have joined Israel and started war with Iran in 2009, which likely would still be escalating into an expensive and bloody regional war, Kim Jong Il would have probably goaded us into starting war there too…which would bring China against us, and Russia would be pissed and probably have declared a new Cold War against us due to our actions and rhetoric in Iran and Georgia.
There probably somehow wouldn’t be any “Tea Parties” though…despite the economic disaster. Some other form of economic collapse based unrest, but probably not many of the same Tea Party folks we see now (except for the black helicopter/anti-gov folks who hate all govt and would still be screaming about FEMA camps)
McCain would probably have a heart attack from the stress and his temper by now and we’d be stuck with an incompetent demagogue President Palin, who’d be busy stripping individual liberties and trying to impose a Christian Theocracy.
In other words, I think it would have been a complete and utter disaster… *shudder*
Joey,
Please, could you please explain why it is you hate this fine country, it’s laws and the Constitution upon which it is founded…?
Serious question, no snark, no sarcasm no “cognitive dissonance etc.
Your stance is against the fundamental underpinnings of what this country is, is or at least puports to stand for and aims to be.
The legal system, for all it’s faults strives for balance and the aim of justice for all without fear, favor or distinction.
There is a presumption of innocence and a requirement to prove guilt before sentencing
As a country of laws we set the civilian government and the people it represents as the final arbiter of policy and not the military
As a democratic Constitutional Republic the USA has a defined requirement to allow certain fundamental rights to exist and be exercised by all even if by their exercise others, even a majority may be offended.
There are checks and balances within the system as well as defined methods to contain and remove abuse and abusers of the political system
So Joey, whay do you feel these instiutions count for so little in your world view?
At the risk of being pedantic, I feel I ought to mention the Treaty of Tripoli signed by your second president, the enlightened John Adams, which states:
Art. 11. As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen, and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
This…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwaNRWMN-F4&feature=player_embedded
…is a sad day for America.
Go do something useful, like volunteering at a soup kitchen.
I would call claims that your opponent didn’t win fairly (was ineligible) the mark of a sore loser.
Random lunatics without press credentials are not usually allowed into campaign offices. Why did you think you’d be an exception?
According to etiquette experts, juniors are *supposed* to drop the “junior” upon the death of the senior. My father was a junior and did exactly that after his own father’s death. The President is right.
As for Joseph Maine, if he’s connected with the traitors at the Pest and Efail, I’d like to know how Sharon Rondeau manages to fine the time to practice her harp while transcribing all those lies.
What discussion? You hijacked a thread on the Constitution to spew lies that were discredited two years ago. That’s not a discussion. It’s a temper tantrum on your part, and most unattractive.
I could believe that they wouldn’t have let you see it, but I don’t believe you tried. I don’t believe it because you offer no evidence.
The fact that the State of Hawaii didn’t authenticate the COLB (beyond a spokesperson saying “it looks just like mine” is a diversion. The fact is that the State of Hawaii has verified Obama was born in Hawaii. Any normal person would say: if Obama was born in Hawaii, then he has a Hawaiian birth certificate and if he has one, he would not put a fake one online. Why use a fake one when the real one would do?
When the State of Hawaii published their statement that an examination of their records showed Obama born in Hawaii, any rational doubts about the COLB were ended, leaving only the conspiracy theorists, whose theories balloon in scope as they have to explain more and more evidence away.
People may drop the title informally, but they don’t typically change their names legally. The name on a passport is supposed to match the name on the birth certificate, or previous passport exactly or else there is supposed to be documentation (such as a court order or marriage certificate) attached to the passport application.
I’m not ready to sweep this one under the rug just yet. We know that the name that Stanley Ann Dunham wrote on the back of her passport renewal application (and crossed out) lacks the II title too.
Doc-You are incorrect. According to the State Department manua,l the passport officer has discretion in this area:
7 FAM 1300 Appendix C h. (1) states “Families sometimes change name suffixes when an older generation dies. You may accommodate such a request provided the suffix on
the identification documents presented corresponds to the name requested.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/94676.pdf
Please cite where you you *first* reported not being allowed to see it and gave names and times. I’ve heard similar claims, but in every case it was something birthers started saying only after the election. FactCheck inspected and photographed the actual birth certificate, and there were no contemporaneous reports of anyone not being allowed to see it.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
From what I can tell, that rally is right at the edge of the grounds of the former World Trade Center (a.k.a. Ground Zero), not outside 45 Park Place a couple blocks away. Perhaps someone should tell those chanting, “No mosque here,” that noone is proposing to even put a mosque at the location of the rally or even within view of Ground Zero.
If we are to be so sensitive to the families of victims of 9/11, then perhaps we should ask American Airlines to stop having its stock traded at the New York Stock Exchange. After all, isn’t it insensitive for the company to have its shares traded only a few blocks from the site where one of its planes was used to commit mass murder?
@Jules:
The part where they insult a black construction worker (which I gather turned out to be named Kenny) because he vaguely “looks” Muslim would be almost pthonesque (or worthy of Borat) if it wasn’t so sad.
LOL, focused like a laser.
Now I have this vision of The Three Stooges (Orly, Mario and Berg) showing up unannounced at Obama’s campaign headquarters and demanding to see his “vital records.”
However, I’m sure that the campaign would have allowed even WND to examine the COLB, if only they had asked. But then WND declared that the COLB is legitimate, before Joseph Farah decided that calling it a fake would generate more action at the PayPal button.
did you mean “pythonesque” lupin ? for a brief moment i thought i had my new word for the day.
Oops yes I forgot the y in pythonesque. My bad.
Submitted for your consideration:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/23/park51/index.html
“Liberals are not immune from reading their own prejudices into the Constitution either. ”
Yup. Prime examples include the practice using interstate commerce clause and “necessary and proper” clause to justify any and all forms of government intervention in the economy.
Jumping Joe says “I was in Chicago and tried to see it. They didn’t let me”
He must be a right winger, they always make stuff up to support their positions. It’s got something to do with ““Argument from Authority”, fundies do the same thing (phony PHD, fake quotes, quote mining, etc. Quite simply, Joe is a L I A R.
Great article regarding what you and Lupin were discussing…
“So, the Republicans have figured out an election strategy. It can’t be the economy, because they’re already getting the full benefit of the Obama economic recovery program’s shortcomings, and too much focus on the recovery would necessitate a focus on why a recovery was even necessary; and the electorate hasn’t forgotten who is most to blame. It can’t be corporate corruption, because the Republicans are wholly owned subsidiaries of the corporate plutocracy, and have opposed any Democratic attempts at regulation or forced responsibility. It can’t be the environmental awareness that has awakened in the aftermath of the BP oil disaster, because criticizing the president necessarily leads to questions of an alternative response, and the Republican alternative of doing even less is not going to lead to more votes. Unemployment is out, because the Republicans don’t want to help the unemployed. Health care doesn’t work, because the Republicans don’t want health care to work, and repealing the president’s health care plan would start the whole mess all over again; and nobody wants to start the whole mess all over again. When you’re the Party of No, you have to give the voters a reason to say “yes.” Abnegation and abdication aren’t good campaign themes.
So, the Republicans want to make the planned Islamic center and mosque that would be built sort of near Ground Zero into a nationwide campaign theme. And never mind that it has nothing to do with national politics. And more specifically, never mind the pain and suffering it inflicts on innocents who already have endured far too much pain and suffering. Certain Democrats deserve condemnation for their own efforts at playing politics with a bigotry that deserves scorn and vilification, and the best advice for elected Democrats has been that repeatedly offered by Big Tent Democrat: stop talking about it; but the Republicans aren’t merely floundering around trying to sound nuanced and wise while at best only embarrassing themselves, they’re deliberately exploiting the worse devils of human nature. They’re not seeking understanding or reconciliation, they’re seeking to inflame. It’s what Republicans so often do, particularly on the national level. They stand for nothing that is good for the common humanity, so they try to divide humanity by inciting people to stand against one another. Fear-mongering. It’s a tired and decrepit template, but it may be all they know to do.”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/8/22/895047/-Who-are-these-people?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29
Lupin, thanks for sharing this info, as well as the video and article. You are absolutely right about the Treaty of Tripoli. I’ve been pointing that one out to folks for years too.
The video and article about the mob protest at “ground zero” was extremely upsetting and telling. Looked like a TeaParty rally – a sea of mostly old angry white people shouting and quickly turning on the only black person in the crowd and wrongly accusing him of being a Muslim and then security having him “removed” so he won’t be a disturbance….just wrong on so many levels.
So, she’s a harpy?
BL,
Thanks for that article. Yes, it is a sad disgusting tactic that the GOP is playing. The author of the article is probably right on the mark of the pathetic “political” reasons for them to pull this nonsense. They need a hate-based distraction when all of their solutions are non-existent and what ideas they have are simply bad for common people.
At least Ron Paul came out with this statement today (as reported in the above mentioned salon.com article from Lupin, as an appended update at the bottom):
But is a suffix denoting a person’s place in a series of people of the same name actually part of the name itself, though? I’d always understood that to be a convention rather than part of the name itself. Hmm. But Obama’s BC contains the II; would that legally be a part of his name?
I know for a fact that Joe was at the Weber Grill instead all loud and demanding to see Obama’s COLB. That was a crazy, cold night.
There, prove you weren’t, Joe. Onus is on you.
To follow up on what G and Lupin are alluding to, there is a good op ed piece in the NY Times regarding this same issue….it is a must read….
“The bookstore gave the president a copy of “Freedom,” a new novel by Jonathan Franzen about a dysfunctional family in America. This is apt, since Obama is the head of the dysfunctional family of America — a rational man running a most irrational nation, a high-minded man in a low-minded age.
The country is having some weird mass nervous breakdown, with the right spreading fear and disinformation that is amplified by the poisonous echo chamber that is the modern media environment.”
….
“It is a prejudice stoked by Rush Limbaugh, who mocks “Imam Obama” as “America’s first Muslim president,” and by the evangelist Franklin Graham, who bizarrely told CNN’s John King: “I think the president’s problem is that he was born a Muslim. His father was a Muslim. The seed of Islam is passed through the father, like the seed of Judaism is passed through the mother.”
Graham added: “The teaching of Islam is to hate the Jew, to hate the Christian, to kill them. Their goal is world domination.”
…..
“Just as some Americans once feared that John Fitzgerald Kennedy (who was a Catholic) would build a tunnel to Rome, now some fear that Barack Hussein Obama (whose name sounds scary) will build a tunnel to Mecca.
In “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,” a history of such national follies as England’s South Sea Bubble and Holland’s Tulip Frenzy, the Scottish historian Charles Mackay observed: “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/opinion/22dowd.html?_r=2&ref=opinion
Doc Conspiracy – “Many liberals quit the ACLU in 1978 when it supported a neo-Nazi group’s right to march in a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Illinois.”
Doc: sorry I’m so late into this discussion of your point above, but being one of those liberal Jews who quit the ACLU during the run-up to the (eventually laughable) march on Skokie – please allow me to explain myself, and defend myself against charges of hypocrisy. I strongly believe in free speech, and believe that, yes, even the Nazis’ hate speech is to be protected. However, since that speech involves promoting the murder of me, and the annihilation of my family, it is inconceivable that any rational, non-suicidal person in my place would voluntarily contribute his own money to promote that speech by private legal defense. The Nazis’ rights should be defended,– just not by me or with my money. Let other legal groups do it. Priorities of any organization must be set and resources allocated. Not being a self-hating Jew, and certainly not being suicidal, I believed then (and still do now) that the ACLU should have taken a pass on that particular case and used its resources – MY money — for the many, many other worthwhile cases it could have taken up, but took a pass on.
Your question wrongly presumes we don’t have enough information to reasonably confirm that President Obama was born at Kapi’olani.
Some facts for you to consider:
1. President Obama’s registration number is almost identical to the Nordyke twins, who also claim to have been born at Kapi’olani within twenty-four hours of President Obama’s birth. Such a close correspondence is unlikely to have occurred by chance, especially as the Nordyke twins did not produce a copy of their birth certificate until AFTER the Obama campaign provided a copy of his COLB with his registration number.
2. Kapi’olani itself notes in its own promotional materials – without dispute – that President Obama claims the hosptial as his place of birth. See http://www.kapiolanigift.org/doc/centennial-magazine.pdf
3. Kapi’olani confirmed to World Net Daily that President Obama sent a letter to Kapi’olani dated January 24, 2009 in which President Obama calls Kapi’olani “the place of my birth.” Keala Peters, director of marketing and communications for the company that runs the hospital, did not dispute the President’s assertion. In fact, according to her, “[w]e treasure the letter.” Asked why the hospital posted a digitally-reworked version of the letter on its website, rather than the original, Peters told WND that it was done “because we didn’t want people to take it from the Web and use it for purposes other than for what it was intended… I’m sorry it created suspicion on your part, but it was not our intention.” See http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104146
In short, Kapi’olani does not dispute the President’s claim that he was born there – in fact it incorporates the President’s claim into its own promitional materials. This is simply not something an institution does if it knows of has reason to suspect that the claim is wrong or fraudulent – unless you subscribe to the imaginative reasoning of a birther.
<
I find it hard to believe he was in Chicago at that time in late Oct or Early Nov. 2008. The weather was very summer like at that time period. We were having nighttime lows in the upper 50s and daytime highs in the upper 70s.
The Factcheck photos were taken during the daytime.
Uh oh Joseph Maine, You done goofed up… Consequences will never be the same
This exchange with Joseph Maine reminds me of one way birtherism differs from many conspiracy theories. Most conspiracy theorists have an answer for everything, but birthers are notable for having no answers. They just don’t respond to questions. They seem to feel they can persuade by making a bunch of allegations and insinuations, and then responding to any comments with more allegations and insinuations, usually on a different topic.
This is particularly amusing when they claim birtherism is not a conspiracy theory, as Joseph Maine does. I’ve noticed that birthers, while railing against Democrats, the MSM, and the courts, don’t like to even take notice of the fact that not one single GOP Congressman has called for an investigation into the President’s eligibility. I suspect this aversion is because they have no idea how to explain that without invoking the New World Order.
While the 50 degree nights of late October may not qualify as “cold”, the FactCheck reporters inspected and photographed the COLB in August. Here’s Newsweek republishing the FactCheck article on 21 August 2008: http://www.newsweek.com/2008/08/20/born-in-the-u-s-a.html
“A cold night in Chicago” in August?
Here’s where the birther mind differs from the reasonable mind.
Reasonable mind: If candidate Obama really wasn’t born in the United States, why would have he undertaken the risk of forging a fake birth certificate and posting it on the internet for every self-appointed sleuth to investigate? The news media at the time treated (and still treat) the rumors that Obama was foreign-born as a loony joke. If Obama had refused to produce a birth certificate, he would have been in the company of every other major party presidential nominee running for president. It would have been at microscopic to zero political risk to Obama.
Bottom line: candidate Obama had no motivation to release a Hawaii birth certificate if he didn’t actually have one.
Birther mind: There is a conspiracy by “elites” who know the “truth” of constutional requirements and of Obama’s ineligibility. The Wong Kim Ark opinion of 1898, for example, was drafted by a Supreme Court justice appointed by President Arthur. Since the justice “knew” that an ineligible President Arthur would have meant his own appointment was invalid, the opinion was crafted to save his own skin. (Never mind that several of the justices in agreement were NOT appointed by Arthur.) Similarly, Obama “knows” he’s ineligible, the “elite” media “knows” he’s ineligible, Hawaii governor Lingle “knows” he’s ineligible, Kapi’olani “knows” he’s ineligible, the Democratic party “knows” he’s ineligible, half of the population of Kenya “knows” he’s ineligible, the Hawaii Department of Health “knows” he’s ineligible. But they are all afraid that they will be taken out by Obama hit squads if they disclose the “truth,” so they have all joined in a widespread conspiracy of silence or of obfuscation in accordance with some imaginary legal standard that allows people to knowingly mislead as long as they state small bits of the truth to inquiring minds.
Bottom line: Only the birther is “clever” enough to see through the obfuscations of this conspiratorial cabal by asking the right questions and getting to the “truth” of Obama’s ineligibility, and therefore his status as Usurper-In-Chief of the United States. As a happy coincidence, this also means that all the legislation he has signed – which most of the birthers oppose – isn’t really law anyway. The world remains frozen as of 11:59 a.m. on January 20, 2009 in the mind of the birther.
Conclusion” I leave it up to you to determine which of these two approaches appears most reasonable.
I am sure they will be happy when the IRS comes knocking at their door to get back the money from the tax cut the President signed. If the various appropriations are not signed will that mean that they have to give back anything paid by an appropriation? At minimal, they would have to put the government on furlough since there is no longer any money to run the various departments. I assume the birthers can wait for their medicare or social security (and the military can do without their pay and pensions).
I am not looking forward to the de-construction projects to take made the stimulus projects. The construction was bad enough.
Oh yes, and the soldiers need to back to Iraq, without pay, of course.
Ahh… the birthers world… the Utopian ideal…
Hey, I am just glad to know I am shady. That complete loon, Pasture Manning, said I was as shallow as cardboard. Now I am shady. Who knew?
Wait a minute. Don’t forget about Chester A. Arthur. We’re going to have to give up the Civil Service and go back to the spoils system.
Good one!!
Well it seems Joseph Maine has gone MIA
Forget the Maine.
Of course he did….As with most birthers they are more comfortable posting on moderated sites where no dissent is allowed….They don’t like having to refute silly little things known as facts….Every known birther like Maine who has ventured to post here has left because they know they are outsmarted and outclassed….
From the Post and Fail, interesting comments from the infamous “researcher” article…I wonder if James realizes that Lucas Smith is so unbelievable that even the Post and Fail won’t touch him with a ten foot pole…Hilarious….
“In June, The Post & Email solicited funds for its Legal Defense Fund for a specific research project focusing on details and discrepancies surrounding Obama’s alleged birth in Hawaii. Many of our readers were very generous with their donations, including one who put forth a “matching grant” challenge which was met and even surpassed. With the help of a private donor, The Post & Email was able to fund an investigative journey to Hawaii for an experienced researcher. The results of the investigation follow in the researcher’s own words.”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/21/results-of-investigation-made-possible-by-donors-to-the-post-email-legal-fund/comment-page-1/#comment-18699
James says:
Saturday, August 21, 2010 at 11:04 PM
You should send all of these findings to LTC Terry Lakin’s Legal team to see what they can do with it. As an addition to this story, you should think about interviewing Lucas Smith to have him explain the circumstances in which he obtained Obama’s alleged Kenyan Birth Certificate.
dotdotcom says:
Sunday, August 22, 2010 at 12:48 AM
Steve Cooper at theconservativemonster interviewed Lucas Smith, here’s part of one of the comments which sums up the interview:
Robert wrote:
…I’m glad we listeners heard Lucas Smith’s account of procuring this document. He paid a hospital worker $200.00 USD (United States Dollars) and a military officer $400.00 USD, and then finally the hospital worker that procured the document Lucas Smith has in his possession $5,000.00 USD.
Keeping in mind that in February 2009
$5,000.00 dollars = 405,000 Kenyan Shilling.
And 5000 Kenyan shillings =61.72 US Dollars.
Can you imagine the look on the face of the person that Lucas laid down $5,000.00 in front of? I bet their knees were weak while getting that document. LOL! They’re well off now!
It’s easy to see how he went in and procured what a military check point was set up to prevent from happening, but as we all know, …MONEY TALKS, especially with a very poor nation, and also they did not commit treason against their President, it was just releasing a birth certificate of a Kenyan, who is in another country. It’s not like they were selling out their own nation, and I am certain they thought of that…
You can read the article, all the comments and link to the radio interview at http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/08/19/recap-of-the-conservative-monster-radio-show-from-aug-18th-2010-the-lucas-smith-interview-and-ground-zero-mosque-commentary.aspx
——————–
Mrs. Rondeau replies: I do not see any documentation that the above statements contained in the interview are accurate. They could well be, but I would like to see some type of proof of Smith’s travel there, receipts, etc. However, I will reserve judgment until I listen to the complete interview.
And another comment from an avowed birther, not realizing how silly he/she looks….
Pixel Patriot says:
Sunday, August 22, 2010 at 4:55 AM
Sharon,
Could The Post & Email possibly earmark a portion of future donations to your LEGAL FUND specifically for the purpose of retaining a licensed attorney and have him state for the record in definitive legal terms …
How can anybody have their identity protected when they are using a fake ID themselves and if not what can legally be done about it?
I would like to know the answer to that question and I have yet to see it addressed.
How could the issue of “standing” be relevant for CRIMINAL legal pursuits, not CIVIL; in the state of Hawaii seeking birth records for an individual that according to more than one licensed private investigator has used numerous social security numbers and the one he is using now was issued in CT, a state where he never lived?
How can the Governor of Hawaii deny access to Obama’s birth certificate by authority granted pursuant to Section 338-18 of the Revised Statues, a provision her office claims is to prevent identity theft…
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=79174
“Probably the most telling evidence of fraud is the fact that the social security number most commonly used by Obama from 1981 until now is a number issued in the state of CT to an individual born in 1890. According to licensed investigators Susan Daniels and Neil Sankey Obama has used numerous different SS numbers that belonged to deceased individuals and numbers that were never issued. 39 such numbers were used according to National Databases, none of which were issued in HI.”
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=7735
In light of the fact that Ms. Nagamine has indicated that Hawaii’s Attorney General’s office will not corroborate Dr. Fukino’s statement declaring “Obama Hawaiian-born and a “natural-born American citizen”, could this be used as a wedge to re-address the issue with the Governor’s office and seek clarification?
Could Ms. Nagamine be asked in court if Gov. Lingle can hide behind Section 338-18 where evidence to social security number fraud can and/or has been submitted to both the AG and Governor’s office?
Leo Donofrio argued that since Obama posted a forged COLB that that in and of itself should deny Obama the right to deny access to his records at the DOH. That is on the state level, on the federal level how could the State of Hawaii afford identity protection to someone violating:
The felony fraud provisions of the Title II programs found in 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(1)-(8) of the Act.
forging or falsifying SSA documents;
using a Social Security Number (SSN)
obtained on the basis of false information or
falsely using the SSN of another person, for
the purpose of obtaining or increasing a
payment under Social Security or any other
federally funded program, or for any other
purpose
making or causing to be made a false
statement or representation of a material fact
for use in determining rights to Social
Security benefits, Medicare, Supplemental
Security Income, or Black Lung benefits
In the description for your LEGAL FUND you state:
“Those who have made such UIPA requests and have been refused, can indicate their willingness to sign on as potential plaintiffs”.
Do you foresee the LEGAL FUND ever getting to the stage of actual litigation? Could you possibly be paying for research unnecessarily when a judge could order it to be done in the course of a trial?
Pixel Patriot 8.22.2010
This “researcher” got a nice, free vacation, but his analysis is quite lacking. Concerning the “duplicate name” silliness. If you look at the photo of the page at the linked P&E page you will see that this an alphabetized list of names. The line above “OBAMA II, BARACK HUSSEIN” is for “OBADO, DUPLICATE MAE”. Now, assuming that noone names their child “Duplicate” this obviously referred to one of Obado births. “DUPLICATE” just sorted at the end of the “OBADO” & OBAMA sorts next. No mystery here, at least in relation to Obama.
Actually “HE” hasn’t. Some aide ordered an electronic copy from the Hawaii Records Dept(or whatever the proper name is). “HE” didn’t do a damn thing. I followed this stupid subject 2yrs ago until I got tired of it and could care less about it. But Joe makes a good point, BHO could get an authentic copy of the on file copy, IF HE Wanted To. My son was born at Tripler Hospital 1989, and his B.C. has all the normal signatures/line entries all the opponents complain BHOs doesn’t. Sure seems all those times BHO was in Hawaii, it would only take him 15 minutes to do the simple thing and put this all to rest, but he won’t. And of course, his supporters avoid that EVERY time by saying one of two things, that he already shown one(“HE” hasn’t), or the infamous “it won’t matter if he did show it, you birthers will never be satisfied” ….which is just another avoiding statement of the Plain and Simple question…why won’t he just do it to prove everyone wrong? Then this turns into some weird circle conversation and just depends who you believe more. The one comment you made “he hasn’t lied” is Your Opinion, you DO NOT know that for sure, you just believe it.
Hawaii says they don’t provide certified photocopies of original registrations (“long forms”) any more, only certified copies of the computer-generated form. Up until this time, to the best of my knowledge, no one has published a recently-obtained long form from Hawaii, despite numerous claims that it can be obtained, and numerous challenges to prove it. It seems as though you are in the privileged position of being able to obtain actual proof of your claim. While I wouldn’t go so far as to say “put up or shut up,” I would say that you are in a position advance the discussion with real evidence.
Anyway, something for you to think about. Certainly if I were in your position, I would be salivating at the chance to get one on the Obots. My check would already be in the mail.
Hello-Kitty pondered, “. . . why won’t he just do it to prove everyone wrong?”
Everyone? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! That’s cute.
Satisfying the curiosity of a few political enemies and providing fodder to paranoid, pathological liars is not on the President’s agenda. It is also completely irrelevant to the eligibility requirement as mandated in the Constitution.
Why do birthers suspect the state of Hawaii of fraud without any credible evidence?
Why do birthers have such blatant disrespect and disregard for U.S. law and the Constitution?
/rhetorical questions
Unless there is some reason to believe that the “authentic copy” of President Obama’s would differ in any substantive way from the “electronic copy” from the Hawaii Department of Health, the effort to obtain the “authentic copy” is a giant waste of time. Furthermore, by asking for it, President Obama would be sending the signal that an official state agency in charge of vital records is somehow not to be trusted. I don’t see any reason why President Obama should subject the DoH to that indignity without some valid reason for doing so.
MW’s right, that “everyone” is just precious, but I’m also wondering, wrong about what? Please make a statement of any consequence that the original birth record can confirm or deny. I haven’t heard one yet.
I won’t hold my breath. Birthers haven’t been real big on answering questions.
Once again Hello_Kitty Obama has proven his citizenship that’s why he’s president and you’re still whining about it. The COLB is the form he got from the Hawaii DOH. It is prima facie evidence and is used to get government and state IDs as well as passports. When is the last time you tried to get a birth certificate for your son? Hawaii no longer issues long forms and even if he got one you do realize the long form is easier to forge don’t you? So then you’ll still be whining.
UnionJack, I’m sorry if the thing I’m going to cite will be offensive to you. However, your entire thing of “Let other people defend the rights of other people” just reminds me of a poem by Martin Neimoller that says: “In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”
Point being is that if one person doesn’t have the right to do it, then no people have the right to do it. And if people will not stand up to defend those rights, then when those rights are actually taken away from you, there will be nobody left to have those rights defend.
I know you’re a Jew, and I’m sorry if my comparison to the Nazis seem a little unfair. However, if these people do not have the right to free speech, then who will speak up when someone comes to take that right away from you.
Actually, if President Obama were to publish a certified photocopy of his original birth certificate, he would prove most people right.
Good going, Doc.
Many democratic countries, including Germany, Canada and France have narrowly crafted laws against virulent forms of hate speech. Those have not inhibited vigorous discussions and vibrant democracy in those countries. The idea that even the slightest limitations on the most virulent speech leads to the end of all freedoms is not proven by empirical data.
This whole fake birth certificate controversy has always seemed familiar to me. Suddenly I realized that we’ve been through this before. During the 90s, the Republicans spent months furiously demanding Hillary Clinton’s Rose Law Firm billing records. The Republicans were loud in their braying insistence that the billing records would reveal that the First Lady was guilty of something or other.
The problem was, the Republicans, through Ken Starr, already had the billing records in their possession and knew exactly what was in them. The billing records they were demanding were photocopies. Somehow, they believed, or claimed to believe, that the photocopies were somehow different from the original. Sadly the mainstream media parroted the Republican claims. Of course the records contained no damaging information on Hillary Clinton, but the Republicans always knew that.
It’s almost the same with President Obama’s birth certificate. He’s already released the copy. So they’re demanding the original.
Everything old is new again.
Yeah, not a good idea. How is he going to prove you wrong? First of all, according to birthers, they are NEVER wrong even when it’s abundantly clear they are wrong. They KNOW that President Obama was not born in this country, and they have and will insist anything he provides to prove it is a fake.
How is he going to show birthers this “long form?” Post it on the internet? Yeah, that worked out well with the COLB he posted on the internet didn’t it? Some idiots downloaded it, altered it, and then claimed that the president faked it. And they won’t do this with a “long form” if he posts it on the internet? Fat chance. Again, they will download and alter whatever he posts on the internet. Birthers certainly are not famous for their honesty.
The only other option is to visit each and every person with the delusion about his birth and show it to them personally, but even that would not satisfy them because they would just claim he faked it. Or he could take each and every one of you out to Hawaii and get you your own personal copy right from the hand of the Director of the Hawaii Department of Health because he has so much time on his hands that he doesn’t know what to do with it.
The president is doing the right thing – IGNORING YOU!
I was more going off of his comment that was basically saying that the Nazis deserved to be defended, but just not by him. It read that he even agreed that the Nazis had a right to do it, but because he found the speech offensive, he wasn’t going to put his money, and his reputation on the line to defend the freedom of speech that he disagreed with.
It reminded me of the Martin Neimoller quote. And he wasn’t speaking hypothetically, he actually experienced the Nazis coming after him, and then nobody spoke up.
My belief is that rights are applied equally. If one person doesn’t have the right to free speech, then nobody does.
It wasn’t my intention to call those ACLU members who left the organization in 1978 over the “Skokie march” “hypocrites.” People make value judgments on these questions, and opposition to neo-Nazis is a value that I share.
I do see clear parallels and weighing of values between Skolie and the so-mis-called “Ground Zero” mosque where one constitutional right is put up against the feelings of a group of victims. Certainly the Skokie concerns were more rational and historically valid than the opposition to the mosque construction, but the feelings are parallel.
I think you ducked my point dunst. Laws limiting hate speech have to be applied equally-Jews who say Arabs should be killed should be prosecuted the same as Nazis who say Jews should be killed. I support limited, narrowly crafted restrictions on hate speech and threats of violence, no matter who makes them or whom they are made against. These restrictions are completely compatible with democracy, as shown by countries around the world.
Scientist, you were not the one advocating that the Nazis did have a right to speech, but you weren’t going to defend it. The post I was responding to was basically saying, “I believe that the speech is constitutionally protected, and their rights to say it should be defended. However, since these people are advocating things that I do not believe in, I will not stand up and defend their right to say it.” That’s more what I was responding to.
As for hate speech, I think we have to be very careful on the laws. We’ll get too much into the famous quote of pornography to say, “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.”
It would have been more intellectually honest if he more took your position and said that he doesn’t believe that Hate Speech is constitutionally protected than the position that he did take. That he viewed hate speech as being equivilant to yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater.
The funny thing about subcribers likr Mr. Maine here they start out claiming they are just trying to see that the constitution is upheld(nothing personal). they maintain that position for a few post , then they go on the personal attacks against the president (calling him a liar, conspirator, usurper, the worst president ever, accusing him of spending millions). Sounds pretty personal to me.
So I ask you Mr. Maine , if the Birth issue did not exist , how would you feel about him then? Would it really change your point of view , or would you just pick another issue to hate him on?