In an editorial titled Lakin trial did not resolve original issue, the Greeley Gazette suggests that Terry Lakin had a right to have his questions about President Obama’s eligibility answered.
My response, which appears now with the article said:
Your editorial would suggest that all 309 million Americans have the individual right to drag their President into court to answer every rumor and crank theory that might come into their minds. That is patently absurd.
President Obama released his official birth certificate in 2008 and the Hawaii Department of Health released a statement verifying that he was born in Hawaii. Lakin’s former defense counsel lied when he waived a piece of paper on CNN saying that anyone could get a Hawaiian birth certificate, citing a law that was not passed until 21 years after Obama’s birth was registered (and which does not provide for … a false place of birth on the out of state certificate in any case).
Lakin may have had good intentions, but he was very stupid in choosing to believe conspiracy theorists and cranks over hard facts. His questions were answered by Congress the day they unanimously certified the 2008 election. That is how it works under our Constitution.
[The following post is really from the banned James, who lurks around here, posting occasionally using a variety of fake names. I let this one through just to assure the community that they aren’t missing anything. Doc.]
Doc,
Obama DID NOT release his birth certificate showing the hospital and the doctor’s name, only the COLB. Although Hawaii DOH claimed he was born in Hawaii, they revealed on one sred of evidence that he was.
Obama rlease the long–form Bc shoing the hospital and the doctor. It’s that simple.
When you release the official document (evidence) and the government agency that issued the document backs you up, the proof doesn’t get much stronger. The State of Hawaii doesn’t have to give you any evidence; they are the official custodian of the evidence and the ones who can say what is or is not.
Your objections are mindless blather, and your method is that of the petulant child who says “why?” no matter what you answer.
Now go away, and stay away.
James appears to be confused about the facts which show that
1. President Obama released his COLB which shows him born in Honolulu HI
2. The Department of Health has verified that President Obama, by virtue of his US birth, is a natural born citizen
3. The DOH of HI has released index data further supporting this fact
4. Two newspapers published birth announcements
James has to ignore all these facts and in addition make up several ‘facts’ himself.
James,
Take that to a real lawyer and ask him what that means. Are you really that ignorant of how the world works?
My question is: What evidence do YOU have that contradicts the State of Hawaii that will stand up to the rules of evidence? Be specific, the court have dismissed the prior EIGHTY cases in a row. Why do you think that is?
I
I have noticed, not only are the motivated only by the hate they have for the President, they are also just plain lazy. They expect Obama to give them the evidence they need to show they are right. They do not search for evidence or even show proof that some of their logic is theoretically possible. Instead, they expect Obama to provide evidence against himself, which is made all the harder when it does not exist.
What have the birthers not bothered to provide:
– One actual case where a birth (which was foreign) and was reported by a third party and yet, the BC would say Hawaii.
– One case of a 6 year old renouncing citizenship with a CLN.
– Any government document showing that Obama was ever adopted
– A case where the COLB does not match the original paperwork
– Any documentation that a convicted forger ever entered Kenya (or anywhere close).
– A school textbook that shows the 2 parent theory
– (running out of time so the list ends here)
Okay… maybe there not lazy but instead, cannot find the above because, they do not exist. So is it lazy or dishonest?
Both and mentally challenged as well.
Yes, yes, and yes.
> Okay… maybe there not lazy but instead, cannot find the above because, they do not exist. So is it lazy or dishonest?
In birther-parallel-world-lala-land, the explanation would be “these proofs do not exist because the Evil Conspiracy destroyed them, so that’s proof the Evil Conspiracy exists”. 😉