"WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President."

[bbarrick8383]

Pure speculation to point out the truth: that this has nothing to do with what is accepted in polite company as ‘personal criticism’?

Let’s look at your terminology more in depth: since when was place of birth (a matter totally out of the hands of the individual traversing the birth canal) a fair subject for criticizing someone over? Far as I know, ‘personal criticism’ runs the gamut of actions, ideology, relationships, finances, acquaintances, educational achievement, any and all matters*** for which the subject of criticism is responsible***.

Now you think that assigning any other description than ‘criticism’ to challenging someone’s birthplace, is speculation! Maybe you need to clarify your definitions of ‘criticism’ and of ‘speculation’. Maybe you just need to let the truth speak for itself. It really doesn’t need any help.

The crticizing comes from those who are honestly wondering why he didn’t prove this wrong over 2 years ago. This started with Hillary, was carried on by his opposition when he was nominated. The history was shady because of his father and mothers actions, then people started criticizing him when he wouldn’t prove them wrong. If the man had been born in Oklahoma to two black parents, who were both born and raised here. None of this would be an issue. If Obama was white and his white father from S. Africa we would still be having this discussion. To attribute it all to racism is pretty pathetic.

If

 

[seekerz]

You have a fallacy in logic here IMO

The first obvious flaw:
1; He voluntarily submitted his Long Form. - Just as he voluntarily kept it from the public for 2-3 years,.

2;He wasn’t demanded by Congress, to do so.

3; He submitted it for only one reason - ratings falling on his overall policy performance and the run for 2012.

4 It’s actually… HE had to…One Main reason was HIS own transparency pledge.

5; When you buy the gun - the bullets - and stick it to your own head and pull the trigger - you aren’t a martyr - It’s called suicide.

6 Did he owe it to the average voter - ABSOLUTELY!!! Especially, if he expects to win back favor ]

By his own words

Barack Hussein Obama : Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

You can defend Mr. Obama if you wish - but don’t attempt to get me to buy that he is a martyr - It’s illogical to attempt

---

As for defending Mr Obama*** (I missed that part in my first response), this thread is about his birth certificate, but if I may say so you (and several other posters) seem to be doing a fine job all on your own. My help isn’t needed in the least.

 

[estesbob]

So, assuming as we should the legitimacy of the long-form birth certificate produced yesterday, the only thing that makes sense is that Obama knows the mainstream media is in his hip pocket. That is, he knew that he would not be held to the same standard as other politicians, and that if he acted in an unreasonable manner by withholding basic, easily available information that any other person seeking the presidency would be expected – be compelled – to produce, the media would portray as weirdos those demanding the information, not Obama and his stonewalling accomplices. And he also knows that, having now finally produced the document only because the game was starting to hurt him politically, the media will not focus on how easy it would have been to produce the birth certificate three years ago, or on how much time and money has been wasted by his gamesmanship; they’ll instead portray him as beleaguered and the people who have been seeking the basic information (i.e., doing the media’s job) as discredited whackos.

*Andrew McCarthy
nationalreview.com/corner/265880/birth-certificate-where-are-indignant-questions-obama-andrew-c-mccarthy.
*

 

[Digitonomy]

Did I say McCain’s eligibility wasn’t discussed? I think I was very specific about what I never saw discussed.

The reason McCain’s long-form birth certificate wasn’t obsessed over is there was no controversy about the facts on it. As SwizzleStick noted, these points were discussed in great depth back in 2008, but have since been censored. McCain’s eligibility issue was whether someone born on foreign soil could be a natural born citizen.

 

[seekerz]

The crticizing comes from those who are honestly wondering why he didn’t prove this wrong over 2 years ago. This started with Hillary, was carried on by his opposition when he was nominated. The history was shady because of his father and mothers actions, then people started criticizing him when he wouldn’t prove them wrong. If the man had been born in Oklahoma to two black parents, who were both born and raised here. None of this would be an issue. If Obama was white and his white father from S. Africa we would still be having this discussion. To attribute it all to racism is pretty pathetic.

If

Yeah, there are lots of things in life that *** are*** pretty pathetic, I’m afraid.

On another note, are you seriously suggesting that the ‘personal criticism’ is not regarding where he was born but why he didn’t take steps to prove it sooner? I’m under the impression that he produced his birth certificate a long time ago, but that fact is consistently overlooked. If you mean ‘personal criticism’ because he failed to satisfy the demand for a long form, then my question to you is: why should he have? Simply to satisfy curiosity? There are people with the job to verify eligibility and that’s how doubts are taken care of. So ‘personal criticism’ based on demands not made through proper channels in uncalled for and unreasonable. Now, back to the real question: if the doubters had no proper legal or other basis for their demands, on what is this so-called ‘personal criticism’ really based and how is it legitimate?

 

[kimmielittle]

---

As for defending Mr Obama*** (I missed that part in my first response), this thread is about his birth certificate, but if I may say so you (and several other posters) seem to be doing a fine job all on your own. My help isn’t needed in the least.

Do you mean you can’t offer a defense against Mr. Obama not adhering to his own platform of transparency?

The birth certificate is only ONE part of not adhering to his stated platform.

Barack Hussein Obama : Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

 

[seekerz]

Do you mean you can’t offer a defense against Mr. Obama not adhering to his own platform of transparency?

The birth certificate is only ONE part of not adhering to his stated platform.

Barack Hussein Obama : Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

You might have had a leg to stand on if he had promised to release it but as far as I’m aware he never did.

So this leaves you accusing him of breaking a commitment (transparency) because he refused to do something (release a long form BC) that he had never promised to do but did anyway, to satisfy the same people who continue to accuse him of lack of transparency for not doing the thing he just did even if he had never promised to do it. :whacky::whacky:

And you wonder why you’re among his best defenders?

 

[gilliam]

How many of those subjects of ‘minor controversies’ became president and felt forced to produce their long form birth certificate to prove their right to lead? Again, I am being very specific. Any claim can be made about a candidate, just not everyone is expected to prove the already proven simply because, to use the words of another poster, “some say” they’re ineligible.

Seekerz,

Birth certificates in the US are a relatively modern item. They were only in common practice starting in the 1900s, especially for people who were not born in hospitals.

If I remember my history correctly, president Chester Arther’s birth controversy was about as much of a controversy then as the current one is today.

 

[seekerz]

Seekerz,

Birth certificates in the US are a relatively modern item. They were only in common practice starting in the 1900s, especially for people who were not born in hospitals.

If I remember my history correctly, president Chester Arther’s birth controversy was about as much of a controversy then as the current one is today.

So how was eligibility proved back in those days? As for the scale of the controversy, I used the assessment of the poster to whom I was responding.

 

[seekerz]

The reason McCain’s long-form birth certificate wasn’t obsessed over is there was no controversy about the facts on it.

At the risk of sounding facetious, that is exactly my point. Who created the controversy, who bought into it and why do they have apologists in high places?

 

[gilliam]

So how was eligibility proved back in those days? As for the scale of the controversy, I used the assessment of the poster to whom I was responding.

Witnesses, baptismal records, church records, naturalized citizenship records, etc. etc. etc.

Usually it wasn’t a big deal because the president’s family roots are long established and people knew the family of the president, grew up with him and his family and knew where and when he was born. It only becomes a problem when the president comes from a “nomatic” family like Arther’s or McCain’s.

 

[Digitonomy]

At the risk of sounding facetious, that is exactly my point. Who created the controversy, who bought into it and why do they have apologists in high places?

McCain’s eligibility controversy is different because it centers on what is the proper interpretation of law, while Obama’s eligibility controversy is based on what are the proper facts. If you agree on that difference, it’s not clear to me how bringing up McCain is relevant to a discussion of long-form birth certificates.

 

[seekerz]

Witnesses, baptismal records, church records, naturalized citizenship records, etc. etc. etc.

Usually it wasn’t a big deal because the president’s family roots are long established and people knew the family of the president, grew up with him and his family and knew where and when he was born. It only becomes a problem when the president comes from a “nomatic” family like Arther’s or McCain’s.

So has a president (not a presidential candidate, but someone who’s actually cleared the vetting process and won an election) ever had to show those document publicly to quell questions raised among significant segments of the population?

 

[Hiskid1973]

At the risk of sounding facetious, that is exactly my point. Who created the controversy, who bought into it and why do they have apologists in high places?

He creates controversy…Vetting is a normal process…What would have been the big deal
to do what he just did and show the full one…Why have lawyers seal up his records unless
he has something to hide…The irony like said before, is he made some much hype about transparency then does so much opposite From what I read even his big transparency meetings details weren’t even disclosed…

 

[seekerz]

McCain’s eligibility controversy is different because it centers on what is the proper interpretation of law, while Obama’s eligibility controversy is based on what are the proper facts. If you agree on that difference, it’s not clear to me how bringing up McCain is relevant to a discussion of long-form birth certificates.

It hasn’t been clear to me either but it is repeatedly brought up in discussions of this nature so I have addressed it.

The more salient question is: who decided there was a controversy over Obama’s eligibility? The ones charged with vetting him? I think not.

 

[Stjudeprayforus]

At the risk of sounding facetious, that is exactly my point. Who created the controversy, who bought into it and why do they have apologists in high places?

Hilliary Clinton started it. PUMA’s kept it going after Hilliary wasnt the nominee.

 

[seekerz]

He creates controversy…Vetting is a normal process…What would have been the big deal
to do what he just did and show the full one…Why have lawyers seal up his records unless
he has something to hide…The irony like said before, is he made some much hype about transparency then does so much opposite From what I read even his big transparency meetings details weren’t even disclosed…

Oh, so let me get his straight. Obama presented his BC to the proper authorities and informed them that there was a controversy over where he was born…or the proper authorities informed us…or what?

 

[estesbob]

So has a president (not a presidential candidate, but someone who’s actually cleared the vetting process and won an election) ever had to show those document publicly to quell questions raised among significant segments of the population?

Politics ia a rough profession. if you do not feel he was up to it you should not have voted for him.There is ample evidence that the MM has treated him with kid gloves. On a scale of 1-10 of information demanded of presidents i would put this at about a 1.

 

[seekerz]

Hilliary Clinton started it. PUMA’s kept it going after Hilliary wasnt the nominee.

So if Hillary started it how comes the polls show it’s Republicans who won’t let it die. Why is there all this stammering on TV by some Republican politicians when they are asked if the president is American? Since when does Hillary set he Republican agenda?

 

[BVM_1221]

It hasn’t been clear to me either but it is repeatedly brought up in discussions of this nature so I have addressed it.

The more salient question is: who decided there was a controversy over Obama’s eligibility? The ones charged with vetting him? I think not.

Who decided? Perhaps those who did not want a Black man in the White House, and would try anything, do anything, say anything to get him out?