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

[Stjudeprayforus]

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.

Me too.

If Obama was republican… Dan Rather would have just made one up.

 

[seekerz]

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.

Your scales don’t hold much weight with me I’m afraid and what I do with my vote is (thankfully) still my personal affair. Generalizing about specifics only works in certain quarters. Some things just can’t be glossed over.

 

[kimmielittle]

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:

Actually, when the President produced the Short Form…He opened the legitimacy of the Long Form.

Then; He used the time of courts and private lawyers has been spent in order to tie up it’s release. Government lawyers have had to spend their time – on the public’s dime – on this nonsense. We have a right to know why.

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

As a Catholic, I can find none of his policies that I can support.

I suspect this transparency policy issue is being challenged because there isn’t any other ground to support his policies with most Catholics

 

[seekerz]

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?

Now desperation sounds like a much more charitable term than…well you know…

 

[Stjudeprayforus]

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?

Not a Republican agenda. Vast majority of Republicans have said Obama was born in America.

MSNBC & CNN devoted the most time to it. Fox only devoted 8% of airtime to it.

poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/129708/factchecking-obama-birther-controversy-was-3-4-of-newshole-economy-was-39/

 

[seekerz]

Actually, when the President produced the Short Form…He opened the legitimacy of the Long Form.(

Now that just has to take the cake! By proving his eligibility, he created a controversy about his eligibility? Would you have preferred he just ignored the Constitution or better yet engineered a Soviet-style takeover?

 

[Big_Ro]

Well, it has to be noted that a person seeking elected office does not have to prove that anything in the filings is true. Rather, they are required to swear by oath that information is true and accurate. I have more than a passing acquaintance with this issue. I have filed for office and served as the election authority. The authority accepting the filing for candidacy is not allowed to research or investigate the information on their own because it’s a civil rights violation. I actually encountered this issue regarding residency requirements. I was advised by one of the most prominent elections attorney’s in the country, so I feel pretty confident I’m on solid ground. I’m sure many “facts” will be presented to the contrary, but, alas, I must labor along with my own delusions.

Now, a person with good standing may petition the authority claiming that some or all of the informnation in the filing is inaccurate, false or otherwise renders the filer ineligible for the office sought. There are well defined processes for doing this. The authority must then determine whether the complaint is valid and warrants an investigation. Usually this means that the complainer has to present credible evidence. In almost all cases, this means a Judge will decide.

Now, I don’t have the “facts” to support this next statement, but I presume that people in the various states where the President filed for candidacy, believing they were and are in possesion of credible evidence that the President is ineleigible, would have filed such a complaint and presented their credible evidence. So, my question is, if the evidence is so compelling, reasonable, and accurate, then why have these complaints not resulted in any State authority declaring the Presdient ineligible?

Finally, it seems a bit disingenuous to suggest that the controversy was really about whether the Presdient failed to keep a campaign promise at a level sufficient to satisfy his critics. The controversy was and continues to be that he was refusing to relaese his Bc because it would prove conclusively that he is ineleigible to serve as Commander-in Chief. And, criticizing a President for failing to keep a campaign promise is to say the least passe.

 

[silentstar]

Well, as I predicted, the Forgery approach seems to be taking hold. I’m beginning to come around to the viewpoint that the President was wrong to release his BC. However, there are others, both perceived as liberal and conservative, although in IMHO those terms are meaningless within the bounds of modern political discourse, but I digress, that feel that it is working against Republican interests for victory in 2012. There are some who are antagonistic towards Republican success in 2012 that consider it a good strategy because it forces Republicans to choose between joining in with the “Obama is not eligible crowd” (I was informed that using the “B” word to describe this bunch is uncharitable) or to deny it. This would presumably divide the base. Let me be clear, it’s not my theory. Those more favorable to Republican success in 2012 are suggesting that it’s a conspiracy by Obama to divide the Republican base. The logic is not hard to see given a certain perspective. If Obama is sinister enough to perpetrate a massive fraud and conspiracy on the American people regarding his place of birth or citizenship status or eligibility for admission to an Ivy league school then surely he is capable of fomenting division within the opposition party. Like I said, this approach fits the mold.

Obama wasn’t going to win no matter what he did. When people have their minds made up no amount of evidence will change their opinion and that includes scientists (I have a degree in physics with a math minor) who sometimes say they operate by observation and careful thought and are immune to human biases. However this controversy does make the Republicans look extreme as does the attempt to blame Obama for the fact that people keep asking for his birth certificate and then in this era of photoshop and etc. don’t accept it when provided.

 

[bbarrick8383]

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?

Not sure why it would matter, but I heard this was brought up when he was running for a state office.

 

[gilliam]

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?

Chester Arther was asked to. Arthr made a lot of statements, some of them false, to quell the questions.
eagle.brooklynpubliclibrary.org/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=BEagle&BaseHref=BEG/1880/08/13&PageLabelPrint=&EntityId=Ar00202&ViewMode=GIF&GZ=T

By the way, Arther was a Republican and those making accusations were Democrats

This is typical politics. The Internet and cable news has simply amplified it.

White House and Obama campaign officials had been convinced the issue helped the president politically, by marginalizing his opposition. But in recent weeks, real estate mogul Donald Trump grabbed the issue to make waves as he tests the waters for a possible presidential run. Fearing the traction he was gaining, Mr. Obama decided last week to release the fuller document, a Democratic official said. On Monday, Mr. Obama sent his personal lawyer to Hawaii to retrieve the documentation
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576288811924282824.html?mod=ITP_pageone_1

 

[Big_Ro]

Is there any evidence that the President or his supporters took any affirmative action to prevent it’s release?

 

[estesbob]

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?

Are you saying the fact Obama is Black should exempt him from having to deal with the rough-and-tumble style of politics that has been in effect in this country since its founding?

 

[kimmielittle]

What it took for Mr. Obama

The request for certified copies of the birth certificate was (finally) made last week, on a Friday, in two short letters – including a four-sentence letter signed by the president that obviously took him considerably less time to review than it takes to stretch before teeing off at the first hole. The birth certificate was produced the following business day (Monday) — with the health department expressing hope that its production “will end the numerous inquiries” it had gotten over the years, which “have been disruptive to staff operations and have strained State resources.” And Obama was able to do his dog-and-pony show yesterday morning, only five days after asking the health department to produce the document.

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

 

[seekerz]

Well, it has to be noted that a person seeking elected office does not have to prove that anything in the filings is true. Rather, they are required to swear by oath that information is true and accurate. I have more than a passing acquaintance with this issue. I have filed for office and served as the election authority. The authority accepting the filing for candidacy is not allowed to research or investigate the information on their own because it’s a civil rights violation. I actually encountered this issue regarding residency requirements. I was advised by one of the most prominent elections attorney’s in the country, so I feel pretty confident I’m on solid ground. I’m sure many “facts” will be presented to the contrary, but, alas, I must labor along with my own delusions.

Now, a person with good standing may petition the authority claiming that some or all of the informnation in the filing is inaccurate, false or otherwise renders the filer ineligible for the office sought. There are well defined processes for doing this. The authority must then determine whether the complaint is valid and warrants an investigation. Usually this means that the complainer has to present credible evidence. In almost all cases, this means a Judge will decide.

Now, I don’t have the “facts” to support this next statement, but I presume that people in the various states where the President filed for candidacy, believing they were and are in possesion of credible evidence that the President is ineleigible, would have filed such a complaint and presented their credible evidence. So, my question is, if the evidence is so compelling, reasonable, and accurate, then why have these complaints not resulted in any State authority declaring the Presdient ineligible?

Finally, it seems a bit disingenuous to suggest that the controversy was really about whether the Presdient failed to keep a campaign promise at a level sufficient to satisfy his critics. The controversy was and continues to be that he was refusing to relaese his Bc because it would prove conclusively that he is ineleigible to serve as Commander-in Chief. And, criticizing a President for failing to keep a campaign promise is to say the least passe.

Thanks for that info. Seems to me that the legal route was tried multiple times, so in the absence of a ruling in favor of the doubters the matter should have been settled then. What happened yesterday was unnecessary and undignified and to see it being widely applauded is galling.

As for the campaign transparency promise being equated to release of the long form BC - that seems to be the justification being promoted in some quarters.

 

[Sonic]

Maybe what Kapiolani did (this is just my speculation), they photocopied the original BC on this fancy green-and-white paper, and gave the photocopy to the staff member. Then, the staff member brought the photocopy to Washington DC, someone scanned the photocopy, touched it up with an image editing software in order to make it easier to read, and uploaded it on the Whitehouse web site.

I can honestly tell that the image was not printed out on the fancy paper and then scanned. You can tell because the background is too clear and doesn’t suffer from editing. It had to be added after the document was edited for clarity.

I think adding the background was just a misguided attempt to make it look like the earlier certificates that were released.

After last night, I did some browsing on the topic. I am now reserving my previous judgment for now. It’s such a badly done editing job, I can only imagine who it was that did it. It’s no wonder people are scrutinizing the image.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7809176&postcount=680

 

[BVM_1221]

huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/27/birthers-still-have-quest_n_854591.html

 

[kimmielittle]

Now that just has to take the cake! By proving his eligibility, he created a controversy about his eligibility?

Nonsense…He chose the Short Form - bringing the questions of legitimacy of the Long Form into question.

You can not escape, nor Mr. Obama, this truth.

 

[seekerz]

Chester Arther was asked to. Arthr made a lot of statements, some of them false, to quell the questions.
eagle.brooklynpubliclibrary.org/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=BEagle&BaseHref=BEG/1880/08/13&PageLabelPrint=&EntityId=Ar00202&ViewMode=GIF&GZ=T

By the way, Arther was a Republican and those making accusations were Democrats

This is typical politics. The Internet and cable news has simply amplified it.

White House and Obama campaign officials had been convinced the issue helped the president politically, by marginalizing his opposition. But in recent weeks, real estate mogul Donald Trump grabbed the issue to make waves as he tests the waters for a possible presidential run. Fearing the traction he was gaining, Mr. Obama decided last week to release the fuller document, a Democratic official said. On Monday, Mr. Obama sent his personal lawyer to Hawaii to retrieve the documentation
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576288811924282824.html?mod=ITP_pageone_1

From what I have read, his eligibility was challenged as a candidate (for vice president) not after he passed the vetting process and I am not aware that he responded publicly either. I think such challenges ARE normal politics. It’s the rest (including the refusal to be satisfied even post-election) that leaves me wondering.

 

[seekerz]

Nonsense…He chose the Short Form - bringing the questions of legitimacy of the Long Form into question.

You can not escape, nor Mr. Obama, this truth.

Does the Constitution, or indeed the eligibility process, require that a long form be produced? Why should the short form have raised doubts about the long one? Not sure I follow.

The truth is that even in the face of the evidence requested, some people continue to choose to believe the president is unworthy of sharing their claim to this country.

 

[gilliam]

From what I have read, his eligibility was challenged as a candidate (for vice president). not after he passed the vetting process and I am not aware that he responded publicly either. I think such challenges ARE normal politics. It’s the rest (including the refusal to be satisfied even post-election) that leaves me wondering.

Nope was an issue while he was president. See: How a British Subject Became President of the United States, by Arthur Hinman. Published in 1884
Arthur was president from 1881-1885