Obama Birth Certificate Rears Its Head - Again, page 8
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9    10    11  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 11 times


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 01:52 PM by theindependentjournal
reply to post by Kailassa


no I meant the document expert that has testified in courts in cases on documents. However I do find the people supporting Barrack on this to be very hypocritical, I however have stated several times I don't know and I don't care but I think it's a setup of some sort.

Riddle me this Batman... If all you say is true why did Barracks lawyers claim privacy issues and harms? Why if it's all easy cheesy doesn't your man Barrack just get a certified copy of the Hawaiian BC and release it? Seems to me you want to put the onus on us to prove a negative instead of on the candidate himself, interesting to say the least. Or is it that you don't care if he is eligible for the job? What if it was Bush or Cheney, would you be so willing to just TRUST THEM???

If there is nothing to it he should release it yet he releases attorneys to hide it giving threads and stories like this footholds, why? Again I think it's on purpose but I don't have a dog in this hunt. I am not a Republican or a Democrat nor am I black voter that only voted for the black guy cause he was black...

I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating and this BC thing is Barracks to clear up, and if he don't release a certified copy be sure to recall your stance when a Republican or Independent runs with questions of his Birth or eligibility, I am sure you won't because this isn't about Right or Wrong with most of you it's about some political party or skin color..

Disgusting to me as an AMERICAN to say the least.. I question everything and everyone in Government I do NOT only question those I dislike or disagree with, but then I am a TRUE PATRIOT according to the founders and not a sunshine soldier and summer Patriot,...

nough said.. Barrack don't release it and keeps his attorneys in it, this proves he has something to hide and only a reasonable person will see it that way, because the opposite is true. If he had nothing to hide he would have already released it...


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 01:53 PM by Maxmars
reply to post by danx


Forget it danx, there is too much love for the man here to actually discuss things like this. To them it's all about the 'winning' of something (although some here still think this has something to do with him being half-white).

Frankly, a requirement like this is not earth-shattering until it threatens their 'winner.'

They will never accept the matter as it is intended, a simple procedural hurdle that all candidates face.

Their defense is simple: "Shut up already. We rock, you obviously don't."

Fortunately, the courts have committed to determine what the deal is. Sadly we will never know exactly what the judges will discuss other than what they are inclined to reveal. I don't care what the end product is, because I have seen too many indications that this is politics as usual.

Look back at the post, pages and pages of whining and thrashing over something that they seem unwilling to accept. He has not met the requirement. We have spent thousands of man-hours debating this and at the end of the argument - he STILL hasn't met the requirement. Instead we see excuses and machination trying to negate the requirement, negate the requirement for him specifically, negate the right to demand he meet the requirement, and of course, if you dare to state you really want to know, you're obviously a racist neo-con or some other such obtuse nonsense.



[edit on 3-12-2008 by Maxmars]


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 01:58 PM by ConservativeJack
Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by danx


Forget it danx, there is too much love for the man here to actually discuss things like this. To them it's all about the 'winning' of something (although some here still think this has something to do with him being half-white).

Frankly, a requirement like this is not earth-shattering until it threatens their 'winner.'

They will never accept the matter as it is intended, a simple procedural hurdle that all candidates face.

Their defense is simple: "Shut up already. We rock, you obviously don't."

Fortunately, the courts have committed to determine what the deal is. Sadly we will never know exactly what the judges will discuss other than what they are inclined to reveal. I don't care what the end product is, because I have seen too many indications that this is politics as usual.

Look back at the post, pages and pages of whining and thrashing over something that they seem unwilling to accept. He has not met the requirement. We have spent thousands of man-hours debating this and at the end of the argument - he STILL hasn't met the requirement. Instead we see excuses and machination trying to negate the requirement, negate the requirement for him specifically, negate the right to demand he meet the requirement, and of course, if you dare to state you really want to know, you're obviously a racist neo-con or some other such obtuse nonsense.



[edit on 3-12-2008 by Maxmars]


your dellusional


it's like, you don't know how to act. When you are an Obama, you don't bend over to people. You just trashed the Clinton's. You are a super natural beast.

You walk around with swagger like your Jay-Z.

You were President of the Harvard Review.

You been dominating people your whole life.

Now some weasels at the bottom who are jealous claim that your not an American and demand to be shown your B.C.

So you tell them to go to hell like you've told everyone your whole life. And you'll see them in court. Hope you have deep pockets.

That's just what YOU do when YOUR Obama. He isn't like YOU or ME. When someone challenges Obama Obama beats them at their own game. He is going to drag this out in court and embarrass the people and make them famous.



reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:00 PM by theindependentjournal
reply to post by Maxmars


AMEN MAX!!! Couldn't have said it better myself, the only one keeping this alive is Barrack and his attorneys, if he didn't have anything to hide he wouldn't be hiding now would he?

This is as you stated about some dog they have in the hunt and if the shoes were reversed they would be screaming bloody murder over it, but alas it is not about what is right or wrong but being right even if you're wrong...

Dr. Paul should have won, we know him to be born in America for sure and both, it seems, of the arty candidates were born outside the U.S. geographically speaking...


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:05 PM by theindependentjournal
reply to post by ConservativeJack


Just as I figure Jack, if you can't argue the position or point go to Ad Hominid attacks, good show, of course it is completely against ATS rules and only proves you have nothing to add to this conversation worth reading.

Can anyone say President Schwarzenegger?

EDIT - Ad Hominem why did this post correct my spelling to some weird thing above???

[edit on 12/3/2008 by theindependentjournal]


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:10 PM by Maxmars
reply to post by ConservativeJack


What Obama Administration is that?

Just for the record, it's his campaign staff and his party that I fault, not him.

You appear to take it on faith that he met the requirement, which doesn't make it true. You can call me a mercenary if you feel so inclined, that doesn't make it true either.



reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:28 PM by maybereal11
reply to post by Maxmars


Max...Lots of right wing rhetoric, no evidence. Just because you or a far right blog says so..doesn't make it real.

Give me a single claim in just a sentence or two...without all of the smear propaganda. Keep it basic, simple...a truth you feel is true. Then supply links to clear law or evidence supporting the claim, not opinions, not youtube document experts etc. etc..Not right wing opinion pieces...

That is what your opposition has been doing. Thorough research and presentation showing these claims to be BS.

What you are doing is just saying things and then complaining that no one listens...well support your claims with evidence, links, sources.

Just give me one tidbit and support it. No BS, just one factoid and supporting evidence to make your case.


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:28 PM by danx
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
If all you say is true why did Barracks lawyers claim privacy issues and harms?


As far as I know, that's not exactly what happened. What Obama's lawyers have claimed is that Berg's lawsuit was without merit, and apparently the (lower) Court agreed and dismissed the case.

The privacy issues were claimed by Hawaiian officials, who said that according to State laws they couldn't release Barack Obama's birth certificate.


Why if it's all easy cheesy doesn't your man Barrack just get a certified copy of the Hawaiian BC and release it?


No one, with any legal standing or authority, has requested him to. All the lawsuits were dismissed, and until a Court requests him to present it, he's not obliged to present it.

In fact, I'm sure that if any Court would request it, it would be to review it only, and it wouldn't be released to the public.


Seems to me you want to put the onus on us to prove a negative instead of on the candidate himself, interesting to say the least. Or is it that you don't care if he is eligible for the job?


As a Barack Obama supporter I have also difficulty understanding that - even though he is not required to do so - why doesn't he clear this once and for all.

But, first of all, we have to remember that Obama has taught Constitutional law for 12 years. I would think (and hope) he knows what he's doing better than any of us can suppose the reasons behind his actions are.

Let's make this mental exercise though: Imagine he releases his birth certificate. What if someone then - with or without merit - claims it is fake, forged or invalid? Probably someone would take him to Court then. In all likeliness, no matter what, someone would take him to Court anyway.

And what other way is there to assert the validity of his birth certificate unless it's through the Highest authority? Unless the Supreme Court decides on it, there would always be a doubt, or at least, probability for people to appeal and drag this on.

Even if the Supreme Court decides (and I'm sure it will have to), there will be people that will doubt it.

So, my guess is that Obama and his lawyers are waiting for a lawsuit with merit, that the Supreme Court agrees to hear, and decide on it once and for all.


Or...
I could be totally wrong and he is hiding the fact that he wasn't born in the US, and therefor can't be President, even though he's a lawyer who studied and taught Constitutional law, and while being aware of all this, still decided to run for President...

Doesn't make much sense to me. But in any case, I don't have any evidence to doubt his reasons, because unlike Bush - who you referenced in your post - he hasn't done anything to make me suspicious of his intentions.


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:29 PM by skeptic1
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


No, he doesn't have to prove it to all of us; that is not a Constitutional requirement. But, with 17 court cases in numerous states, he needs to prove it to someone. He needs to end this by stepping up and either showing his vault copy BC to the courts or to the public in general.

What I don't think some people realize is that this election was the first time circumstances like this have been this big of a deal. It has happend in the past, but that was long before the advent of the 24/7 media (who won't touch this) and the Internet (which has it splashed everywhere). People have always just assumed that the candidates were born on American soil....but not this time.

People have questions.....questions that need answers. Some people on here (not you, BH) seem to have blind faith in Obama and will follow where ever he leads without quesiton....that is scary. There are only 3 Constitutional requirements to hold the office of President. The citizens of this country need to be sure that those requirements are met. Smoke and mirrors won't work any longer....a lot of people won't be satisfied with that.


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:33 PM by Tinkabit
www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...


When asked in what hospital Barack was born, both he and his sister gave different hospital names.

The story is far from straight.


[edit on 3-12-2008 by Tinkabit]


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:36 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by DJMessiah


Thats ur first mistake, The US is a Republic not a democracy........
could the president of China be .....mexican? Could the leader of France be Norweigen? The requirment to provide his orginal birth certificate is so basic. I had to do that to get a passport...why not him.



reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:40 PM by Maxmars
Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by Maxmars


Max...Lots of right wing rhetoric, no evidence. Just because you or a far right blog says so..doesn't make it real.

Give me a single claim in just a sentence or two...without all of the smear propaganda. Keep it basic, simple...a truth you feel is true. Then supply links to clear law or evidence supporting the claim, not opinions, not youtube document experts etc. etc..Not right wing opinion pieces...

That is what your opposition has been doing. Thorough research and presentation showing these claims to be BS.

What you are doing is just saying things and then complaining that no one listens...well support your claims with evidence, links, sources.

Just give me one tidbit and support it. No BS, just one factoid and supporting evidence to make your case.



Right-wing? Congratulations! You have the honor of being the person to complete the list of pidgeon-holes I have been inserted into. Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative, "mercenary"; AWESOME!

I am asking for evidence too. You want me to provide you with what? Proof that I haven't seen an official affirmative declaration of his 'natural born status'? Can't prove a negative pal, you seem to be aware of that; so I can only expect that you are the person employing rhetoric here.

What sources can I offer, I want sources myself. One court ruling, one state official, one person empowered and authorized by the government to simply state "Barak Obama meets the criteria as a natural born American Citizen." That's all. No bells, no whistle, no race, politics, or other extraneous claims of prejudices or bias. It's a question.

Am I not allowed to ask? Do I not rate an actual answer? - Then say so.

Presumptively many here agree that American people have no right to ask for the assurance that this 230 year-old requirement is met. I am simply begging to differ in that opinion.

Edit to add: What far-right blog are you thinking I am sourcing? I have said nothing here that hasn't originated from me - and if I did, I am sure I would have attributed it to it's rightful author.




[edit on 3-12-2008 by Maxmars]


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:41 PM by Tinkabit
reply to post by danx


Human Psychology:

Those that have a secret, hide it.

If there was a long form BC in Hawaii, do you not think he would be more than enthusiastic to shut us people up once and for good? I know some of his supporters would like that

Privacy? People that concerned with privacy for the sake of privacy, do not stick their big toe into a political area. It is the nature of the game.

The vetters simply figured Joe Plummer et all would not want to have any verification other than their word for it.

Apparantly, they were wrong.


reply posted on 3-12-2008 @ 02:42 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by DJMessiah

I will present the why it matters, and the why it does not matter.

It matters because the President is Commander in Chief. This means he's the guy who has the final say on when our government is used to kill people. And no matter who you are, you have a connection to your past, including where you were born. It matters not how much time was spent there, the fact is people do feel an intimate bond with the place they were born. And if you lead one country that may possibly be at war with other countries (including, therefore, the other country in which you were born), it is unacceptable to have someone whose allegiance may lie elsewhere in that position. That's not to say other factors couldn't create that same allegiance, but being born somewhere is a factor that we can KNOW about, and therefore, do something about. This is why we have such a restriction on eligibility of candidates running for President of the United States of America. The simple fact is, if any of the principles that we supposedly operate this country by were real, then we would have had this matter resolved before the election even took place. Since it still has not been resolved, the only conclusion to be drawn is that it does not matter. Every issue in the universe can be shown to be of dual nature in the same manner that this has. Thank you.
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9    10    11  >>    ^^TOP^^



On why America is in denial and Ron Paul will not be elected
  Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags
Study says racists and conservatives are dumb
  Posted 9 days ago with 16 member flags
Is ‘anti-Canadianism’ the new ‘anti-Americanism?’
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags
Clarification on the definition of "natural born citizen"
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags