reply to post by earlywatcher
I don't think obama is being asked to provide personal papers to the general public that would compromise his safety.
Yet, go through this thread and see how many people have said the equivalent of "show us
the long form birth certificate."
I have to wonder what the real motives are behind this witch trial.
when a person applies for a job, there are often eligibility requirements. a certain amount of education, maybe certification or
The office of POTUS has eligibility requirements. These are plainly spelled out in the constitution. Education and licensing are not requirements for
this position. The only three requirements for the job of POTUS are to be a natural born citizen, and to be 35 years of age and have lived in the US
for the last 14 years.
being asked to provide proof of those things is not an invasion of privacy for the average job applicant any more than it would have been for
obama to do during the campaign. It's not unreasonable to expect to know such things before hiring someone--or voting for him.
But there are proper people that he would have had to prove it to. Not every single man woman and child in the United States and around the world.
When he decided to run for the office, I am sure that these requirements plus many more would have had to have been satisfied in order for him to even
become a candidate.
whatukno, i understand that you are sharpening your debating skills. trying to see how much reason you can shoot down by simple
It's not simple denial, what I was attempting to do is show that this particular form of identification was not requisite in order for him to prove
his eligibility. Fact of the matter is the COLB would have been proof enough to establish his eligibility. I am sorry that it's not good enough for a
few malcontents, but the fact remains that not a single one of you in this thread has shown conclusive proof that the long form birth certificate is
the only form legally required in order to prove someones eligibility for the office.
Some have cited that the DMV reqires this form in order to prove identity to get a drivers license, however, the office of POTUS does not require the
it's surprisingly hard to discuss any issue when one side sticks to one issue and refuses to acknowledge there is more to the situation. in
this case you are pretending the issue is due process, that the obama's rights are being violated if he has to produce a particular document unless
he is served with a subpoena that he respects. (he has been served with many on this subject).
The issue is due process under the law. Yes there have been many complaints filed in courts over this issue, but each and every one have been rejected
by the courts. The courts have cited no legal standing. The reasons are that no president in the history of this country has had to provide this
document publicly in order to prove eligibility for the office. No constitutional requirement proves validity to litigants complaints that the long
form birth certificate is the only document legally required to hold the office of the President.
Obama has provided a legal copy of his COLB, a copy that was verified by the state of Hawaii to be valid and correct. He has even provided this
document publicly for all to view.
I suspect that this issue won't go away, I suspect that people will continue for the next 4 years to waste the courts time by trying in vain to
obtain publicly a document that is not constitutionally required to prove eligibility.
Court rejects Obama citizenship
The Supreme Court has turned down another challenge to Barack Obama's eligibility to serve as president because of his citizenship.
The appeal by Cort Wrotnowski of Greenwich, Conn., was denied Monday without comment as the Electoral College formally elected Mr. Obama the nation's
44th president.Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Leo Donofrio and Philip J. Berg, both have filed lawsuits that were rejected by the SCOTUS...
Obama’s Birth Certificate Challenger Keeps
You've got to hand it to Philip J. Berg: he doesn't give up easily. You might recall that Philadelphia attorney Berg tried, and failed, to halt
the presidential election of Barack Obama on the grounds that he is not a native-born citizen. Game over, right? Wrong.
Berg filed a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in late October, asking that the highest court review the decision of the U.S. District
Court in Pennsylvania. The latter court dismissed Berg's claims because he lacked standing to bring them. Standing requires plaintiffs to prove they
are directly affected by the issue at hand, with evidence of injury that is concrete and particular. In its decision the district court said Berg
"does not, and we believe cannot, establish injury in fact." It also dismissed his claims as frivolous.
Court wont review Obamas
eligibility to serve
UPDATE: The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be
president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election.
Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth -- his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject -- he
cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
3 different people, 3 different rejections by the SCOTUS on the same exact matter.
But my word isn't good enough to provide adequate defense in this matter, not by a long shot, so I will yield to
who offered this opinion on the matter in question...
This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is foolish or that America
has too many lawyers with not enough to do. Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The
right thing to do is to bring it to an early end.The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force colonel who continues to owe fealty to his
Commander-in-Chief(because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey orders from
Barack Obama because it has not been proven -- to the colonel’s satisfaction -- that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under
the Constitution to be President. The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by
America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign
If you like, Judge R. Barclay Surrick has also provided his dismissal and opinion on this subject.
So, every single Cort Wrotnowski Leo Donofrio and Philip J. Bergs in the world can contest, appeal, and bring forth litigation on this matter, but I
seriously doubt that the repeated rejections by the court is going to satisfy this ongoing and frivolous conspiracy theory.
Here are two links to Hawaiian newspapers announcing Obama's birth...
and for further evaluation: The truth about Obama's birth certificate.
No legal precedent, no legal standing, proof has been offered, examined, verified, Constitutional requirements have been satisfactorily met. Other
than taking a time machine back to 1961 and being in the delivery room when Obama was born, I don't know what other proof to offer.
The man was born in Hawaii, he is a natural born U.S. Citizen, and as such having attained the requisite age, is completely eligible to hold the
office of the president of the United States.
"Show us the Birth Certificate!"
Show me why he has to. The above men have gone through the proper legal channels in order to force the issue, each of them have been rejected. The
reason is that it is obvious that Obama was born in Hawaii and therefore a natural born American with the constitutional right to run and be POTUS.
Until actual proof arises that shows otherwise that the court will accept I see no reason why the POTUS should have to show the public anything other
than what he already willingly has.
There is no constitutional requirement that specifically the long form birth certificate is the only proof positive documentation that a person has to
show in order to be eligible for the office of POTUS. I have asked many times for anyone to show me where in the Constitution it states that this is
the only form of identification that is acceptable in order to prove citizenship. As of this post, not one single person has shown me any concrete
proof that this particular form is required.
As I said on page 1 of this thread, Probably the most pointless conspiracy going.
[edit on 6/11/2009 by whatukno]