****Democratic Party of Hawaii Refused To Certify Obama****

Wow, more evidence of lies and deception! This video explains it, and is a MUST SEE! Hawaii's own Democratic Party essentially refused to certify Obama as eligible under the US Constitution.

Now a series of reports, including those from blogger JBJD, the butterdezillion blog, Obama Release Your Records blog and the Fellowshipofminds blog, are revealing the local state party's stance in 2008.

...."In other words, by omitting the above words, the Democractic Party of Hawaii (DPH) was signaling the following: 1. DPH is merely certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president by virtue of the ballots of the Democratic Parties of the 50 states. The DPH is not certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution! 2. The DPH is also saying that Obama and Biden are NOT the chosen candidates of the state of Hawaii," he concluded.

www.wnd.com...

From the video description at youtube:

The Hawaii Democratic Party refused to state that Obama was legally eligible, and never stated that he was duly chosen as a candidate of the state party. They were certainly in a better position to know about Obama's legal status than Nancy Pelosi. So according to Hawaiian Law, and the US Constitution, he should not have been allowed on the ballot.

Why is the word of the Democratic Party of Hawai even needed? Isn't the only necessary vetting in order to be president done by federal institutions, not local party chapters?

I think he's too far into this term for it to matter. Whether or not he was born in Hawaii, will probably never be known at least nothing concrete to speak of. I really don't see him getting re-elected, though unless the economy greatly turns around in the next few months. Not saying he's a bad person, but I think he's in a little over his head.

Isnt this old news?
I still think it is valid, dont get me wrong, but I think this came out a LONG time ago? I remember reading it on this site actually.

I could be wrong though.

Wow. TA, I gotta say... This might be big. This is the first piece of evidence that actually puts a question in my mind. It will be interesting to see what happens with this. Don't get your hopes up, though... Seems nothing can actually be done about it because a) only Democrats can challenge it and b) it's too late. According to the law:

Letters to Leaders

When the authority to make a nomination is legally challenged by objections filed to the certificate of nomination, and violation or disregard of the party rules is alleged, the court must hear the facts and determine the question.

Before we break out the party noisemakers, here's some sobering information from p. 339 of the same Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure concerning who can object and the time period for making an objection:

One who is not a member of the party making nominations cannot object to the regularity of the proceedings resulting in the nomination.

It is usually provided by statute that objections to nomination papers shall be made within a designated time after such papers are filed, or within a certain number of days before election. And, after the time for filing objections has passed, in the absence of fraud a certificate of nomination to which no objections were filed and which is regular in form cannot be attacked. At all events such objection should be made before the election, for if not so made the legal authority of a convention will in the absence of fraud be conclusively presumed.

I'm going to do some more research on this. Specifically why Hawaii may have changed the wording of their form. There is the possibility that there was another reason, but I can't imagine what it is.

There is also the possibility that he was born at home and since his Hawaiian BC does not specify a hospital, the Hawaii DNC could not validate his Constitutional eligibility. My guess is that it's just that simple. It doesn't mean he was born outside the country.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Don't get your hopes up, though... Seems nothing can actually be done about it because a) only Democrats can challenge it and b) it's too late.

My hopes up? I know it may seem, from all the stories I have done here on this subject at ATS, that I am some Obama hater, but I assure you that is not the case. All I ever wanted was for there to be the correct man in the White House, unencumbered by any doubts of eligibility. And sorry, but there have been so many questions surrounding his eligibility and the birthplace issue I cannot let it rest.

Even so, thanks for your comment. It is insightful and pertinent.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
My hopes up? I know it may seem, from all the stories I have done here on this subject at ATS, that I am some Obama hater, but I assure you that is not the case.

Oh, come on, TA, your feelings about Obama are pretty clear. Besides, I didn't mention your personal feelings about Obama. What I mean is that if you have hopes that he will be impeached or otherwise booted out of office, even if this is found to be legitimate, don't get your hopes up.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
All I ever wanted was for there to be the correct man in the White House, unencumbered by any doubts of eligibility.

If Obama is ineligible, we haven't had the correct man in the office since Clinton. Election fraud is the game of the day.

I was thinking about this and wondering what is the most likely scenario, and this is what I came up with: If the Hawaii DNC Officials KNEW that he WAS born in Kenya (let's say), then they would never have put him on the ballot for president. BUT... if they weren't sure... for example, if he was born at home in Hawaii, and there was no Dr's signature, they really couldn't verify his status. So they sent it to Pelosi. Pelosi checked his short form (which is legal proof of nation of birth) and then signed her form, stating that e was Constitutionally eligible. All legal and above board... No election fraud.

My first thought on this is what is this going to do? I have seen stories come and go of his eligibility being questioned here, challenged there, and court cases filed. And all of that brought to this point nothing.
So can any one tell me if this latest piece of news on an old story is going to really mean anything? Does this carry any real weight? Will Obama be forced to respond, or to challenge it?

Maybe Obama wasn't born in America. If anyone would try and cover something like that up it would be his own political party, but if they are even posting something like this than maybe it's true.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
My hopes up? I know it may seem, from all the stories I have done here on this subject at ATS, that I am some Obama hater, but I assure you that is not the case.

Oh, come on, TA, your feelings about Obama are pretty clear. Besides, I didn't mention your personal feelings about Obama. What I mean is that if you have hopes that he will be impeached or otherwise booted out of office, even if this is found to be legitimate, don't get your hopes up.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
All I ever wanted was for there to be the correct man in the White House, unencumbered by any doubts of eligibility.

If Obama is ineligible, we haven't had the correct man in the office since Clinton. Election fraud is the game of the day.

I was thinking about this and wondering what is the most likely scenario, and this is what I came up with: If the Hawaii DNC Officials KNEW that he WAS born in Kenya (let's say), then they would never have put him on the ballot for president. BUT... if they weren't sure... for example, if he was born at home in Hawaii, and there was no Dr's signature, they really couldn't verify his status. So they sent it to Pelosi. Pelosi checked his short form (which is legal proof of nation of birth) and then signed her form, stating that e was Constitutionally eligible. All legal and above board... No election fraud.

BH if he were born at home,why would his political machine put out the story and newspaper clipping that he was born in the hospital? (which they have stated two different hospitals,and that confuses me)

Here is another video explaining this that might be easier to understand for some:

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin
Why is the word of the Democratic Party of Hawai even needed?

The fact that they wouldn't back one of their own, in something that should be insignificant and a 'given', leaves a lot of room for doubts about Obama being eligible.

Isn't the only necessary vetting in order to be president done by federal institutions, not local party chapters?

Sure. By the Federal Election Commission. But they have not said what documents (if any) they viewed or counted on to make their assessment as to if he is eligible. So MANY American people want to know ... and no one is saying.

Put those two things together ... add to it Obama blocking the lawsuits asking to see documentation ... add to it that the two alleged newspaper 'announcements' had the wrong address (Obama's never lived at that address) ... add to it that a forger came forward and admitted that he faked the Daily Kos Certificate of Birth ... etc etc

If he'd just show the dang thing that is in Hawaii .... POOF ... MOST of this could go away. Some would still hang on .. but most would go away. Unless, of course, there is a reason he doesn't want to show it ... could prove the conspiracists correct ... could be something else all together .. dunno ... we'll probably never know ....

reply to post by TrueAmerican

I'm more interested in that Biden's house address is given. 1209 Barley Mill Road. I've always wondered where his house was. Now I know. The REALLY rich part of town. One day I'll have to take a drive by just to satisfy my curiosity. See how the other half lives ..

When he's in town the secret service blocks the roads and if you are driving when a family member is in town the secret service drive like freaks .. taking up the entire road ... driving in the center etc. It's insane.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
BUT... if they weren't sure... for example, if he was born at home in Hawaii, and there was no Dr's signature, they really couldn't verify his status. So they sent it to Pelosi. Pelosi checked his short form (which is legal proof of nation of birth) and then signed her form, stating that e was Constitutionally eligible. All legal and above board... No election fraud.

If they couldn't verify his status, then WTF is he doing in the White House?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
add to it Obama blocking the lawsuits asking to see documentation

Care to name the specific lawsuits that Obama "blocked"?

add to it that the two alleged newspaper 'announcements' had the wrong address (Obama's never lived at that address)

Your proof of that is what exactly?

add to it that a forger came forward and admitted that he faked the Daily Kos Certificate of Birth

Your source for that is....

If he'd just show the dang thing that is in Hawaii

He has shown it, you can see it here:www.factcheck.org...

.... POOF ... MOST of this could go away.

Well, he has shown it and none of it has gone away.... but we know it is notactually about Obama's birth certificate!

Originally posted by daddyroo45
BH if he were born at home,why would his political machine put out the story and newspaper clipping that he was born in the hospital?

Well, I don't have the answers you seek, but there are several possible reasons as to why a hospital was mentioned. He may have been taken there immediately upon his birth to be examined. Most home birthed babies are taken to a hospital to be checked in the days after they are born. The reports of the hospital he was supposedly born in probably came from his book (I believe a hospital was mentioned there) and other sources. It's quite possible that he thinks he was born in a hospital. Newspapers get details wrong all the time.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
If they couldn't verify his status, then WTF is he doing in the White House?

I'm not convinced that Hawaii COULDN'T verify his status. That's what the blogs and YouTube videos are saying, but that's an assumption with no proof to back it up. Again, there may be a perfectly reasonable explanation for the form we're seeing. Maybe... JUST MAYBE... there some information you don't have. For example, maybe Hawaii has a code that says to verify a presidential candidate they must have a long form BC with a hospital listed and a Dr's signature. If he was born at home, his long form BC wouldn't have that info. So they turn it over to the National Democratic Party.

Maybe this is how it's done. It may be that if the state doesn't verify his Constitutional eligibility, it's up to the national party to do so. It might be as simple as that.

Just because you guys don't have these answers, doesn't mean you can start making them up.

There are questions, I agree. But I think getting the actual answers would be the best way to investigate this.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
add to it that the two alleged newspaper 'announcements' had the wrong address (Obama's never lived at that address) ..

And according to WND

Additional research has established that the grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, not Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham.

So, birthers run around with their hands wringing their hair, shouting, "But Obama never lived there!!!!" But they neglect to mention that his GRANDPARENTS (who most likely put the ad in the paper) DID live there.

It would be nice if we could have ONE birther thread that stuck to the SUBJECT of the thread instead of being sidetracked with all these other issues that have been disproven and discussed ad nauseum already! But that wouldn't serve the purpose, would it? Distract, deflect and misinform. :shk:

reply to post by maybee


I don’t care if it 10ys after the fact. If he is deliberately breaking the law, I want him to swing, and anyone else involved.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Ok, I agree with you, but please tell me how to get the answers? Don’t you think that by now there is enough “questions” that someone should stand up and say Ok, we need to take a serious look at this? If not, please tell me where the justice in this is.