Trump is not letting up! Will Obama respond??

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by STM777
1. Do you think it's unreasonable to ask for the original BHO COLB?

In the context that this inquirey took complete with mocked up COBs from Kenya, vieled racist claims, lies, smears and outright hate? Yes I support the position that he has done more than any other president in history to prove his citizenship and any further indulging of the lunatic fringe tells them that it is OK to attack someone with lies and fabrications. There is no reason what-so-ever to legitimize those tactics with absolutely uneccessary documents. It would simply tell them and future Presidents that this kind of hateful and dishonest insanity is legitimate and it is not.

Originally posted by STM777
2. The Original COLB has much more information that the computer printout; Hospital, biographical information on Mother, etc. The computer COLB is a shortened version of the original.

Right...so what? This just speaks to motivations. What birthers claim to be important is already contained on the COLB he has presented...so this question just speaks to what everyone knows...it has little to do with evidence and his place of birth.

Give us more information that is not neccessary so we can make stuff up about you and your mother is not a valid reason for him to volounteer the doc.

Originally posted by STM777

3. Today, thousands of Americans willl have to produce a certified copy of their birth certificates for any number of reasons. Those reasons, such as a drivers license or passport, pale in comparison to establishing the credentials of the POTUS.

Right...and in each instance they will be required to present the same doc that Pres. Obama has presented.

It is the doc that the DMV, Courts and everyone else recognizes...try to take a copy of your longform (without a registrars seal) to the DMV or Passport office and see what happens.

1. You create your own standard in answer one. He has done more than any other president in the history of the world........yet, he won't do what millions of Americans have had to do for lesser issues. BTW, I don't agree that he has released more information than any other president. In fact, you could make the argument he is the least transparent POTUS in recent history. The birth certificate is but a minimum and he won't even do that.

2. Right? So what? We can can and should have less information and you're fine with that? Are you in favor of striking the Freedom of Information Act? The less the governed know about their leader the better?

3. I had to present my original birth certificate when I applied to college, went for my drvers license etc.

reply to post by maybereal11


so obama has not spent millions of his own money to defend himself from showing his birth certificate? i dont want to believe he was born anywhere else besides where he says he was born, hawaii. i just wonder why he has let this go on so long, why doesent he put the issue to rest? u know he can, its easy. all he has to do is show his birth certificate. if only to shut up all the birthers, but in my opinion its already to late? he has been playing games and skirting the issue, if there was nothing to hide we would not still be discussing the issue!

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like a chance to comment on these issues.

Originally posted by STM777
1. Do you think it's unreasonable to ask for the original BHO COLB?

It's reasonable to ask if you're curious. What isn't reasonable is to DEMAND that he give up his privacy rights.

2. The Original COLB has much more information than the computer printout; Hospital, biographical information on Mother, etc. The computer COLB is a shortened version of the original.

Right. The information on the long and short form is the same. That's how birth certificates work. The only piece of information that's relevant to this discussion is where he was born. Since both list Honolulu, Hawaii as his place of birth, that's the only information that's relevant. The hospital and information on his mother is none of our business and not relevant to his eligibility.

3. Your post takes for granted that the computer COLB accurately reflects the original COLB. However, wouldn't the best evidence rule in court require the original or certified copy of the same? The only way you could get the computer generated COLB into evidence is for the originals to be lost or destroyed.

The short form COLB is certified. The information on it is taken DIRECTLY from the long form.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

4. Today, thousands of Americans willl have to produce a certified copy of their birth certificates for any number of reasons.

The short form is a certified copy. It is signed by the registrar and has a raised seal. It serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in ANY court proceeding.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like a chance to comment on these issues.

Originally posted by STM777
1. Do you think it's unreasonable to ask for the original BHO COLB?

It's reasonable to ask if you're curious. What isn't reasonable is to DEMAND that he give up his privacy rights.

2. The Original COLB has much more information than the computer printout; Hospital, biographical information on Mother, etc. The computer COLB is a shortened version of the original.

Right. The information on the long and short form is the same. That's how birth certificates work. The only piece of information that's relevant to this discussion is where he was born. Since both list Honolulu, Hawaii as his place of birth, that's the only information that's relevant. The hospital and information on his mother is none of our business and not relevant to his eligibility.

3. Your post takes for granted that the computer COLB accurately reflects the original COLB. However, wouldn't the best evidence rule in court require the original or certified copy of the same? The only way you could get the computer generated COLB into evidence is for the originals to be lost or destroyed.

The short form COLB is certified. The information on it is taken DIRECTLY from the long form.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

4. Today, thousands of Americans willl have to produce a certified copy of their birth certificates for any number of reasons.

The short form is a certified copy. It is signed by the registrar and has a raised seal. It serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in ANY court proceeding.

1. Unreasonable to ask if your curious? I guess we have someone else who would like to do away with the Freedom of Information Act? Citizens must now restrain their curiousity? The less we know about our dear leader, the better? Especially when it impinges upon Constitutional requirements?

2. The Hospital and Mother biography are none of our business? Gotcha, the less we know the better. I remember that from above. I see you also take it on faith, that nothing was lost in the translation between the original COLB and the computer printout. The humans inputing the information were infallible and incapable of error. Those government workers who inputed that information were something special?

3. I know the short form [Less information] is certified. So what, it still doesn't comply with the best evidence rule. Any party wanting to introduce a document must produce the original or a certified copy of the same, unless that document is lost or destroyed. That has been a hallmark of American law for 300 years.

4. Not me and millions of other Americans, I had to produce a certified copy of the original.

Originally posted by STM777
1. Unreasonable to ask if your curious?

Read it again. I said it's REASONABLE to ask.

2. The Hospital and Mother biography are none of our business?

That's right. What bearing does this information have on his eligibility?

I see you also take it on faith, that nothing was lost in the translation between the original COLB and the computer printout.

That's right. Humans don't input the information. A computer program extracts the information from the original.

3. I know the short form [Less information] is certified. So what, it still doesn't comply with the best evidence rule.

Best evidence rule??? We are not in a courtroom here! Obama is NOT on trial. This is not a court case! Get a hold of yourself. He owes up NOTHING in the way of proof.

4. Not me and millions of other Americans, I had to produce a certified copy of the original.

For what?

.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by STM777
1. Unreasonable to ask if your curious?

Read it again.

I said it's REASONABLE to ask.

2. The Hospital and Mother biography are none of our business?

That's right. What bearing does this information have on his eligibility?

I see you also take it on faith, that nothing was lost in the translation between the original COLB and the computer printout.

That's right. Humans don't input the information. A computer program extracts the information from the original.

3. I know the short form [Less information] is certified. So what, it still doesn't comply with the best evidence rule.

Best evidence rule??? We are not in a courtroom here! Obama is NOT on trial. This is not a court case! Get a hold of yourself. He owes up NOTHING in the way of proof.

4. Not me and millions of other Americans, I had to produce a certified copy of the original.

For what?

.

edit on 3/30/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

I apologize for the form of my responses, hopefully they will improve overtime.

1. Privacy rights.......don't all presidents necessarily give up much of their privacy when seeking the office. Its a part of the job. We are not asking for STD test results, we are asking for basic information to determine eligibility. For the life of me......I don't understand the stonewalling.

2. The Mother's backgraound is absolutely necessary:

For persons born between December 24, 1952 and November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true (except if born out-of-wedlock)[7]:

1.The person's parents were married at the time of birth
2.One of the person's parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was born
3.The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child's birth;
4.A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent's 14th birthday.
For persons born out-of-wedlock (mother) if all the following apply:

1.the mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person’s birth and
2.the mother was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the person’s birth.[8] (See link for those born to a U.S. father out-of-wedlock)[7]
en.wikipedia.org...

3. So what it doesn't conform to the best evidence rule? If you practice law and have ever had to introduce a document, you wouldn't be saying.......so what. The rules of evidence, fashioned over centuries are there to protect the integrity of the process, even if the King a party to the litigation. Again, the rules millions of Americans labor under everyday simply doesn't apply to our leader? Especially if it relates to eligibility?

4. Application to the Naval Academy, security clearances for subsequent employment etc.

The evidence is overwhelming that he was born in Honolulu, but their will always be a few who choose to believe shadowy youtube videos and websites from nobodies, then actual proof.

en.wikipedia.org...

Like Karl Rove said, this is in the best interest of Obama as the small lunatic fringe birthers are givng them a bad name..It takes away from the real issues.

My favourite line from Robert Gibbs:

"A pregnant woman leaves her home to go overseas to have a child — who there’s not a passport for — so is in cahoots with someone…to smuggle that child, that previously doesn’t exist on a government roll somewhere back into the country and has the amazing foresight to place birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers? All while this is transpiring in cahoots with those in the border, all so some kid named Barack Obama could run for President 46 and a half years later."

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I'm not attacking you personally, I'm questioning the consistency of your positions.

To me, they seem to change based upon who is in office. Just making that observation.

But, notwithstanding, I'm glad to see this response.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I have stated many times here that I FULLY support a procedure by which every presidential candidate would have to prove his constitution eligibility.

I guess we agree on something, then.


ETA

But I find this part completely ridiculous:

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But to use Obama's situation (and to obliterate his privacy rights) as an excuse to answer that problem is just wrong.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Correct, other than I never said he must release it.

So you don't believe he should release it, but you agree with birthers that he should release?

I love how you continually take peoples post and take a part of their sentence so you can take the whole thing out of context. Why didn't you quote the rest of that? Because then you'd have nothing to blabber on about.

Your tactics have been obvious from the first birther thread you showed up in. Either call everyone in the thread that doesn't agree with you a racist or take their words out of context to try and make points you don't have, or make it out to seem like posters are saying things that they aren't. I've watched you do it on every one of these threads.

Exactly, and where does that leave us? It leaves us with the constitution, it leaves us with the decision of the electoral college and congress. What happened on December 15th 2008? Obama was confirmed to the presidency by the majority of electors and by congress, sworn in on January 21st. So really what that individual claims is irrelevant. You choose to buy into what he says, it has no relevance to the required constitutional process.

I'm not buying into anything only providing info just like you and everyone else. I'm not worried about where the man was born. I am worried about him now though. I only posted things showing it's possible that he wasn't vetted.
If Obama is a fraud and it was known do you really believe anything we argue about makes a difference? No. And nothing the birthers do will make a difference.

Since are using congress as a reference to mccains vetting process, maybe we could use them again when they all voted to clarify Obama's eligibility for the presidency in 2009. There, now we can confirm, by your standards, that Obama was vetted.

Are you saying a congressional hearing was held to make sure Obama was eligible? Having a vote in a congress that has a very bad habit on voting for things without ever reading them or researching them is a far stretch from having a hearing.

Is listening to the McCain campaign( Palin included) talk in the media about her being vetted an assumption?

Yes it is an assumption, because you choose to believe the statements from the McCain campaign, and you have nothing more beyond that.

I never said I believed it. Once again I was only providing information that was new to me to see if it was debunked or already discussed before. The only one making assumptions is you. YOU assume I believe it. YOU assume I believe Obama wasn't born in Hawaii. YOU assume I believe an attorney. YOU assume I believe the McCain staff. I originally came to this thread asking questions until you started in with the race baiting on me. Instead of trying to be helpful like Yeahright and BH and answering questions in these threads posters like you and several others have nothing to offer other than attacks on the posters not agreeing with you.



Now, would you like to know what I believe? Memoryshock said it best.

Originally posted by MemoryShock
This is one of the lamest issues ever if one considers that money buys our 'leadership'...I don't care if Obama was born in Antarctica...corporate interest runs this world...not ideology... which is how our politicians get elected...

That is what I believe. If Obama isn't eligible you can believe it's known by those in charge and it didn't matter to them. Why? Because Obama was chosen by them just like every other president has been.

Originally posted by Tiste
The evidence is overwhelming that he was born in Honolulu, but their will always be a few who choose to believe shadowy youtube videos and websites from nobodies, then actual proof.

en.wikipedia.org...

Like Karl Rove said, this is in the best interest of Obama as the small lunatic fringe birthers are givng them a bad name..It takes away from the real issues.

My favourite line from Robert Gibbs:

"A pregnant woman leaves her home to go overseas to have a child — who there’s not a passport for — so is in cahoots with someone…to smuggle that child, that previously doesn’t exist on a government roll somewhere back into the country and has the amazing foresight to place birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers? All while this is transpiring in cahoots with those in the border, all so some kid named Barack Obama could run for President 46 and a half years later."

edit on 30-3-2011 by Tiste because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-3-2011 by Tiste because: (no reason given)

Who you gonna believe.........Karl Rove or Michelle Obama? BTW, when did Rove become a credible source to liberals?

reply to post by STM777


Huh?

I was pointing out that Karl Rove is calling out Republicans who comment on Obama's birth certificate.

Originally posted by Tiste
reply to post by STM777

 

Huh?

I was pointing out that Karl Rove is calling out Republicans who comment on Obama's birth certificate.

Exactly, Rove says don't go there, while Michelle says BHO is from Kenya.

In my opinion, Trump's goal is not to win the presidency, but to make sure every voter is aware, whether they believe it or not, that Obama's eligibility is being questioned. I have to admit, my liberal friends find Trump's accusations over the top and hard to believe, but Trump has fulfilled his goal. They are talking about it and the issue is gaining traction.

Obama is 2nd to none when it comes to ignoring issues, Obama may be the best President we have ever had, when it comes to ignoring stuff, so I think he can hold off a long, long time...
If Obama was half as good as being President, as he is at not dealing with stuff... we would be in awesome shape...