AZ Birther Bill accepts Circumcision Certificate even though it is not a legal document.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
This thread is really making the birther's case that the source document is important.

How so?

It DOES matter what they have on file, that they are basing the short form on. That's what birthers are saying, and that's the message in the OP, we can't just accept any old thing, the source document matters. So why are some people so sure the source document is fine, without having seen it?

I am fairly certain by this you severely misunderstood the message in the OP because that is not even close to what I was getting at with my OP.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Wrong offering up a circumcision record is NOT the same as describing your penis..........more language from the inflamitory liberal left......

Explaining whether or not your penis has had a "haircut" is indeed describing it. Would I be able to pick it out from a lineup based on that? Probably not. If I say my hair is long or short, I am describing it. I am not sure what you think circumcision is.

not that i think this whole thing is anyhing but idiotic.

point is the left accuses the right all the time of using inflammatory language to incite............

and then what do we see here:?

I really have no idea what you are seeing here. Please get a dictionary and look up "describe" as well as "inflammatory" because I am not sure you have used either correctly.

Originally posted by jibeho
The main topic of this bizarre and irrelevant thread was supposed to be about the Circumcision Certificate as accepted in a STATE law.

Because it is not a legal form of ID whereas a short form birth certificate from Hawaii actually is. Why you are trying so hard not to see that says a great deal about your role in this movement.

Hence my mention of Obama NOT being Jewish. Whether the man has been snipped or not is a moot point. It does not apply to Obama. No need for anyone to worry.

If Arizona wants to accept the certificate in the absence of any other documents, that is their right to do so.

No one is worried that this clause will apply to Obama. The point is that it is an easily forged non-legal document they are willing to accept to appease the birthers who refuse to understand what the Hawaiian short form means. Keep trying though. Each time you take the time and effort to post in my thread to call it worthless, I get a special little tingle.

Sorry shills but just creating threads so you can all shout 'birther lies' 'case closed', 'nothing to see hear' isn't goingto cut it - Trump is going to make this the issue of the election and is going to crucify Barry or whatever his real name is with it!

This sums up the crux of the argument quite nicely - cw.ua.edu...

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by jibeho
The main topic of this bizarre and irrelevant thread was supposed to be about the Circumcision Certificate as accepted in a STATE law.

Because it is not a legal form of ID whereas a short form birth certificate from Hawaii actually is. Why you are trying so hard not to see that says a great deal about your role in this movement.

Hence my mention of Obama NOT being Jewish. Whether the man has been snipped or not is a moot point. It does not apply to Obama. No need for anyone to worry.

If Arizona wants to accept the certificate in the absence of any other documents, that is their right to do so.

No one is worried that this clause will apply to Obama. The point is that it is an easily forged non-legal document they are willing to accept to appease the birthers who refuse to understand what the Hawaiian short form means. Keep trying though. Each time you take the time and effort to post in my thread to call it worthless, I get a special little tingle.

Don't let your panty hose interfere with that tingle.

If the STATE wants to accept the certificate as a legal form of ID IN LIEU of other proof that is their choice. This is not a FEDERAL mandate. Do you know the difference???

Enjoy the point you just got from my post. I am glad to help anyway I can.

Originally posted by jibeho

Don't let your panty hose interfere with that tingle.

You severly misjudge the location of any tingles you are giving me. Ego aside, can you address any points or facts or are you just here to pick at me and distract?

If the STATE wants to accept the certificate as a legal form of ID IN LIEU of other proof that is their choice. This is not a FEDERAL mandate. Do you know the difference???

No, it is not their choice. They cannot decide their own eligibility qualifications seperate and different from qualificiations already in place throghout all 50 states.

Enjoy the point you just got from my post. I am glad to help anyway I can.

Try presenting a valid point or cogent argument.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files.

If that's what she said, why isn't it in quotes?

I don't know what she said if they didn't quote her.

Originally posted by jibeho
If the STATE wants to accept the certificate as a legal form of ID IN LIEU of other proof that is their choice.

Gotta love the birthers.

On one hand they say this bill is really about certifying a candidate is qualified for office, on the other hand, they don’t seem to have a problem if the alternative documentation the state requests is not, for other purposes, accepted as valid proof of citizenship... because, of course, they don’t think Obama can submit those documents.

Can you imagine the outrage if Obama got on the Arizona ballot by presenting a baptismal and circumcision certificate?

This is not a FEDERAL mandate. Do you know the difference???

This is for a federal office. The states cannot create additional qualifications, and that’s to what this Arizona law would amount to.

Two of the three conditions to be eligible are determined by place and date of birth (natural born citizen and at least 35 years of age). If a candidate has a legal document, accepted as proof of citizenship under federal law, that addresses these conditions, the states cannot say they will only accept X document. Not for a federal office, anyway.

None of the conditions for office are having a long form birth certificate, knowing the hospital where a person was born, who the doctor was or who were the ‘witnesses.’

I really hope Jan Brewer signs this bill, though. I can’t wait to see the birthers’ faces when they get laughed out of court, or the secretary of state of Arizona has no choice but to accept the certificate Obama already presented.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
Sorry shills but just creating threads so you can all shout 'birther lies' 'case closed', 'nothing to see hear' isn't goingto cut it

Maybe you should find a thread that actually says any such thing and post this there. This thread does not suggest "case closed" because I know this case will NEVER be closed for the birthers.

- Trump is going to make this the issue of the election and is going to crucify Barry or whatever his real name is with it!

Sure he is. Nothing like a salesman to tell you the truth, right? Good luck with all that.

Originally posted by aptness
Can you imagine the outrage if Obama got on the Arizona ballot by presenting a baptismal and circumcision certificate?

This thought occurred to me. Obama tells his staff: "Get my circumcision certificate and baptism record NOW"! That would be hilarious!

None of the conditions for office are having a long form birth certificate, knowing the hospital where a person was born, who the doctor was or who were the ‘witnesses.’

Nor are circumcision or baptism. The state cannot deny an official document (the short form) that is used for proof of citizenship on a federal level (for passports, for example) in lieu of non-official documents that state NOTHING about citizenship, nor are they proof of same. They also can not discriminate against those who may NOT have been circumcised or baptized. It's ludicrous on the face of it.

It shows me how far birthers are willing to go - to say that they would take a circumcision or baptism record, which DOESN'T prove citizenship - over a short form document, which DOES prove citizenship, just shows how much this IS about Obama, no matter how they try to couch it.

I really hope Jan Brewer signs this bill, though. I can’t wait to see the birthers’ faces when they get laughed out of court, or the secretary of state of Arizona has no choice but to accept the certificate Obama already presented.

Right there with you, friend!

reply to post by Sinnthia

Ego aside, can you address any points or facts or are you just here to pick at me and distract?

Only giving back what you continually dish out in countless other threads on similar topics. The only differences here is that this is your thread.

Sorry if it bothers you.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


If this what was actually said
She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files

this appears somewhat sh"odd"y

Obama may well have been born in Hawaii but me thinks somethings is still not quite right.

Why cannot a long form BC just be produced from all the info available to help put the issue firmly to bed?

Obama will not get relected that would be a shock!

reply to post by jibeho


The excuses some birthers give for the reason they contribute nothing and back up nothing are getting weaker and weaker. So my thread is worthless and you have nothing to contribute, yet you are here, posting in it like we are pen pals?

It is a shame that you cannot address the topic at hand in any real manner. You come across as passionate about it but when pressed for anything factual or logical, you resort to attacking me because you apparently perceive me as a forum bully that needs to be put down. Convincing.

Let me help you out. This is where you last thought you had a point and I asked a second time for you to prove it.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by jibeho
It may not have been clear but I was referring to the Baptismal Cert. as a legal form of ID. I also posted the information on the Baptismal cert from the govt. site.

It was perfectly clear that you were claiming a CC is the same thing and that is why I was asking you to provide something to demonstrate that.

Originally posted by RoguePhilosopher
Obama may well have been born in Hawaii but me thinks somethings is still not quite right.

Do all the birthers have to get together to move the goalposts, or does it just take one really determined one?

Can you show me where the qualifications for president list "everything has to be 'just right'"?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Im not determined but curious.
And you must admit there's something odd!
This maybe nothing important but.....
Either way I think that Trump will run and probably win anyway.
Just like with Ronny only this time it will be Donny!

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by jibeho

 

The excuses some birthers give for the reason they contribute nothing and back up nothing are getting weaker and weaker. So my thread is worthless and you have nothing to contribute, yet you are here, posting in it like we are pen pals?

It is a shame that you cannot address the topic at hand in any real manner. You come across as passionate about it but when pressed for anything factual or logical, you resort to attacking me because you apparently percieve me as a forum bully that needs to be put down. Convincing.

edit on 18-4-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

I've already contributed, now its just fun. I don't need to convince anyone unless you want to get into a debate over the Full Faith and Credit clause of the constitution (which has been interpreted many times in a court of law). Its a complicated issue that goes far deeper than your attempts to oversimplify the situation if only to defend Obama at all costs.

Its a slippery slope and we have states right now passing laws that are not recognized in other states! (gay marriage as a recent example) Again this goes back to the FF&C debate which is manipulated constantly.

Let it go to the Supreme court if need be. I am sure it will end up there.

Bear in mind that are already wide variations from state to state on the requirements placed on political candidates in regards to the forms to be filed, fees to be paid, number signatures to be gathered and so on.

Let the debate rage!!


Sometimes worthless threads need love to!! and an injection of rational thought

ETA
Thanks for trying to add your own meaning to my post regarding Baptism certs. But, you FAIL.

Originally posted by RoguePhilosopher
And you must admit there's something odd!

No. I don't see anything odd in Obama or his behavior.

The only odd thing I see is how some people respond to him. Their behavior is very, very odd indeed.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Was refering to the issue of the BC not him personally although he has been extremely defensive at expense over this matter has he not!

I dont know him personally so couldnt comment of him other than what I heard him say in his pre-election speaches. Lots of promise of change to get elected but all broken! happens all the time I guess.

I personally dont care who is the next POTUS.

Im just an interested poster, who is intrigued by the current state of play in US politics. And looking forward to the next election contest/s. Should be amusing!!

Originally posted by RoguePhilosopher
Was refering to the issue of the BC not him personally although he has been extremely defensive at expense over this matter has he not!

I don't see anything odd about his BC. It looks perfectly legit to me. Registrar's signature, raised seal, born in Hawaii.... Check. It doesn't seem odd to me at all.

As far as him being defensive... How has Obama been extremely defensive? Can you specify what you mean by this?

I tell you what, I would be a LOT more than 'defensive'. If you were the first black man ever to have a certain job and people started rumors about you and demanded that you meet higher standards than any white man who had ever held that job in over 200 years, might you get a little defensive about it? Especially after you MEET the new standards, and it's still not good enough?

I'd be flipping a double one-finger salute to anyone who bugged me about it. And I think that's what Obama is doing by refusing to do any MORE to meet the continued higher standards.

Lots of promise of change to get elected but all broken!

Wrong again. 134 promises kept, 41 broken.

And looking forward to the next election contest/s. Should be amusing!!

I am right there with you on that! It's going to be VERY interesting and I'm really looking forward to it!