Birth Certificate Debate Expanding to of all places; CNN

reply to post by JulieMills


I think your on your own..

*shiver*

Originally posted by whatukno

 

You didn't answer my question. Where does it say in the Constitution of the United States that the Long Form Birth Certificate is the only acceptable form of identification that is valid to prove someone is eligible for the job of POTUS?

I'll take a stab at answering your question.

It doesn't.

But I don't see how that has any bearing.
The Constitution requires a president be a natural born citizen.
The onus of proof is on the candidate.
A candidate can offer up whatever he/she feels is absolute proof.
Common sense tells us that simply having "Mike the Doctor" vouch for you is not proof enough.
So it is only logical to show the one form that is expressly intended for just such proof: the birth certificate.

What did we get?
The SHORT form birth certificate.
Well, what is that?
"Whereas the long form is a copy of the actual birth certificate, a short form is a document that certifies the existence of such certificate"
wikipedia

So what they showed us is not actually a birth certificate at all.
It is a piece of paper that promises there is an actual copy of a birth certificate somewhere in the state and also promises the vital information presented on said piece of paper are from that actual copy and are factual.

So the question is:
"Is a short form birth certificate absolute proof of natural born citizenship status?"
By definition; NO.
It is only EVIDENCE of the existence of proof.

Does it still qualify?
"The short form typically includes the child's name, date of birth, sex, and place of birth, although some also include the names of the child's parents. When the certification does include the names of the parents, it can be used in lieu of a long form birth certificate in almost all circumstances [6]"
wikipedia

What circumstances exclude the short form BC as substitute for the long form? Probably circumstances of extreme importance.

Perhaps, say, a Presidential election?






[edit on 19-7-2009 by GuyverUnit I]

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by heliosprime

 

All I have ever asked in these threads is one simple question.

One that never gets answered

So maybe, just maybe you will be the one to answer it.

Where in the US Constitution does it specifically state that the long form birth certificate is the only form of identification that is valid to prove someone is eligible for the job of POTUS?

That's all I want to know.

Where in the constitution does it disallow the common citizen to question the validity of the president? Where does the constitution disallow the redress of grievances? Where is the common courtesy,that it would take to address the concerns of a block of the voting public?

reply to post by daddyroo45


Probably the part where it states that you don't vote for the president, but vote for electors.

As you have no constitutional right to vote for the POTUS what right do you think you have to Qualify him?

[edit on 7/20/2009 by whatukno]

Originally posted by born2BWild
I find this fascinating due to the fact that he is the president of the United States. The fact that people think he wouldn't be able to have an official birth certificate made that states he was born there, regardless if he was born there or not. The answers to the questions won't be found on a piece of paper but somewhere in his past. Follow his life back to where he resided when he was born and get witness testimony to who he grew up with and where. Even the fact that he could just buy off people to say where he was born is just another dagger in the heart of this conspiracy. I highly doubt this one will ever be laid to rest.

He does have an official birth certificate and it has been released. The fact that it is the 'short form' doesn't make it any less official. The long form doesn't have any additional information on it that makes it more or less official or more or less informative about his place of birth and his parents.

You want to go back into his past and find out where he lived? How about looking in the contemporary newspaper for the birth announcement? Would that satisfy you? If there was a conspiracy to impose an ineligible president on the US would it really have been sharp enough to plant a birth announcement for a Kenyan kid more than 50 years before it was required?

Guess what? His birth announcement is in the Honolulu Advertiser newpaper.

The proof of ineligibility is out there.

There are enough protesters to make it a national concern.

It's up to those that are still mesmerized by 'the aura' to snap out of it.

Some of them are coming around.

Some of those mesmerized by 'the aura' aren't really under any spell; they are just spineless slimes as Eric Holder has been known to observe.

I don't know any cowards personally, but I know they exist.

BTW: I gave CNN another chance and watched them for a few minutes reporting on Health Care today... If you skip CNN you are missing absolutely NOTHING.