Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Fukino may be telling the truth for all I know, but obviously the governor lied (or was mistaken if you want to be more charitable about it).

Yes, because when it comes to questions of Obama’s eligibility everyone involved must be lying. There’s just no other conceivable alternative.

If I wanted to be charitable I would indulge birthers in their delusions.

Originally posted by 46ACE
So you say...Have you "FOIA'd" the eligibility documents filed?

If you mean the Democratic Party affidavits, they are available on the internet, so there is no need to FOIA anything. Unless by “eligibility documents” you mean Obama’s vital records. But those would be futile to FOIA because they probably fall clearly under one of the FOIA exemptions (re: privacy).

changing the subject...avoid, obstruct, obfuscate,fall back on the old standards

It was a honest question. Have you seen McCain’s birth certificate? It’s online as well.

I don't know why this birther debate rages on. By his own admission, O's father was Kenyan, which was under British jurisdiction...therefore, it DOES NOT MATTER WHERE O WAS BORN, he DOES NOT meet the CONSTITUTIONAL requirement of being a "natural born" citizen.
Here's one well-explained article about the matter. A google search will locate several more.
www.newswithviews.com...

This is nonsense!!! The people who created this "conspiracy" is basing their theories on a false premise. President Arthur's claim to the presidency could be questioned because during his time the criteria for being a US citizen was: American father OR born on American soil!

Today's criteria is much different because of the 19th Amendment passed in August 18th,1920. 40 years before Pres. Obama's birth! INS have laws stated as INA:ACT. Within the INS laws it gives women the same power as men. For instance, If your mother was/is an American citizen and if you were born overseas then you could claim american citizenship.

The problem with Pres. Arthur during his time was that his mother was american but his father was a British subject. Pres. Arthur claimed that he was born in Vermont and this was probably through the claim of his parents (word of mouth only).

So, now we come Obama's father. He was surely a British subject from Kenya. However, US laws concerning immigration and naturalization was expanded because of women's suffrage. Hypothetically,even if he was born overseas to an American mother he would still be an American citizen EVEN as we add his father as a British subject.

INS laws state that if one parent is an American citizen then the child could claim american citizenship. All it takes is ONE PARENT!

As for "natural born"? Why did John McCain run for president when he was born in the Panama Canal? Yes, both of his parents were american citizens. Why? Read INA:ACT 303 ! of the INS laws and you will find out why and include some other suprising facts.

Let's end this "conspiracy" today!!!

maybe he really will be the last president....

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by dolphinfan

 

I don't think it should be that hard to find your own birth certificate, or even someone else. You just go to the hospital they were born at and they should be on record.

The fact that this is still a controversy and still the certificate cannot be found screams red flags.

This is not necessarily true. Hospitals come and go. Places move. Records are moved. I myself was born just off base in Ancon Canal Zone, Panama. The hospital is no longer there and if I were to lose my original birth certificate, I would not be able to get a new one, I would be pretty much screwed... and my birth certificate was issued by the US Government.

Originally posted by aptness
That article is complete nonsense

What makes you think it's nonsense and what do you mean by nonsense? Are you saying the documents presented are forgeries? Or that they are misrepresenting the documents? Or what? This letter on congress.org elaborates a little further: www.congress.org...

By omitting certain words in its 2008 Certificate of Nomination — words that were included in its 2004 and 2000 Certificates of Nomination — the Democratic Party of Hawaii was signaling that (a) Obama was not constitutionally qualified to be President; and (b) his nomination does not have the State of Hawaii's approval and consent.

I haven't FOIA'd the documents myself so I can't comment on whether or not they may be forgeries. But statements I can confirm by governor Lingle and HI DOH official Fukino raise enough questions in my mind.

but couldn’t one argue that the Republican party leaders could be guilty of the same?

Sure if you have similar documentation from the republican party, post what you've got. However I'm not sure that two wrongs make a right. If the republicans are guilty too that means both parties need to straighten up.

Were they sure McCain is a natural born citizen? Are you sure?

They weren't sure, and to help resolve the issue, McCain provided his....guess what...long form birth certificate, the same document Obama hasn't provided.

reply to post by MrWendal


you can still get a copy of it. i have gotten more than one copy of my kids certificates. no one goes down to the whatever office and gets the original. everyone gets a COPY.

Originally posted by Habit4ming
I don't know why this birther debate rages on. By his own admission, O's father was Kenyan, which was under British jurisdiction...therefore, it DOES NOT MATTER WHERE O WAS BORN, he DOES NOT meet the CONSTITUTIONAL requirement of being a "natural born" citizen.

Perhaps you should read Supreme Court opinions instead of relying on some guy’s blog.

From United States v. Wong Kim Ark—

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the King's dominions, were not natural-born subjects because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the King.

All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. (...)

We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution.

reply to post by aptness
I didn't say everyone was lying.

Governor Lingle said Kapiolani was in the press release by Fukino. It wasn't. That's pretty black and white.

You never address that issue but instead make sweeping statements to avoid addressing the issue.

Perhaps its under Barry Sotero !
But, I bet it's not either

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
]They weren't sure, and to help resolve the issue, McCain provided his....guess what...long form birth certificate, the same document Obama hasn't provided.

Can you please link the long form birth certificate of John McCain? I have seen it, but I want to comment on after you post it, in case someone wanted to accuse me of linking a fake one. Thanks.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
You never address that issue but instead make sweeping statements to avoid addressing the issue.

I have addressed it. It’s obvious to me that the governor was mistaken. Seeing as Fukino is actually the person in charge of the records, and who has authority, under the law, to inspect the vital records, Fukino’s second statement has settled it for me.

Now I can’t help it that you can’t accept that the person with access and authority to inspect the records has unequivocally stated Obama was born in Hawaii.

Originally posted by aptness
Can you please link the long form birth certificate of John McCain? I have seen it, but I want to comment on after you post it, in case someone wanted to accuse me of linking a fake one. Thanks.

I'll give you two links. The first is from a law college:
moritzlaw.osu.edu...
It's a pdf and the contrast is different than on another version posted. That also includes other documentation related to McCain's eligibility.

The birth certificate content here looks the same, but it's a little more legible:
www.scribd.com...

I'm not very familiar with this situation but was there nobody to check on these details when Obama filed to run for Presidency?

Originally posted by eLPresidente
I'm not very familiar with this situation but was there nobody to check on these details when Obama filed to run for Presidency?

That's explained in this post.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


YOU HYPOCRITE! You chastise someone about making assumptions, yet you clearly do the same thing in assuming that someone is lying when they say they carry their birth certificate just because you don't. Your cute games with semantics are juvenile and old at the same time. Give it a rest.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by sweetliberty
Obama campaigned on open government and transparency,

And you believed him?

Should you be laughing?

Do you believe that we should be laughing?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Skippy1138
Um- yes I REALLY have my 43 year-old birth certificate in my wallet.Did you think I was lying?

No not really, just surprised as I do not know much people who have their 43year old original birth certificates let along carry it in their wallets. Things happen over a period of 30 or 40 years, but well done to you and your parents for looking after that birth certificate. It'd be silly however to expect everybody else to still have theirs.

Why? Because you say so?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Let me just go back to your post there regarding this new Arizona law. So essentially, arizona is going to make law requiring presidential candidates to present their original birth certificates, or they will be disqualified for the presidency, essentially making millions of natural born citizens ineligible. This is how you fellas intend to get back at Obama huh?

The arizona politician is taking you for a ride.

I guess that your argument is that because you say he is taking this individual for a ride that he is and the author is just not a smart and streetwise as you. Thank you for saving all of us!