Most Democrats are Birthers too
Now hold on there for a minute. I know you are upset with the title, but it's true. Most Democrats know Barack Obama can't meet the provisions of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, or at least aren't sure whether he can or not.
Rather than go all over the issues again, let's just go to Congressman Bill Posey's bill:
The Presidential Eligibility Act (H.R. 1503)
Here's my point: Most people are shocked when they learn there is no formal qualification process to run for the President of the United State, once the most powerful position in the world. People see themselves being required to produce a birth certificate to place their children in public school, get a new driver's license, any number of state and federal functions now days where a person's identify is required, except when running for the Presidency of the United States. There the only thing required is your honorable word that you have meet all of the requirements.
Civil wars have been started over far less. So wouldn't it be prudent to take this Birther issue, even if you don't believe a word of it, and support legislation that would act to avoid this kind of "misunderstanding" in the future? It seems like a slam-dunk piece of common sense legislation. So why aren't Democrats crawling all over this bill?
Now I am sure we are going to hear a lot of excuses, but the bottom line is, if Democrats are so sure Barack Obama can meet the requirements of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, they should be supporting this legislation for the good of the country. And the only real reason why they aren't is because they too believe their man can meet muster. It's as simple as that.
So if you want to know who actually believes Barack Obama can't meet his Constitutional requirements, all you have to do is look at what people do, or, in this case, what they don't do, instead of listening to their words.
ex animo
davidfarrar
ps: Note what it says in the lower left-hand corner:"DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR".
This means there was some information contained in Barack Obama's "certificate of live birth" application the registrar could not independently verify. Think about it
Ask me what it should read if all of the information on Barack Obama 's "certificate of live birth" application had been independently verified by the registrar.
if Democrats are so sure Barack Obama can meet the requirements of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, they should be supporting this legislation
-------------------------------------------------
Farrar you're a clueless idiot. I'm more than satisfied that the birth certificate submitted by Obama meets all the legal requirements to prove that Obama is a citizen.
It doesn't matter whether I support this legislation or not. If most democrats supported it you would be posting that most democrats don't believe Obama is a citizen and are therefore supporting the legislation to force the issue. To avoid that lying accusation many democrats don't support the legislation. So you just come up with another lie to keep this dead horse alive.
August 16, 2009 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
No wait, let me see if I have you right.
"If most democrats supported it you would be posting that most democrats don't believe Obama is a citizen and are therefore supporting the legislation to force the issue. To avoid that lying accusation many democrats don't support the legislation. So you just come up with another lie to keep this dead horse alive."
Your predicate is incorrect. Most Democats are not supporting Congressman Bill Posey's bill because they too believe Obama can't meet his constitutional requirements. If most Democats supported Posey's bill -- and this goes for Barack Obama, himself, who by any measure should be "demanding" this legislation be supported and passed -- they would be seeking its passage to prove once and for all, birther have no issue.
The fact that they aren't supporting Posey's bill tells us they too believe Obama hasn't met his constitutional requirements.
How much do you want to bet right after the 2012 elections, there will be many more Democrats suddenly seeing the light of common sense reflecting off of this bill?
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
So Posey's bill is retroactive?
And in the bill it states that the BC must say accepted rather than filed?
And where is your proof for your stated conclusion that 'filed' means that there is some 'information' that the registrar could not independently verify?
Is there a manual that states that this was what the register was supposed to put down if they couldn't independently verify something?
What the Constitution calls for is that the President be a natural born citizen not that some clerk fills out a form correctly. And if you can't trust someone to honestly state their place of birth you have no business voting for them in the first place.
What is your explanation for the woman in a previous thread in response to your idiocy checked her own child's birth certificate and found 'filed'?
You do realize that many of your fellow Birthers are even unclear as to whether Hawaii is a State.
That until Orly Taitz was punked, you people thought she was brilliant.
You haven't a clue as to how it works around here. Obiter Dicta doesn't work. Stating your conclusions as factsdoesn't work.
Showing evidence, if you have any, does. Making up fairy tales about what something is supposed to say just gets you the same reputation as the kid who kept lying in grade school. Using logic also helps.
August 17, 2009 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
A. Posey's bill is not retroactive
Q. And in the bill it states that the BC must say accepted rather than filed?
A. No, but supporting evidence and at least educational records must be provided
Q. And where is your proof for your stated conclusion that 'filed' means that there is some 'information' that the registrar could not independently verify?
A. Proof by comparison.
Q. Is there a manual that states that this was what the register was supposed to put down if they couldn't independently verify something?
A. We are researching this point even as we speak.
Q. What the Constitution calls for is that the President be a natural born citizen not that some clerk fills out a form correctly. And if you can't trust someone to honestly state their place of birth you have no business voting for them in the first place.
A. Yes, but how would the voter know if someone can't be trusted to fill out a form honestly before the fact?
Q. What is your explanation for the woman in a previous thread in response to your idiocy checked her own child's birth certificate and found 'filed'?
A. I would have to look at her case closer.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, and by the way, oceankat, you just subconsciously admitted you too don't think Obama has met his constitutional muster by telling us "I'm more than satisfied that the birth certificate submitted by Obama meets all the legal requirements to prove that Obama is a citizen." Only natural born citizens can be president, not simply "citizens".
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said you make up lies. As a hard core Hillary supporter I researched this during the primary everywhere in the hopes it was true. I wanted it to destroy Obama. I wanted Hillary to win. But there was no way I could use it because unlike you I'm not a liar. I couldn't push or post on this story because I wouldn't lie even to help Hillary win. Do you now see the difference between you and me? The simple fact is that the birth certificate is valid. Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.
August 17, 2009 1:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fine, then let's have Obama do what John McCain did, release his background education records, his long-form birth certificate and support Congressman Bill Posey's bill: The Presidential Eligibility Act (H.R. 1503).
You know he won't, and you know you won't support the bill because you can't be sure the bill would preclude Obama from running for a second term, pure and simple.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some presidents released their education records some didn't. McCain didn't. Doesn't matter though, there's nothing in the constitution requiring it. His valid birth certificate is sufficient to prove he meets the requirments.
Since I have no doubt that Obama has submitted a valid birth certificate I have no problem saying I support that meaningless bill. But again it doesn't matter. If you convinced a majority of democrats to support the bill your next post would claim that democrats don't believe Obama is eligible for president and are supporting the bill to call him out.
August 17, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/08/combatting_the_liars.php#more?ref=fpblg
Farrar....shut up.
August 16, 2009 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stop lying.
And shut up.
August 16, 2009 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay,
I give up. How does one lie about one's own opinion?
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
They open their fucking mouth . . .
Keep yapping clown.
~OGD~
August 17, 2009 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
And also. :-)
And also to debunk the lie Farrar is begging us to ask about:
Along the way and over the years to this short form, things changed. Some short forms show "Date Accepted by Registrar" and others show "Date Filed By Registrar".
However, in the case of this short form, the 'geniuses' at Free Republic have decided amongst themselves that this means somebody tried to file a late birth certificate for Obama and it was not accepted by the state registrar due to this rule:
Completely revising the part that states "the state registrar shall not register the late certificate..." Freepers have twisted this to mean Obama's BC was filed but never registered. It also ignores the two statements issued by the Hawaiian HD that confirms Obama's birth in Hawaii.
One of their own, a birther on another site, has several certificates that show both entries.
August 17, 2009 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oooops, almost forgot.
In Hawaii, certificates that were filed late are marked as such. Notice that Obama's certificate does not have "late" written on it.
August 17, 2009 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Notice too, nobody is suggesting Obama's Certificate of Live Birth was filed late, only that the information contained therein could not be independently verified.
Now in the case of the Patricia DeCosta COLB, wherein her birth was in a hospital, witnessed by the birthing physician, and such. Her COLB reads "DATE ACCPETED BY THE STATE REGISTRAR".
Again, let me point out, Hawaiian Health Officials have no independent recollection of Barack Obama's birth, at least to my knowledge. All they are attesting too, all they can attest to, is the information contained on Obama's certificate of live birth, and what is on Barack Obama's certificate of live birth application, which they may or may not have at this point.
If there is information contained in the application that was not independently verified, Hawaiian Health officials attestations would be worthless. The only way to find out is to examine both the application and the certificate of live birth of Barack Obama -- and I'll give you one guess as to who is blocking that action. I'll give you a hint: The same person who is not demanding Congressman Bill Posey's bill not be passed.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 12:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
...nobody is suggesting Obama's Certificate of Live Birth was filed late...
All they are attesting too, all they can attest to, is the information contained on Obama's certificate of live birth, and what is on Barack Obama's certificate of live birth application...
1. If it was not filed late, there would be no application to inspect. On time registrations do not need an application in order to file them.
2. If it was not filed late, why are you using the late registration requirements for criteria?
August 17, 2009 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone needs to apply (register) for a Certificate of Live Birth. I believe the date was August 8, 1961, if I am not mistaken.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 1:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is one document, not two. The certificate is filled out and given to the local/state registrar. If the registrar has an issue with the certificate at that time, it is taken care of before it is given back to the registrar for filing. I was a sub-registrar for years. It's not rocket science.
August 17, 2009 5:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but not in Hawaii. And I wish I could answer your question, but until we see what information is contained on the certificate, all we are doing is speculating.
By the way, if you do believe Obama's COLB is authentic, do you support Congressman Bill Posey's bill: The Presidential Eligibility Act (H.R. 1503)?
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
1. Yes, even in Hawaii. Whoever fills out the certificate, usually the hospital or midwife, does not also have to fill out an application to file it, when it is done within the specified time frame. Obama's certificate was not filed late. Therefore, no application.
2. I did not ask a question, so I fail to see what you wish you could answer.
August 17, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why does it scare you that Barack Obama 'IS' our president? Is it because he is black? Because he is educated? Because he is not part of the pseudo-christian mafia and not under their mind-control programming as you appear to be?
How does it feel to be a tool of the pseudo-christian mafia David? To be used as a pawn by those greedy, rich, and powerful people who believe that they have been ordained by God to rule us? And they believe they are 'above' moral rules as well, they just put on a show for appearances sake so that you think they are moral.
Do you understand that Doug Coe and other leaders that guide them appreciate and respect rulers like Hitler and Mao? When you try to peg that stuff on President Obama, you are barking up the wrong tree, you should just turn around and look at the people you are listening to on Fox etc.
Do you understand that they want you confused and afraid because then you are easy to manipulate? Do you understand that their goal is to amass more and more power and rule?
You watched Bush and Cheney... do you think they gave a damn about our constitution or liberties? I think not!
If you really gave a damn about the constitution you would be demanding accountability for all of the violations of law that Bush and Cheney perpetrated.
Do you understand that they consider themselves above the law and do not care what we put in our 'legislation'?
Now 'those' are the people you 'should' be afraid of.
Those are the people who are destroying our democracy... and you inadvertently and possibly innocently are one of their soldiers, helping them with this agenda...
Did you know all of that?
You've got it all backwards.
President Obama is a citizen. I wrote to him and asked him to run for president when he was a senator. I may be disappointed in some of the decisions he has made but am glad he IS president and you appear to have a problem dealing with reality.
August 17, 2009 12:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
When you work your way through all of your ad hominem attacks, I'll be glad to address your issues.
Birthers are not racists. Indeed, to allow Obama to slip by simply by posting a jpg on a website and calling it "proof" he has meet his constitutional requirements simply because he is black, would be racist.
Secondly, his COLB says he is Caucasian, not black, which may, indeed, indicate the registrar did not have all the facts about Obama's birth independently verified.
Lastly, first and formost, this is a legal issue.
As I have mentioned before, if Obama releases all of his educational records he is presently withholding, all federal records, including all previous passports issued, foreign or domestic, social security numbers that have been and are presently assigned to Barack Obama, Jr. or to any of his aliases.
Secondly: Allow his long form, Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" document, along with his "Certificate of Live Birth" application to be examined by a panel of (independently assigned, with at least on being Dr. Polarik) forensic document and computer experts to determine all document authenticity.
Thirdly: Depending on the information contained therein, produce corroborating evidence.
Lastly: Take the issue of Barack Obama meeting the "natural born" provision of the U.S. Constitution to the Supreme Court, even with his new appointment, and have him declared a "natural born" citizen. Then and only then will I address Mr. Obama as my President Obama.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 1:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ad hominem has become the new slang response for having nothing meaningful to say...
August 17, 2009 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Birthers are not racists. Indeed, to allow Obama to slip by simply by posting a jpg on a website and calling it "proof"
-------------------------------------------------
Either you are a liar or a complete idiot. No one is talking about the original scan posted by Obama. Factcheck has examined and analyzed the birth certificate in detail.
"FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false."
So either you're not aware of any of the examinations of the birth certificate after the first scan by obama and are therefore a complete idiot. Or you are aware but lying when you posted, "to allow Obama to slip by simply by posting a jpg on a web site and calling it "proof"."
I'm guessing liar.
August 17, 2009 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
FactCheck reporters are not forensic document experts. Their purpose wasn't to authentic anything. Their purpose was to verify there was actually a piece of paper with Obama's name on it, that's it.
These two reporters were specifically chosen by Obama's staff and were given all of 15 minutes to take some photographs and then hustled out of the room.
You begin to see the inadequacy of this response when you compare this to John McCain's honorable response when his birth certificate was challenged.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have made a mistake. Barack Obama's COLb does not state he is a Causasian. It states his mother is a Causasian. I apologize for the mistake.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 1:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I for one, am glad to see you manage to get comments but no rec's - guess you lost your ability to get those phony ones as in the past. I have nothing further to say except that I am glad those at the top of the rec list deserve to be there.
August 17, 2009 7:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
So all your 'because I said so' statements are completely made up at this point and your checking your data as we speak.
Judgment first, trial later.
You're getting quite confused: trust whom to fill out what form before the fact?
If I trust a candidate to run our country, I trust that candidate to inform us correctly about where that candidate was born.
'Proof by Comparison' Unless you tell us by comparison to what this is at best word play.
Stop wasting our time.
August 17, 2009 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, of course we are speculating. We have been forced to speculate about Obama's "natural" allegiance because Obama has given us no choice!
Nobody wants to speculate over a matter as serious as this, as important as this, except Obama; who, strangely, doesn't seem to care. And now you come along and berate us because we are having to speculate -- nice.
Below is a point I recently made concerning this same issue, with a few minor adjustments:
"And I must say here, although I am no presidential historian, the question of Barack Obama’s “natural” allegiance can be called into question far, far more than any other president’s, which one would think would be reason enough to call for the publication of his Certificate of Live Birth and other supporting documents.
"Depending on how accurate his present history is reflected by the record (and not by Obama own fiction): being born in Hawaii, adopted by an Indonesian, returned to Hawaii, brought up by his U.S. citizen grandparents while his mother was Indonesia, went to college in U.S., his natural allegiance can rightfully and legitimately be called into question.
"But, of course, without access to Obama’s record, little can be determined in this regard, which is precisely why he is blocking its release. One can further speculate that since Obama is blocking the release of this material that may offer him vindication, it may be substantially different than the one reflected in his autobiographies.'
As a pure example of this kind of forced speculation: Do we really know when Barack Obama Jr., came back from Indonesia? Was he ten-years old, in his teens, or in order to attend college?
I would deeply appreciate of any corroborative evidence that would clarify his issue other than what Barack Obama has written about this time period himself.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Time to pony up some details and credible links. What is your source that Obama is blocking access to the coveted "long form" birth certificate?
OK, I'll tell you. Having checked all the lawsuits against him, he is not blocking access. None of the lawsuits have progressed enough to get to the point of production. This "blocking access" meme is purely made-up fiction.
I also checked the source for the "Obama is spending millions of dollars" in order to not have to produce the long form. The source is WorldNet Daily and only WND. When WND does supply a link to their source, guess what, it's WorldNet Daily! At this point, they also have a vested interest in keeping this story going, as they are making money out of the suckers believing them. There is no other source that claims he is spending "millions".
For somebody that wants a panel of independent forensic examiners and Supreme Court certification before you believe Obama, you sure aren't choosy about the sources you use.
Nobody, including the President of the US, is going to reveal their SS number to the entire world. Ditto for passport information. As for scholarly law papers, as Editor of the Harvard Law Review and a student, he was not under any obligation to write one. Nor did he have any reason to write any while at the University of Chicago. "Publish or perish" is for those looking for tenure, which he wasn't. His law license is easy to find, as is his driving record and marriage license. No access blocked there.
You are spending so much of your life involved in something that has no basis or credibility for your angst. I don't care how you spend your time, but with no evidence to back up your claims, you are not going to achieve anything here at TPM.
If you are looking to TPM to improve your credibility for those who find you through Google, rest assured that someone here will comment on every post that that is what you are doing.
August 17, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hawaiian Health Officials cannot release Obama's long form birth certificate without his permission to do so. He is purposely blocking any and all attempts to discover any supporting evidence the record may hold that would support his contention that he has met his constitutional requrements to be President of the United States.
When you compare John McCain's honorable response of openess and transparency when his birth right was questioned to that of Obama's dishonorable response, you begin to see just how much Barack Obama is hiding from the American people.
As far as the extent of disclosuer a President is required to display, one would think it would certainly be at least as much as would prove beyond a shadow of doubt that s/he has met his/er constitutional requirments. For more info on this subject graciously offered by Chuck Schumer, please
click here.
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 17, 2009 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is purposely blocking any and all attempts to discover any supporting evidence ...
No, he is not. He produced the official birth certificate and senior Hawaiian officials verified that they have seen the original, that he was born in Hawaii and that he is a natural born citizen. You may choose not to believe any of it, but that is your problem, not his. How does that make him less honorable than McCain?
You're barking in the wrong forest about his supposed British dual citizenship. He became a dual citizen of Kenya on 12/12/63 (Chap.VI, Sec.87), which expired on his 21st birthday because the Constitution of Kenya does not allow dual adult citizenship (Sec.97). Holding a dual citizenship did not affect his natural born status in the US.
August 18, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
He hasn't produced a "birth certificate" at all, and you know it. All he has done is post a picture of a document on a website.
The only thing Hawaiian Health officials have attested to is that the information represented by that picture posted on that website is the same information reflected on their vital record application, period.
Whereas John McCain "produced" a certified copy of his long-form birth certificate, along with reams of educational and other medical records, including vaccination records, et cetera when call upon to do so. You are not seriously suggesting Obama's response to the questioning of his birth credentials is in anyway comparible to John McCain's response; are you?
ex animo
davidfarrar
August 18, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I am seriously suggesting it. Obama produced the certificate that Hawaii issues. It was certified. Since then, Hawaiian officials have confirmed the information. And since you didn't read it, here is what they said on July 27, 2009.
August 18, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Most Democrats are Birthers too
Bwaaaaah hah hah hah..... you don't know the half of it, so clueless! You people are just hitting the tip of the iceberg, naively distracted by the Kenya thing on a piece of paper, you use the wrong definition of the word "alien." You'll realize your naive mistake when Nancy Pelosi utters Klaatu barada nikto to Rahm Emmanuel, but it will be waaay too late then. You totally ignored the tie in to to Area 51, and you gave up with "who killed Vince Foster?" waaay too soon. That primary fight between the Clintons and Obama? All an act to fool and distract those of you without the implant, hah hah hah, too late.
August 17, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink