emergency obama birth certificate

And I didn't call you names or a Birther- I described what Birthers do. If you disagree with my statement, prove me wrong.

As for the criminal - That is Obama.
Illegal laws do not legitimize illegal actions.

We need look no farther then him ordering the execution of US Citizens without due process of law.

Odd how you invoke 'due process of law' when you have made Obama a criminal without any such due process. Let me know when Congress starts impeachment proceedings on the issue. Me? I am tickled pink that the United States took out that traitor.


Also - his legitimacy as president is in question.
If it eventually comes out that he is not eligible to be president his whole campaign as well as every action he has taken with the authority of POTUS is also illegal.[/QUOTE]

No his legitimacy is not. He was elected by American voters, by the Electoral College, confirmed by Congress and swore in by Chief Justice Roberts. You are claiming he might not have been eligible- and you have all of the responsibility to prove such an allegation under 'due process of law'

I am pointing out that Taitz is a complete failure as a lawyer and that Birthers have never produced any evidence for any of their claims. Not sure why you consider these facts to be 'rants'

 

Were you seven years old and traveling alone from as far away as Indonesia? I mean did you have your own US passport by age 5?

Did you ever attend school overseas.

Do you know any expat Americans who had children overseas.. NOT on a military base? Ever set foot in a US Consulate to register a birth?

 

So in other words you have nothing but your opinion to support your claim that he is using his office to hide anything.

We have a sitting President, who has provided more evidence of his eligiblity than any President in history, and we have a small faction of Conspiracy enthusiasts who try to raise doubts as to his eliglbility.

Once again- I will point out- you were unable to support your claim that Obama has used his office to hide anything.

Just the usual Birther rumor and innuendo.

 

It is all merely your opinion. You haven't provided evidence for anything you have claimed.

 

Can you read or are you blinded by your love of Obama?
If this man is not a NBC all those actions are null and invalid.

Although, you do expose one good reason why so many are protecting him.
This scandal is incendiary and would burn people in all branches of government.

If you are willfully ignorant I can't help you and repeating information to those who do not want to acknowledge it is folly.

Go ahead and stew in your ignorance - that is your choice.

 

How do you get a US passport when you are 5 years old... You have to be able to READ to become a naturalized US Citizen.

Think....

 

And you have yet to provide one ounce of evidence that counters the best evidence ever produced by any President that he is eligible. The voters, the Electoral College, Congress and Chief Justice Roberts all believed him eligible, and all due Constitutional process was followed.

Until you provide some evidence- enough to convince Congress to start an investigation, impeach and convict him- he is our legitimate President.

You haven't shown any ignorance yet except your own. You haven't provided a single bit of evidence to support your claims. All you have done is provide unsubstantiated, unsupported claims.

Remember that 'due process of law' thing you mentioned. Obama has followed it. Under the law, he is President. Under the law, he will be President until he is termed out, voted out, or impeached.

 

He hasn't provided any evidence
and again I'm tired of repeating myself for the willfully ignorant.

Go grow up.
I'm tired of wasting my time on you and your ignorance.

Do I know Obama is not legitimate?
Of course not, only him and his intimates know.

What I want is to end the debate which can be accomplished by examining his original birth certificate.

Anything else or less is just more partisan BS.

Could Obama end this?
Absolutely.
Why doesn't he?

I don't know but to me it appears he has something to hide.

Could an average citizen leverage their power and influence to keep their birth certificate out of a legal proceeding.

Of course not and you know that so quit playing your stupid childish games with me.

 

In other words, once again you are unable to substantiated any of your claims.

But hey- if you want to go look at his original birth certificate keep up your quixotic campaign. You will never see President Obama's or any other President's original birth certificate.

You have of course seen copies of President Obama's certified copies of his original's, confirmed by the state of Hawaii and you have rejected their veracity.

You have of course, never seen copies of any other President's birth certificates, yet you always assumed they were legitimate, just as you assume the Republican candidates are legitimate without seeing any evidence of their eliglibty.

 

Anyone who can read the statutes and Title 8 of the US Code knows Obama is legitimate.

 

Actually Wong, everything you and at least the two other Musketeers have to say, could be put into a couple sentences basically saying, "quit picking on poor little Obama", he's doing the best he can and deserves more time to get "SOCIAL JUSTICE" enacted. Then what I'm trying to show are the results involved under "class warfare" which is and has been the Administrations motivation. Said another way, this BC issue is the controversy he or at least his advisors are promoting to divide the electorate or he may in fact have no choice and has undermined the Constitution. If you think about it, the same approach is being taken for the 2012 Election, the birther issue being replaced with those dirty "Tea Partiers" and Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule

I also have the Constitutional Right to voice my opinions, where acceptable to the owners of the property (ie. this forum or any other). This possibly could change minds and hearts of many people, where I have only one vote to cast.


Afterthought; In completing and re-reading this, I had decided not to post, Wong not being my favorite musketeer. Then reading your post to 'kshRox' with almost a systematic (organized) character attack over substance, decided to post.

As you all are working this issue, for whatever reason that might be, aside; If you have no answers it's off topic, not relivalent and if it fits your combined narrative you simply repeat some programmed answer. I really don't understand what your motives are, since if you think your helping Obama, some Liberal cause or just some kind of paid posters, you are really not helping any cause. People are honestly looking for answers, you know that, they know you know that, yet over and over again you are saying "their is no question". It's not the skeptics that are without substance, it's those trying to protect "whatever" that are without substance.

 

You posed questions. I answered them. You seem to have no response to my answers beyond whining.

This is where we stand.

Moving on.....

 

That's absurd. But let's test it. I am not the President of the US.

Try and get mine.

I'll wait.

 

When you stop calling the President of the United States names (not to mention us), perhaps such a request might be worthy of attention. Until then, insert aphorism about pots and kettles here.

 

Those are not mutually exclusive statements. Perhaps you should put more thought into what you are imaging are arguments.

You need to brush op on the "De Facto Officer Doctrine."

 

Except for two birth certificates, the testimony of two consecutive governors of Hawaii, the testimony of two consecutive State Directors of Health, the testimony of one Hawaii Registrar, and the testimony of everybody else who is actually in a position to know.

Except for those... right?

All other things being equal to the cases that have been filed by Birthers? Absolutely. Without a doubt.

 

Huh?

I suggest you go back and read my posts. All 4,422 of them. You will never find anything even vaguely resembling that comment in any of them.

Go ahead. Check. I'll wait.

And I have the Constitutional right to mock you for it.

But... you have been shy. Whose sock puppet are you again?

 

You remain skeptical because he's a half-black liberal with a funny sounding name.

If you deny that, I want you to point to what, specifically, in his history, makes you "skeptical", and why the same thing in some other Presidential candidate's history did not ALSO make you "skeptical".

After all, you still haven't made that thread demanding to see Mitt Romney's birth certificate.

I discuss them plenty, in the appropriate threads. This is a thread where some people argue with a straight face that a person could somehow rise to the level of the most scrutinized office on the face of the Earth while hiding their birth origins, and we sane people point and laugh at them.

Nonsense. 100% of the evidence says he's qualified. 100%. And you have absolutely nothing that says otherwise.

Why should he answer to nutcases about irrelevancies?

What if someone in an insane asylum asks to see the receipt for the last pair of underwear he bought?

No person has a duty to respond to an idiotic question, no matter how public a figure they are.

I don't support him. But I also don't support this fantasy you have that he might be ineligible Constitutionally.

He distributed it and allowed it to be examined. The mere fact that he didn't let insane, idiotic, lunatic Orly Taitz to come to that conference actually gives me MORE confidence in his abilities, not less.

But of course you have never had this question about any candidate for President, before or since, despite the fact that none of them have made this information public.

So where's your thread demanding to see Rick Perry's birth certificate?

There's no question about the legitimacy of Obama's presidency.

LOL... The SSN again? What is your proof it's invalid?

 

Once again- purely unsupported innuendo.

Show me anywhere where I say or imply 'quit picking on Obama"- I have repeatedly challenged you to support any of you claims with evidence.

You have repeatedly instead responded with insults rather than evidence.

Why are you trying to change the subject from eligilbity to politics?

You have the Constitution right to express your opinion free of Governmental interference- just as I do. As do I to express my opinion by calling your posts clearly politically biased.

I am expressing facts, when I point out that you have not once provided any evidence to support your claims.

We have repeatedly given answers to any actual legitimate question. Just because you don't like the answer, doesn't make it go away.

My motivation is purely because I support the rule of law and the Constitution, and I despise attempts to distort either for political purposes. Birthers- yourself included- first decided you were againts Obama- and then discovered your concern about eligiblity.

I am not trying to help any cause except that of truth.

Just post some actual evidence rather than unsubstantiated rumors and innuendo and we can discuss the truth.

In my opinion- based upon your posts and other Birther posts, that no Birther is honestly looking for answers. Otherwise Birthers would not so regularly post lies and completely refuted Birther rumors.

but prove me wrong. Show me where you have shown any concern about the eligiblity of any other Presidential candidate. Or show me evidence for anything you have claimed.

 

i couldn't help but notice that the obots are now saying release of two birth certificates. i remember a time when "this is it, there is nothing else". three years later... ok her's the "birth certificate". this is why the issue won't die. at some point colb and longform and original will all be the same in the twisted make believe world of obama and the obots. evolution.

 

Dan, I'll give you another response in hopes you might gain some insight into why so many people feel Obama is not representing the US as any other President before has and yes might just have gained this power by other than honorable means. Frankly, I would argue, he was simply a NY hippy, drug user and pot smoking (his words) that somehow managed to combine a good speaking voice (deep tone), with an exceptional ability to read allowed written material and has been well managed.

In my mind I've offered, as have many others on these "Birther Threads", link/evidence to the contrary of your's, simply to be ignored for what seems to be an illusive agenda. No doubt if I were 50 years younger, wanted Government Assistance for my every need and had not spend those 50 years practicing Free Market Capitalism, I could feel FDR, Johnson and Obama were saviors of the human race.

As for being a racist, I wrote a short piece on that hopefully you skipped over, but I'm not intimidated by Obama's skin color in any way (pro/con), don't believe in being "politically correct" and my skepticism over his heritage formed from the way he had campaigned, has managed and his absolute refusal to put a story to rest, that could have been done at any time, from the day he first mentioned running for the only office requiring absolute confirmation, in the US.

As for Romney or any other current or past candidate for P/VP, if you have any reason to question his place of birth, can't find back up documentation, spends millions blocking access or any of the other things that were done in Obama's name, I would be as skeptical of him as I am of Obama.

It's my contention (A point asserted as part of an argument) that your arguments in support of Obama's obvious diversionary tactics, as well as your other two cohorts are politically driven as described earlier. In addition I believe, especially if he was born in Hawaii (likely was) all this obfuscation nonsense is/was a ploy to make some voters sympathetic to his circumstances, otherwise said, "mommy their picking on me"....

If you have been following my post, you understand IMO, people are not going to voice/write opinions in "speculations" (everything under politics, by some are speculative), to be labeled, then that label be defined by a very few and as mention a steady response of the same material. To emphasize this, I've labeled and defined "The Three Musketeers", noting it has not been well received, which was my intention.

NO SIR, your expressing only what you perceive as undisputable assertions by others, no less than skeptics want physical evidence, that even the most skeptical would agree with. No less than required from any Judge/Jury in the US and with today's technology, even a microfilm can be tested for age.

I don't think so; Yes, if a trail is held, the accused granted all rights and the Judge/Jury determines a verdict, I'll accept that verdict, but this issue has not run it's course or IMO was it permitted to.

As for me, I begged your birthers, not to use the argument during the election campaign, that if anybody was capable of using the issue, it should be Hillary Clinton and she did not. The problem is after the elections, she became SoS, remained political viable and for whatever reason Obama capped anything from his past for unknown reasons, that may be criminal at worst, embarrassing at best and what I've always felt was his problem...

 

Not "well received?" I thought it was great. Have you never read "The Three Musketeers?"

They rocked!!!!

 

congress may have probable cause.