Nebraska has joined several other states in introducing a "birther" bill

I will type slowly for you: 1 Nebraska legislator is stupid- and wrote a stupid piece of legislation to appease 3 of his constituents.

The law he is proposing is unconstitutional and un-American.

If any of them wanted to prevent 'this uncomfortable situation' from happening again, they would draft laws that were Constitutional, but these are just political hack jobs.

 

Oh I dont think it is tilted in favor of future opponents- frankly I have seen no evidence that a single Republican candidate will be able to meet Nebraska's standard either- especially a Nebraska candidate since Nebraska doesn't issue original birth certificates.

You are being rather disingenius here- Birthers in this thread have been cackling like hens laying eggs over how this law is being proposed specifically for President Obama. And the ridiculous requirement for a parents original birth certificate, or a sworn statement that the father(not the mother mind you, the father) was an American citizen is of course directed specifically at attempting to disenfranchise President Obama.

Not that I particularly care- Nebraska's state legislators can pass whatever unconstitutional laws they wish. The court will overturn it long before the primaries start. But really, I dont care even then. Because I dont object because President Obama can't produce a certified copy of his birth certificate to a State if absolutely required- he could for instance get a court order for a copy- I object because its one more example of how Birthers will trample on the Constitution in order to get rid of the President.

 

I think the clear intent of our forefather was that only white Christian land owning men should be President. Do we really want to operate interpretation of what our forefathers intended, or do we want to operate within the law and the Constitution.

The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen. Not in one place does it say a thing about 'loyalty'- that is left up to the voters to decide.

"next we have a candidate born to an American mother and self-admitted Hezbollah fighter. Would you also not have problem with supporting this candidate"

See this is the difference between your America and my America.

In your America, what a child can aspire to be is determined by who their parents are. A child born in the U.S. to a struggling Indian migrant or hard working Cuban or Kenyan student is not quite as real of an American citizen to you as someone whose parents were born in America. You are telling immigrants to America, "your children just aren't as good as my children."

In my America, every child born in America can aspire to be whatever they want to be- to pursue the American dream- whether thats to get rich, be a baseball player or yes, be the President. Whether that child is a son of a mobster or terrorist or a millionaire or a lobbyist- that child rights should not depend on the circumstances of his father or mother.

So if a Presidential candidate was running whose father was a 'self-admitted Hezbollah fighter' who should decide whether that candidate should be elected? Some politician who got elected to Secretary of State or the American voters?

I will trust the American voters over a politician any time.

 

And that is why it is a political decision and up to the voters.

 

The Obama "debate" (conspiracy) aside, doesn't this bother folks? There are plenty of US CITIZENS over 35 years of age that all the sudden become ineligible to run for an office they could be more than qualified for? This could turn the only people eligible for the "ruling class" are those fortunate enough not to have any sort of paperwork calamity? Fires in homes, storage space considerations in hospitals/city halls can all be reasons a person can no longer run?

Oh and since when is a short form BC not reasonable enough? Yeah the government of Hawaii, the hospital in Hawaii, the newspaper in Hawaii, not to mention the book Obama completed before he ever RAN FOR ANY PUBLIC OFFICE all conspire to hide that he was born in Kenya TWO YEARS BEFORE KENYA WAS EVEN A COUNTRY!!!!!!!

Critical thinking folks try some.

 

After all my original BC may or may not be in the hospital I was born, that I am not sure. I do know that I do not have the original copy from 1972, but I do have a copy of the original produced in 1976, but who knows FOR SURE what could of happened between the year of my birth and the 4 years that passed before the date of my copy?

Oh no now you folks know how old I am, and most of the folks that disagree with me have guns... sooner or later they will triangulate my position, I've said too much

BTW why did the founders include that citizen or living in the country at the time of founding stuff? Cause a population in a NEWLY FORMED nation may have allegiance to another land. At this time in our nations history that concern isn't valid anymore. This nation has been around long enough that HAD say "the ARNOLD" in CalEEfornia done well there would be none of the concerns the Founders had in him becoming president even if he was born in Austria.

 

Over 60% of Americans doubt/do not believe Obama is eligible to be a president; let's assume all of these "unbelievers" live in all 50 States of the Union. And since our elected politicians should listen to, and try to "appease" their constituents, it's only logical to assume pretty soon all 50 States will propose similar legislations.

What does it mean? I've no doubts within months there's going to be a burglary in the Hawaii vital records offices... anybody care to guess what's going to be stolen?

 

When have I ever argued about his parents' birth place? His father was not an American citizen and his mother was. If he was born in HI, then he is a NBC. If he was born to them abroad, he may not be a NBC based on the laws of 1961.

The disturbing reality is that Obama could lay this matter to rest for the vast majority of Americans by releasing his OBC, but he will not.

 

Is it difficult to do? I guess there is a mass of people who don't know what tautology is without googling... - as I was afraid trying to post the link... they do not have even an ability to make a google search - but yet they keep on argueing matters which are a lot more complex then knowing what Tautology is. Aren't they simply dumb people?

Now I wonder if I repost the links and even examples would I get a dumb reply to my post, or even dumber reply or which would be the dumbest – no reply. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(rhetoric)

Examples and Observations:
• "At the risk of being redundant and repetitive, and redundant, let me say that tautology is the last thing children need from their parents, especially when they are in trouble.

"Whatever you have to say, whatever you do, avoid tautology. Try to say it only once!"
(Tom Sturges, Parking Lot Rules & 75 Other Ideas for Raising Amazing Children. Ballantine, 2009)

• "The 'new public management' has brought new ailments, particularly tautology. You often see such phrases as 'first class organizations are those that perform excellently.'"
(David Walker, "Mind Your Language." The Guardian, Sep. 27, 2006)

http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Tautology_(rhetoric)

oh forgot – for the dumb – this is the link to my post : http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...s-introducing-birther-bill-6.html#post3426868

and for the dumbest – it is post #58 in this tread

 

Ah, the race card! Every time you look one millimeter under the skin surface of any liberal, you see the race card there, just waiting to pop out.

Did you forget that President Wonderful is, after all, half-White? Does it then follow liberal "logic" that he should only present half of a birth certificate?

The answer, everybody, is so obvious: every state in the United States needs to produce birth certificates that, BY LAW, MUST CONTAIN:

1. The name and contact information for the attending physician.
2. The name of the official witness or person who swears to the authenticity of the information in the birth certificate, and that person's contact information.
3. The name and address of the hospital where the individual was born.

NONE...absolutely NONE of this information is included in Barack Obama's Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth. But, that's just fine with the great State of Hawaii, which has pronounced this threadbare, unproven claim of American citizenship to be legal. As a consequence, the entire United States must accept it, no matter what.

Naturally, any of us who question both Obama's nearly empty COLB, and the method by which it was declared legal in Hawaii are cursed as the lowest form of "birther" scum by his worshippers....

Even if birth certificates are mandated to include verifiable information going forward, all these "ass-wipe" so-called birth certificates that have been issued by negligent states like Hawaii have validity! So, face it, folks, we're stuck with this Obama nightmare until the day we can inaugurate a different person as President in January 2013. Hopefully, at this future point in time we can all agree, at least, that the new President isn't an illegal alien....

Does anyone know where I can get a T-shirt that says, "I THINK; therefore, I'm a Birther "...?

 

"lay this matter to rest" ...."by releasing OBC". I would venture that even if that were to happen a good chunk of the more fevered doubters would claim forgery. I will explain as playwrite;

DOUBTERS: wheres his BC, wheres his BC?

Here's the short form BC

DOUBTERS: Where's the long form BC?

Here's the long form

DOUBTERS: Has it be authenticated? Who authenticated it, and whats in it for them?

I trust this nonsense will never end as the burden of proof is continually raised as more and more FACTS disprove the assertion that Obama isn't a citizen.

 

So people who give birth in their home with a mid wife and no witnesses, didn't give birth to citizens, or said kid just can't run for President?

 

why do you keep posting this?.............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_(rhetoric

what is your point?

 

where in the constitution does it stipulate that a hospital must be listed on the birth certificate in order to be eligibile for the POTUS? for that matter, where in the constitution does it even mention a birth certificate? I've asked before, but the other fellow couldn't answer and placed me on ignore.

and as SFJEFF has pointed out, this law would have disqualified just about every POTUS to date. As has also been pointed out, this law would disqualify everyone who was born in nebraska, since they only issue short form COLB's.

I will again point out that this law will be shot down in court, because each state is constitutionally bound by the FF&C to accept the official birth certificate of another state. For states like, hawaii, california, and NEBRASKA(LOL) it's the short form COLB.

 

Correction: 58% of the GOP doubt/do not believe Obama is eligible to be president. Overall, 77% of Americans do. ~ http://www.politico.com/blogs/glenn...uredont_beleive_Obama_born_in_US.html?showall ~

 

No doctor, no midwife, no witnesses? Boy, that's convenient, isn't it? Is that what happened with Barack Obama? Look at his COLB and you won't find any doctor, any midwife, or any witness! But to answer your question, hell yes! If you've got NO proof of birth on American soil, the Constitution says you've got NO right to be President of the United States! Why are we even still discussing this? Until Obama proves he is a "natural born" citizen of this country, he should NOT be President, even if Hawaii says it was "legal".

 

Not the case - according to Obama, he was born in a hospital in Hawaii. What's the problem again?

 

Wrong! According to CNN, only 42% of Americans think Obama was definitely born in the US; that leaves 58% not sure, doubting or not believing he was. http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/08/04/rel10k1a.pdf

And quoting politico? LoL, may as well quote Mr. Gibbs

 

see, this is what birthers are all about. they simply can't accept that obama is president, no matter what evidence is presented.

He provided a copy of the official birth certificate from the state of hawaii. hawaii also confirmed it. case closed. but, for birthers, no amount of evidence is going to be enough.

 

jesus christ, from your link........

what is 42+29?

your own link proves you wrong. which is typical for birthers.

 

Oh I have to repeat the same simple point - how many times?

repeating: I guess there is a mass of people who don't know what tautology is without googling... - as I was afraid trying to post the link... they do not have even an ability to make a google search - but yet they keep on argueing matters which are a lot more complex then knowing what Tautology is. Aren't they simply dumb people

try this: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4SKPT_enUS417US417&q=Tautology

 

This proposed law would be completely unaffected by the Full Faith and Credit clause since Nebraska is dealing with no other state at all in requiring candidates to more fully prove their constitutional eligibility in order to have their names on the ballot in Nebraska only.

It seems clear all Full Faith and Credit arguments are doomed to failure in this context.

 

To be honest I wish the Federal Government had a law like this..

All candidates for Federal office must prove that they meet the requirements laid out by the Constitution. This can be done by;
(1) Providing an Original Birth Certificate to election officials
(2) Providing any mailing addresses, employment history, or other information deemed necessary to ensure residency requirements are met
(3) This information will be made fully available to the public (minus specific information such as SS#) and all citizizens will have standing to question, in court, a candidates elegibility.

This would merely ensure that all candidates meet the requirements laid out by the Constitution, as well as provide public proof of that fact. Nothing wrong with forcing a candidate for office to prove that they do meet the requirements.

Also, the burden of proof would rest with the candidate. As the candidate is seeking office, they must prove beyond reasonable doubt that they meet the requirements.

 

have you ever heard about Official Certification of Nomination document?http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...page=1&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0&tx=37&ty=74

Laws federal or local are of no matters for thugs.