Obama, DNC elude citizenship lawsuit deadline

[dburkhead]

Your tinfoil hat is on a little tight.

Since one snarky comment deserves another: So how's the fishing over there in Egypt. You're on that river, right?

 

[rcuhljr]

Since one snarky comment deserves another: So how's the fishing over there in Egypt. You're on that river, right?

I'm snarky because I proposed the level of conspiracy that would have to be involved for their case to be true, and his reply was... that there's a giant conspiracy. And the water in denial is just fine for fishing, I just wouldn't eat anything you catch. (Also he brought up a pointless MSM rant which wasn't relevant, since the two MSM links are merely provide the quotes from health department officials, but I'm sure he read the links so he knows that.)

 

[Scutter01]

Can we please get back on topic? Personal attacks are not required.

 

[4sarge]

Your tinfoil hat is on a little tight.

The Annenberg Foundation is at the center of the ongoing Obama-Bill Ayers controversy. Ayers was a former member of the homegrown terrorist group, the Weather Underground, which took credit for bombing the Pentagon, the Capital Building, and the New York City Metro Police Department plus 30+ other bombings during the Vietman War era.

The Weathermen, a small band of extreme leftists who got their name from lines in a Bob Dylan song - “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows” - conducted a bombing campaign against targets such as police headquarters, prisons and courthouses for three years to “bring the [Viet-nam] war home”.
Two police officers were killed in 1981, when members of the Weathermen and Black Liberation Army stole $1m from an armoured car. It was their last action.
–Times Online
​

Charges against Ayers were dropped after the FBI was accused of using illegal wiretaps. Ayers wrote in his 2001 “memoir”, Fugitive Days, that he regretted that his group “didn’t do enough” back then in regards to the almost 30 plus bombings his group took credit for. Ayers later became a professor in Chicago and the founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an offshoot of the Annenberg Foundation.
Here’s one “literary”[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Fugitive-Days-Memoir-Bill-Ayers/dp/0142002550"] review [/ame]of Ayer’s “memoir” Fugitive Days:

From Library Journal
“Memory is a ************,” writes Ayers (A Kind and Just Parent). In the 1970s, he was a head of the radical Weathermen and one of America’s Ten Most Wanted, along with his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, but he is now a distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois in Chicago. His memoir is a breath of fresh air in this self-absorbed age. Ayers discusses his reservations about the use of violence to achieve an end to violence (reservations he held then as well), but he is unrepentant in believing that America was the aggressor against North Vietnam and that right-minded people have an obligation to resist unjust wars. The book is uneven in tone, alternating fluffy passages about the passage of time with straightforward narration of Ayers’s more than ten years on the lam. The sentiments expressed in the book still seem noble, however, regardless of one’s opinions of the means used by Ayers’s comrades. There are many lessons still to be learned from such narratives. Recommended. David Keymer, California State Univ., Stanislaus
​

Stanley Kurtz of the National Review has been closely following Obama’s ties to Ayers as well as his association to ACORN .
While both the AP and the New York Times are reporting that there is no “truth” to the claims that Obama had “ties” to Ayers, Kurtz has uncovered a long standing association between the two men, one that leads straight to the Annenberg Foundation:
Ayers was a “key founder” of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.
In 1995 Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Annenberg Chicago Challenge, a “branch of the Annenberg Foundation”.
Ayers co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg “Collaborative”, which set education policy for the “Challenge”.
Obama was “authorized to delegate to the Collaborative the development of collaborative projects and programs”.
Obama had to “obtain assistance of the Collaborative in the development of requests for proposals.”
Obama had to “seek advice from the Collaborative regarding the programmatic aspects of grant proposals.”
Ayers sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”.
Obama and Ayers sat together on the board’s Governance Committee.
Ayers and Obama were “part of a group of four instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern CAC”.
As Board Chair, Obama authorized the funding for Ayers educational projects, as well as projects of Ayers’ “radical” friends.
Obama and Ayers “guided” monies to ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now).
Kurtz also points out Obama’s tenure as Board Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in regards to the one and only “executive experience” of Obama which was rated as a bust:
“The Chicago Annenberg Challenge stands as Barack Obama’s most important executive experience to date. By its own account, CAC was a largely a failure. And a series of critical evaluations point to reasons for that failure, including a poor strategy, to which the foundation over-committed in 1995, and over-reliance on community organizers with insufficient education expertise. The failure of CAC thus raises entirely legitimate questions, both about Obama’s competence, his alliances with radical community organizers, and about Ayers’s continuing influence over CAC and its board, headed by Obama. Above all, by continuing to fund Ayers’s personal projects, and those of his political-educational allies, Obama was lending moral and material support to Ayers’s profoundly radical efforts. Ayers’s terrorist history aside, that makes the Ayers-Obama relationship a perfectly legitimate issue in this campaign.”
Factcheck.org is part and parcel of the Annenberg Foundation. Factcheck was also chosen by the Obama campaign as the arbitrar of whether Obama’s birth certificate, which purportedly proves he’s a citizen of the United States, is authentic.
We were mostly uninterested in the birth certificate controversy until a recent court case in Philadelphia caught our attention.
On August 24, a prominent Democrat and attorney in Pennslyvania, Philip J. Berg, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against Obama and the DNC. Berg’s suit claimed that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States is therefore uneligible to run for President. On September 24, rather than show up with a copy of Obama’s birth certificate, attorneys for Obama and the DNC filed a motion to dismiss.
On September 29, Judge Barclay Surrick denied the motion to dismiss and ordered three separate items to be delivered to the judge in three days:
* A certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate
* A certified copy of Obama’s Certification of Citizenship
* A certified copy of Obama’s Oath of Allegiance
Clarification - It was inaccurate to say the judge has demanded the documents: the judge in Berg v Obama has not ruled on various motions yet. It is more accurate to say that Phillip Berg, in his court filing asked for the three documents in question.
60. Plaintiff has asked for a simple resolution. Plaintiff has asked that Obama supply a genuine certified copy of his original long version “vault” Birth Certificate, A Certification of Citizenship and a certified copy of his Oath of Allegiance. If in fact Obama can prove his “natural born” citizenship status, which he cannot, then he has not been prejudiced in anyway, but instead Plaintiff has been protected and his civil rights secured. However, if Obama is unable to supply said documentation, then he needs to withdraw his candidacy, again which will eliminate Plaintiff’s deprivations and instill Plaintiff’s constitutionally protected safeguards and rights.
We found it interesting that the Obama campaign saw fit to “release” Obama’s birth certificate to FactCheck.org but not to the U.S. District Judge supervising the Berg lawsuit against Obama.
Factcheck.org “verified” the Obama birth certificate yet intrepid bloggers Atlas Shrugs as well as Yid With A Lid have found several inconsistencies which call into question whether the certificate is “authentic”.
Again, regardless of whether the certificate is authentic or not, DBKP finds the fact that Obama’s attorney chose to file a motion to dismiss rather than just handing over a certified copy of the birth certificate to the judge puzzling. Everyday ordinary citizens have to prove citizenship by providing a certified copy of their birth certificate in order to obtain a driver’s license or an ID card. We cannot fathom why the Obama camp chose the motion to dismiss instead of complying with a Federal judge’s order to provide a certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate. The Obama campaign handed over a copy to Factcheck.org, why the “stall” with handing a copy over to the Federal Judge handling the Berg lawsuit?
If the Obama birth certificate is on the “up and up” then releasing it to a Federal Judge should be a “priority” of the Obama campaign instead of filing “motions to dismiss”. After all, the rest of us ordinary Average Joe’s have to fork over a copy of our birth certificates every now and then to prove we’re citizens in order to get a something as mundane as a driver’s license. We imagine most citizens would comply with a judge’s order to supply a copy of our birth certificate without too much fuss. Obama, an attorney himself, must surely realize the consequences of disobeying a judge’s order.
DBKP is keeping a close eye on the Berg case in Philadelphia. The judge ordered on September 29 for the three documents to be presented by Obama within 3 days. Rumors have circulated across the web that the judge “dismissed” the case. Those rumors are untrue. The Obama camp has yet to supply the documents to the judge.
Blogger Steve Diamond of the blog, Global Labor, has more info on the connections between Obama and Ayers:
*The Woods Fund
* The connection between Obama and Ayers’ wife, Bernadette Dohrn, another ex-Weather Underground grad.
* Obama’s first fundraiser for Illinois Senate hosted by Ayers and Dohrn
* The link between Michelle Obama and Ayers visa-a-vis a panel to discuss a book written by Ayers
* A longtime radical friend of Ayers who blogs for Obama
As far as Obama’s past association with Ayers, Obama claims that Ayers was “one of thousands” of people he knew. We’re not sure how many boards Obama has sat on as Chairman and President but one would think he’d remember the “founder” who was once a famous member of a notorious far left terrorist group that bombed the Pentagon and the Capital Building. In fact, in 2001, Bill Ayers was written about in the New York Times, when Obama was still Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The article in the Times was published the same day that hijackers boarded four planes and ended up murdering over 3,000 innocent citizens. Bill Ayers was pictured standing on the American flag. The timing was a coincidence, the subject, Ayers’ memoir, Fugitive Days:

”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.” Mr. Ayers, who spent the 1970’s as a fugitive in the Weather Underground, was sitting in the kitchen of his big turn-of-the-19th-century stone house in the Hyde Park district of Chicago. The long curly locks in his Wanted poster are shorn, though he wears earrings. He still has tattooed on his neck the rainbow-and-lightning Weathermen logo that appeared on letters taking responsibility for bombings. And he still has the ebullient, ingratiating manner, the apparently intense interest in other people, that made him a charismatic figure in the radical student movement.
​

According to the Obama campaign, he and Ayers had a “tangential” relationship which seems to revolve around the Annenberg Foundation. In 2001, Obama and Ayers were still members of the Chicago Annenberg Foundation, Obama was Chairman while Ayers was touting his memoir, Fugitive Days, about his days spent “bombing” in the name of “change”.

 

[hunt3rsd3n]

"No one can serve two masters, because either he will hate one and love the other, or be loyal to one and despise the other." Matthew 6: 24

BO is a laying in wait for his time to spring his nasty head. How could we come down to these candidates in this election without thinking the outcome was predetermined. It goes to show this Country is Godless and we deserve what BO brings. More gun control and more social programs for those that choose not to funded by the ones that do. Share the wealth, baby. Here it comes. His campaign was built upon change, but he has a lot of the old Clinton appointees in his cabinet now. We are gonna get more of the same. Talking out of two sides of his mouth in the interest of both parties he is talking to. If there absolutely was not merit to the lawsuit Berg entered, then why was it never addressed. The law required an answer to the complaint and since it was not addressed in a timely manner, the conclusion is assumed that the DNC and BO is hiding material evidence.

 

[10ring]

Your tinfoil hat is on a little tight.

And your sources suck and are not credible.

 

[10ring]

Does this Barack Obama birth certificate issue bug you because, although improbable, it's possible that he's not a natural born citizen, isn't eligible to be President under the Constitution, and this issue could be bigger than Watergate -- or any other "gate" in history?

Are you afraid that if you were even to raise the subject with your friends that they will think you wear a tinfoil hat, because Soros money backed Factcheck.org, the final arbiter of all truth in the universe, said so?

Are you with the news media, and after spending so much money to get Barack Obama elected, you'd hate to ruin your investment?

Are you a talk radio host who thinks that if you say the burden of proof needed to demonstrate one is eligible to be Commander in Chief should be at least as high as, oh, say, the level to be eligible for Hawaiian homestead status (see 1.F. below), that you'd be forced to give equal time to someone who disagrees?

Are you a conservative, libertarian, or any conscientious constitutionalist from any ideological side of life, who's convinced something's not right, but you're afraid your reputation might be tarnished because, after all, this could be one big Saul-Alinsky-style set-up, and the joke would be on you?

Fear not! Below is an outline showing that no matter how this issue is ultimately resolved, you have legitimate concerns, and that Barack Obama should, simply out of respect for the nation he was elected to lead, disclose the sealed vault copy of his birth certificate.

Given the circumstances, if Barack Obama respected this nation, he would prove it by the simplest and easiest of gestures - unless, of course, all this talk about change and hope was just a bunch of bull, and he's just "another politician." Here's the outline:

1. Under Hawaiian law, it is possible (both legally and illegally) for a person to have been born out of state, yet have a birth certificate on file in the Department of Health.

A. From Hawaii's official Department of Health, Vital Records webpage: "Amended certificates of birth may be prepared and filed with the Department of Health, as provided by law, for 1) a person born in Hawaii who already has a birth certificate filed with the Department of Health or 2) a person born in a foreign country" (applies to adopted children).

B. A parent may register an in-state birth in lieu of certification by a hospital of birth under HRS 338-5.

C. Hawaiian law expressly provides for registration of out-of-state births under HRS 338-17.8. A foreign birth presumably would have been recorded by the American consular of the country of birth, and presumably that would be reflected on the Hawaiian birth certificate.

D. Hawaiian law, however, expressly acknowledges that its system is subject to error. See, for example, HRS 338-17.

E. Hawaiian law expressly provides for verification in lieu of certified copy of a birth certificate under HRS 338-14.3.

F. Even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands does not accept a certified copy of a birth certificate as conclusive evidence for its homestead program. From its web site: "In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL."



2. Contrary to what you may have read, no document made available to the public, nor any statement by Hawaiian officials, evidences conclusively that Obama was born in Hawaii.

A. Associated Press reported about a statement of Hawaii Health Department Director Dr. Fukino, "State declares Obama birth certificate genuine."

B. That October 31, 2008 statement says that Dr. Fukino "ha personally seen and verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." That statement does not, however, verify that Obama was born in Hawaii, and as explained above, under Hawaiian policies and procedures it is quite possible that Hawaii may have a birth record of a person not born in Hawaii. Unlikely, but possible.

C. The document that the Obama campaign released to the public is a certified copy of Obama's birth record, which is not the best evidence since, even under Hawaiian law, the original vault copy is the better evidence. Presumably, the vault record would show whether his birth was registered by a hospital in Hawaii.

D. Without accusing anyone of any wrongdoing, we nevertheless know that some people have gone to great lengths, even in violation of laws, rules and procedures, to confer the many benefits of United States citizenship on themselves and their children. Given the structure of the Hawaiian law, the fact that a parent may register a birth, and the limited but inherent potential for human error within the system, it is possible that a parent of a child born out-of-state could have registered that birth to confer the benefits of U.S. citizenship, or simply to avoid bureaucratic hassles at that time or later in the child's life.


1. We don't know whether the standards of registration by the Department of Health were more or less stringent in 1961 (the year of Obama's birth) than they are today. However, especially with post-9/11 scrutiny, we do know that there have been instances of fraudulent registrations of foreign births as American births.

2. From a 2004 Department of Justice news release about multiple New Jersey vital statistics employees engaged in schemes to issue birth certificates to foreign-born individuals: "An individual who paid Anderson and her co-conspirators for the service of creating the false birth records could then go to Office of Vital Statistics to receive a birth certificate . . . As part of the investigation, federal agents executed a search warrant of the HCOVS on Feb. 18, 2004, which resulted in the seizure of hundreds of suspect Certificates of Live Birth which falsely indicated that the named individuals were born in Jersey City, when in fact, they were born outside the United States and were in the United States illegally . . . Bhutta purchased from Goswamy false birth certificates for himself and his three foreign-born children."

3. Even before 9/11, government officials acknowledged the "ease" of obtaining birth certificates fraudulently. From 1999 testimony by one Social Security Administration official: "Furthermore, the identity data contained in Social Security records are only as reliable as the evidence on which the data are based. The documents that a card applicant must present to establish age, identity, and citizenship, usually a birth certificate and immigration documents-are relatively easy to alter, counterfeit, or obtain fraudulently."


3. It has been reported that the Kenyan government has sealed Obama's records. If he were born in Kenya, as has been rumored even recently, the Kenyan government would certainly have many incentives to keep that undisclosed. Objectively, of course, those records may prove nothing. Obama's refusal to release records at many levels here in the United States, though, merely fuels speculation.

4. Obama has refused to disclose the vault copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate. This raises the question whether he himself has established that he is eligible to be President. To date, no state or federal election official, nor any government authority, has verified that he ever established conclusively that he meets the eligibility standard under the Constitution. If the burden of proof were on him, perhaps as it should be for the highest office of any individual in America, the more-than-dozen lawsuits challenging his eligibility would be unnecessary.

A. Had he disclosed his vault copy in the Berg v. Obama lawsuit (which was the first lawsuit filed on the question of his eligibility to be President), and it was established he was born in Hawaii, that would have constituted res judicata, and acted to stop other similar lawsuits being filed. Without res judicata (meaning, the matter is adjudged and settled conclusively) he or government officials will need to defend other lawsuits, and valuable court resources will be expended. Strategically from a legal standpoint, therefore, his refusal to disclose doesn't make sense. Weighing factors such as costs, resources and complexity of disclosing versus not disclosing, he must have reason of considerable downside in disclosing, or upside in not disclosing. There may be other reasons, but one could speculate that he hasn't disclosed because:


1. He was not born in Hawaii, and may not be eligible to be President;

2. He was born in Hawaii, but facts that may be derived from his vault copy birth certificate are inconsistent with the life story he has told (and sold);

3. He was born in Hawaii, and his refusal to provide the best evidence that he is a natural born citizen is a means by which to draw criticism of him in order to make him appear to be a "victim." This would energize his supporters. This would also make other charges about him seem suspect, including his concealment about ties to Bill Ayers and others of some infamy. Such a clever yet distasteful tactic would seem to be a Machiavelli- and Saul-Alinsky-style way to manipulate public opinion. But while this tactic may energize his supporters, it would convince those who believe him to be a manipulator that he's not only just that, but a real pro at it. This would indeed be the basest reason of all, and would have repercussions about his trustworthiness (both here and abroad), which Americans know, is a characteristic sorely lacking in its leaders.


B. His motion to dismiss the Berg case for lack of standing could be viewed as contemptuous of the Constitution. See, "Who Enforces the Constitution's Natural Born Citizen Clause?" Are we to expect yet another White House that hides behind lawyers, and expects Americans to swallow half-truths on a just-trust-me basis?

C. This issue poses the potential for a constitutional crisis unlike anything this country has seen. Disclosure at this stage, however, could even result in criminal sanctions. See, "Obama Must Stand Up Now Or Step Down." Thus, he has motive not to disclose if he were ineligible.


The question not being asked by the holders of power, who dismiss this as a rightwing conspiracy, is what's the downside of disclosing? This is a legitimate issue of inquiry because Barack Obama has turned it into one. The growing number of people who demand an answer in conformance with the Constitution are doing their work; the people's watchdogs aren't.

 

[ryanmercer]

See https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...4712-obama_s_bith_to_go_to_supreme_court.html

The supreme court is to review a case about his citizenship Friday

 

[flagtag]

Two things:
McCain was born to two U.S. citizens in Panema, which was "leased' to the U.S. for 100 years at the time of his birth. And his father was stationed in Panema (in the service of his country - the U.S. of A. at the time) So McCain is a full fledged U.S. citizen. No doubt.

Obama - there are claims (by his grandmother) that he was born in Kenya - she claimed that she was in the room at the time of his birth. In Kenya.
So, Obama's birth place is in doubt, whether or not his mother was "legal" and most countries consider the child to be a citizen of the country of the father - the mother's citizenship is unimportant.

So there is all kinds of doubt in relation to Obama's real citizenship. All he has to do to put this behind him is show a legitimate birth certificate. That's all. Why does he refuse? Why do others support that refusal?
Money talks!

 

[dburkhead]

Per US law, a child born abroad can be a US Citizen if the mother is a US Citizen and has resided in the US at least 10 years, 5 of which have to be after the age of 14. If the claims that Obama were born in Kenya were accurate then Obama is not a natural born citizen, then Obama's mother, 18 at the time of his birth, could not possibly have met that requirement which would make Obama not a "natural born" US Citizen.

Personally, I think the claims that he's not a US citizen are wishful thinking, and Obama's furtiveness about it is just reflex with his general secrecy about his past, but I also think that denying standing (or denying cert if the USSC so choses) are the wrong way to go about refuting them.

 

[flagtag]

Being a "public official", and having run for the top job, it is his DUTY to prove to WE THE PEOPLE that he is legally qualified for that office. He is not allowed certain "secrets" - those that have a direct bearing on his "job" - ei: his citizenship.

He needs to PROVE his citizenship as demanded by WE THE PEOPLE. And he needs to do so now - BEFORE he takes the OATH of OFFICE.
The Supreme Court needs to get it in gear and ORDER Obama to provide legitimate PROOF. THAT is THEIR DUTY!

 

[right winger]

The sad part is the Constitution no longer applies to the DemocRat Party.

 

[ryanmercer]

Being a "public official", and having run for the top job, it is his DUTY to prove to WE THE PEOPLE that he is legally qualified for that office. He is not allowed certain "secrets" - those that have a direct bearing on his "job" - ei: his citizenship.

He needs to PROVE his citizenship as demanded by WE THE PEOPLE. And he needs to do so now - BEFORE he takes the OATH of OFFICE.
The Supreme Court needs to get it in gear and ORDER Obama to provide legitimate PROOF. THAT is THEIR DUTY!

Exactly +1

 

[flagtag]

The sad part is the Constitution no longer applies to the DemocRat Party.

I'm not so sure that many in the R party honors it much either. More than the D party -MUCH more.

But I'm sure we all know that the majorityj of them are corrupt!