More on that Birth Certificate thing...
- Thread starter Bann
- Start date
This_person
Well-Known Member
My best guess? They don't have any hard evidence, because it all requires Obama's consent to get and he won't provide that for ANYONE. And, if he is unhappy with you as a news organization, he pulls access to anyone from your organization. News organizations without access are called "failed", so his threatening ways in this keep people from attempting anything on the probability that this will amount to nothing. And, that probability is increased by little or no knowledge of it from the American people.My point exactly! And why don't they have any?
It's a great circle he's got going.
Rommey
Well-Known Member
At some point the love-fest will start to subside and that's when the press will remember what they are supposed to be doing. They don't realize that they can make 0bama look good or look bad. If 0bama keeps blacklisting news organizations, it could get awfully lonely at press conferences (or it should once the press pulls their collective heads out of their asses).
twinoaks207
Having Fun!
Hmmm. If I was a news organization, I'd report the lawsuits and if access was denied I'd report that, too! Then I'd go to town in the Op-Ed section and give daily up-dates. Eventually, something would get done because, believe it or not, he's NOT the only game in town and there is much other news to report. If only someone somewhere had the balls to follow the second part of David Brinkley's statement (see 3rd quote below), what a wonderful world it would be....
awpitt
Main Streeter
He has shown a BC but that's not good enough for some on the outer fringes. The BC shown in the PICs looks just like the one I get when I send for copies of my birth records. It doesn't matter, any "proof" Obama shows will never be good enough in the eys of some. Even with a BC, it will never be good enough as some have already questioned how the state of HI does its records so now the citizenship of anyone born in HI can be questioned.
Outer fringes? Yeah right, they are the only ones that don't believe Obama was born here. How about the inner fringed type that think all that flows from him is beyond reproach?
He hasn't showed a certificate of live birth as of yet, all he has shown is a certification of live birth. There is a difference between the two, is that so hard to understand? One is given when you are born at the hospital and the other is used to replace lost records or given when a birth is "registered" with the state.
Given that the questions could be squelched by providing access to any original record that exists, please explain why your hero has failed to adequately do so? Right now he has left only one option for the reasonable and that is to believe like those from his extended family that say they were present at his birth in Kenya.
aps45819
24/7 Single Dad
:shrug: Name one person or orginization that doesn't have a direct connection to his campaign that has actually seen the document.
:shrug: The .jpeg file posted on FactCheck.org (owned by the Annenburg Foundation) has had the serial number blacked out (why?) and states at the bottom it's not legal if altered.
Hawaii issues two types of BC. One has the name of the hospital and sig of the attending physician. The other just requires a signed statement sayin you've got a kid and need a ssn for him.
If he was born in Hawaiin hospital, the first type is available.
Do you really not want to know if the guy you voted for is eligible to hold the office? How hard is it to produce you birth certificate? I'll bet you've been asked to show yours at some point. Do you think it would have been acceptable to just e-mail an altered jpeg?
awpitt
Main Streeter
I don't consider him my hero.
awpitt
Main Streeter
I have and I provide a copy that looks very much like the one (of Obama's) shown in the pic. My Mom lost my original back when I got my learners permit so I have to write and send a check to the vital records people when I need a new copy; however, once I got my passport I haven't had to do that.
Right.
Then why aren't you calling for him to clear this up once and for all? 
You've been drooling over him since he first announced, he has you mesmerized.
SouthernMdRocks
R.I.P. Bobo, We miss you!
He has not shown it because there is something he doesn't want the public to know. The writing is on the wall.
ImnoMensa
New Member
Right.
This thread is 56 pages long and Awpitt still cannot understand that what he has seen is a fake, and not a true Birth certificate. No amount of scholars or others who have said it isnt a real certificate will convince him, because fact check has annointed it.
The chances of Bracko ever showing or allowing it to be shown are slim and none .Why?? Its a pretty simple document. There can be but one reason. There is something on that certificate that he doesnt want seen.
The chances of our illigitimate President elect ever coming forth wih the truth are also pretty slim unless the Supreme Court makes him do so.
The fact remains that Bracko Bama doesnt care if he is called illigitimate as long as he is serving President. Neither does the Democrat party and neither do people who have their head up his ass. Bracko is supposedly a Constitutional Scholar and yet he insist's on pissing on the Constitution by not showing his certificate.
The Democrat party is part and parcel of this coup.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
...
...and the silence of the right? What has McCain said about it? Has Palin called for him to just show us? Boehner? Newt? Any senators? I haven't heard Limbaugh or Hannity say much about it.
Why not?
...and the silence of the right? What has McCain said about it? Has Palin called for him to just show us? Boehner? Newt? Any senators? I haven't heard Limbaugh or Hannity say much about it.
Why not?
awpitt
Main Streeter
Right.
Ken, you don't know me as well as you might think. My original choice was Biden. I may have voted for Obama but there was no drooling involved. I guess we'll all find out soon enough when the Supremes have their say. God help them if they rule in Obama's favor. They'll become part of the BC cover up. I can't help wondering that if this claims about Obama's citizenship are so real, why wasn't it addressed way back when? There have been many bridges crossed were this should've been brought up. If this is so important to these people, than one would think this bridge would've been crossed a long time ago. Like back in June or maybe right after Obama was nominated. Hillary could've used it. McCain could've used it. Any one or more of the 50 Secretaries of State could've made an issue. No one did. Instead, they pushed the Bill Ayers stuff. There were nationally televised oppurtunities for the BC stuff to be brought up but it wasn't. Why? It just seems, that for some, they can't stand the outcome of the election so now they want the ref to call the touchdown back after the game is over.
Actually, I know you as well as I care to. Maybe drooling is a little strong, salivating might have been a better choice.
Wouldn't it depend on how it is handled? If they declare this as an important Constitutional issue and then demand proof of birth then whatever result is found will be the right decision, would it not?
What bridges are those Tony? It seems that the point a person is challenged is only when they are designated as President-elect (20th Amendment). At what other time must a Presidential candidate provide any proof whatsoever?
Way back when? You mean like at the time he was selected as the candidate for his party? Seems to me that is exactly when Berg brought suit against him. It also seems that this "experience" shows how little vetting for qualification is done by those charged with overseeing the selection/election process.
ImnoMensa
New Member
Larry is playing the Devil's advocate again. It gets booooring.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
...
...no, the Devil's advocate would only propose a worse case scenario 'what if', however unlikely. It's beyond conceivable what the GOP has actually done.
You call it boring. I call it pathetic.
...no, the Devil's advocate would only propose a worse case scenario 'what if', however unlikely. It's beyond conceivable what the GOP has actually done.
You call it boring. I call it pathetic.
This_person
Well-Known Member
You actually raise a valid and interesting argument. The fact that Obama has tried so hard to simply make this go away (vice answering it) is the single largest reason I have any interest in it at all. That same reasoning, however, should apply to the "loyal opposition"; their silence may speak volumes.
However, I think of who they are - politicians. It gains them exactly zero to be boisterous over this issue, because it's already in the court system to be answered by proper authority. The only thing that can happen is that they look stupid if/when it's proven an invalid argument. So, it's a lose situation for them to speak, and a no-loss situation for them to just wait it out. In their position, I'd wait it out.
That's a good question.