Birther lawsuit tossed by Kennedy
posted at 2:30 pm on December 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy rejected two appeals this afternoon challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility for the Presidency. One of the two appeals came from Philip Berg, the 9/11 conspiracy theorist who claimed that Obama was born in Kenya and that a conspiracy existed to cover up the alleged Constitutional defect to his candidacy:
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has rejected two more efforts to get the court to consider whether President-elect Barack Obama is eligible to take office.
Kennedy on Wednesday denied without comment an appeal by Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney, that claims Obama is either a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia and is ineligible to be president because he is not a “natural-born citizen” of the U.S. as required by the Constitution. Another appeal from California, based on Berg’s claims, also was denied.
Individual justices and the entire court have turned down emergency appeals over Obama’s eligibility at least seven times in the past six weeks.
And that puts an end to the entire farce. Berg can certainly petition another justice, perhaps Scalia or Thomas, who have both sent previous challenges to conference. However, without Kennedy, the court would almost certainly rule against the appeal, and probably couldn’t get the four votes to even grant certiorari. Sending it back to conference would do nothing but waste more time.
I’m certain that Obama didn’t stay awake nights worrying about this, and Hawaii officials have publicly attested to the accuracy of the certification Obama released in June. What will the birther industry do now? If the 9/11 Truthers give any kind of example, they’ll sell lots of books and keep the flame alive.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
there would now be precedent.
peacenprosperity on December 17, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Dude, I think txsurveyor got his/her law degree from Wikipedia…
sayabule1 on December 17, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Thankfully, now the truth is known. :)
JiangxiDad on December 17, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Great, we agree on one thing. Now please, tell me which agency is it that verifies this? Also, what was their conclusion?
javamartini on December 17, 2008 at 4:37 PM
If Hot Air is going to cover this story, at least do a competent job. Why was the case thrown out? What was the ruling in the lower court? Was it on standing or did it address the merits? This might mean something if it was Keyes’ lawsuit that was being rejected. But it was just that nut Berg’s lawsuit.
tommylotto on December 17, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Good post, tommy. There have been many over the last days on this subject over the last days.
Why write posts on the subject if the proprietors have no interest in researching the subject? It drives traffic.
I feel this is an important subject with regard to all presidential candidates not just BO. While Ed and MM seem to enjoy deriding those who are concerned as “birthers” tossing them in the same category as “truthers” as if they are the dreaded Oogedy-Boogedy branch of the conservative party, I would note that perhaps they have become Parkeresque.
Readers are customers, and it tells me something when the authors of such posts ridicule the readership.
Cody1991 on December 17, 2008 at 4:38 PM
What the hell is so difficult to understand about this issue?
1. Barack HUSSEIN Obamanation refuses to show us the real-deal birth certificate.
2. Barack HUSSEIN Obamanation has spent about $1 million getting the lawsuits quashed; and that’s just the lawyers’ fees, let alone the bribes he must have given to the jurists involved.
3. IF Barack HUSSEIN Obamanation really has an undeniably valid birth certificate AND if his mother met the statutory requirements of citizenship at the time of his birth, he would doubtlessly show the world the birth certificate and prove to everyone that he is at least constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.
4. Since Barack HUSSEIN Obama has not been forthcoming and has chosen to hide behind the battery of attorneys at his disposal, it should be painfully obvious to ANYONE of average or better intelligence, that he is FREAKING HIDING SOMETHING.
Logic is a wonderful thing to possess…I suggest you people who have labeled us skeptics as “birthers” retract your pejorative, condescending remarks and join the thousands of concerned citizens who have an absolute RIGHT to know that this empty suit called The Fraudulent One meets the minimal Constitutional requirements to occupy the office. Crap, we already know he’s not qualified by experience.
Jarhead68 on December 17, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Elections divisions actually determine this, state by state, during the elections process. As they have made no statements, I am going to assume they did their job.
Now I will wait while everyone tells me I’m an idiot for thinking a government agency works which, for the sake of humor I would agree with, but not in a serious discussion. I will then wait for all the posters to tell me how they know the truth behind the doors of state elections divisions.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Regarding the Keyes suit, in Fulani v Hogsett, in 1990, the 7th circuit ruled that presidential candidates do have standing to challenge the ballot placement of other presidential candidates. However, that case involved the issue of which presidential candidates’ names should be printed on a ballot. That is different than the Keyes case, because the November election is over, and no one argues that the individual presidential elector candidates themselves are not eligible. The Keyes lawsuit asks that the California Secretary of State not certify the election returns for president until the plaintiffs receive the evidence they seek about the factual dispute.
Guess what? December 15 has passed and thus this lawsuit is moot…
sayabule1 on December 17, 2008 at 4:43 PM
We talk a lot about the media not digging into the Dems, especially Obama, but yet we see “our side” doing the exact same thing with this issue (among others). We complain about how McCain didn’t go after Obama, and let him get away with anything he wanted, and then we have Newt, HA, etc all doing the same thing, and getting ready to grab their ankles. If you’re going to post on this subject, at least try to show you took an objective look into it (and saying “we should just ignore so and so part of the Constitution” doesn’t really stand).
When “our side” starts attacking the only people left who will actually hold Obama or the Democrats to question, then I think it’s really time for the “oogedy-boogedy” part of the party to take the movement back.
Rainsford on December 17, 2008 at 4:55 PM
Are you saying fraud — which is what we’d have if Osama Obama doesn’t meet (and knows he doesn’t meet) the criteria for Presidential eligibility as set down by the Constitution — can’t be tried/punished ex post facto?
Saying “he got away with it” and letting it drop sets one hell of a bad precedent, to say the least.
Thanks to the cowardice of the Supremes and go-along-to-get-along attitudes of some “pundits” (and some HA commenters) another nail has been slapped on the coffin of the Constitution.
Can’t wait to see the revised version, as written by Obama and his merry band of Marxists, now that upholding the law is “moot.”
MrScribbler on December 17, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Moron. But at least you’re finally being partially honest about your stupidity.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:09 PM
Calm down MrScribbler, I am just saying the Keyes lawsuit is DOA. However, the other suits (i.e., the to be filed after January 20) have a better shot because those litigants will have standing. In other words, no standing until Barry becomes President and enforces laws pursuant to Article II of the Constitution. Got it?
sayabule1 on December 17, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Same to you. You keep exercising your authority over the the viability of a person for president in your capacity as an anonymous internet commenter, though. Keep fighting the good fight.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:10 PM
I won’t be as hard on you as you just were with yourself, because I happen to think you are smarter than that and you are definately aware of the old saying concerning “assumptions”…but I am glad you came to the proper conclusion…we dont know, and not knowing is the problem at hand.
javamartini on December 17, 2008 at 5:12 PM
So you have the facts and “logic” all lined up, let’s see how many facts you have…
1)How do you know he has spent of $1 million dollars on this?
2) And tell us whom he has bribed?
He has met the requirements of providing the state department with the accepted proof of birth, he doesn’t need to do any more then that…it has served Hawaiians for over 50 years without any state or country not accepting it as official.
The problem with “logic” is if you want to use it, you have to live with it…and I have a feeling when you say logic, you mean what you “feel”.
So to be logical, answer my two questions. Those were accusation, I am sure you have some logical explanation for those accusations.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Exactly.
And Joe the Plumber assumed that the Ohio state officials weren’t snooping in on his personal information, but were doing their jobs as they were supposed to be doing. If no one investigated them, maybe some arrogant pr1ck like him would also say with absolute certainty that the Ohio officials were just doing their jobs, and that was just fine and dandy by him.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Now, that was just brilliant …
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Yep. These folks are just cracking up, now.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Oh, come on. You can address me directly, just like yesterday, with lots of asterisks to replace letters in words that aren’t very nice.
By the way, you’re continuing to prove you have no infatuation with me by continuing to focus on me. Way to go.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Absolutely. I explain where the authority for this whole mess lays, note that there has been no news of any qualms they have with Obama through this entire election, am skeptical as hell of a truther lawyer who sued Bush for 9/11, and you respond by calling me a moron…but I’m cracking up. You got it.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:22 PM
can someone do something about this a*hole’s persecution complex? that and the fact that he thinks that the world revolves around him.
oh, and the arrogant part.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Let’s use your logic.
You claim that because Obama has not produced his birth certificate, that there is no birth certificate.
Fine.
Because the state elections divisions have expressed no problems with Obama’s eligibility, there are no problems with Obama’s eligibility.
Does that work, or are we now relegating elections divisions to the same place as the Warren Commission and 9/11 Commission?
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Hello, mister logic? Are you out there?
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 5:24 PM
I never claim the world revolves around me. Only yours, as you talk about me even when you haven’t the guts to address me directly.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:25 PM
You don’t happen to have that link to support your accusation do you?
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 5:26 PM
seriously.
he’s not right. in the head.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 5:27 PM
I rest my case.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:28 PM
Yet another person with the name Kennedy watching out for our constitutional rights.
Done That on December 17, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Here is Fukino’s entire press release statement:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: October 31, 2008 08-93
STATEMENT BY DR. CHIYOME FUKINO
“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai’i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai’i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have 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.
“No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai’i.”
[end of statement]
Yeah, she definitely says he was born in Hawaii. End of story. //sarc
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Chicken and Egg but in this case we know. First law or EO Obama signs will give standing to anyone it affects. Then the courts will have to consider it. Could be this is what the SCOTUS is waiting for. Then Biden will become President and it will effect government less. The constitutional provision says the President can’t act unless natural born.
Ed this is far from over. I agree you are being snookered just like the rest of the feckless commentators and blogers. I wonder what Obama or the MSM is threatening you all with. You are all just falling into line like a good communist should. You make me sick. All we are asking is what any good employer would. We want proof he is qualified for the job we are hiring him for. Yet he refuses to offer proof so you attack the us with insane accusations, just like the left you claim is wrong when they do it. Well just like McCain it is time to register as a Democrat Ed et all.
Steveangell on December 17, 2008 at 5:35 PM
I would classify it more as a defense mechanism. He’s admitted that his whole argument has come down to his assumptions about things which are untrue, but he doesn’t know that they are untrue because the media hasn’t reported on it (big shock!) and no SecState has complained about having screwed up.
Of course, the FACT that Roger Calero (definitely NOT a natural-born citizen by any stretch of the imagination) showed up on 5 state ballots PROVES that Madison’s “assumptions” that some official entity is verifying eligibility are ill-founded … but those are just facts that get in the way of Mad’s assumptions.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Since the birth requirement for President does not matter why should age? I suggest NY Governor Patterson keep an eye on Chelsea Clinton for the Senate seat and give her as serious a look as Princess Caroline is getting. In his view he may clearly see, as the rest of us do, that Chelsea will open his eyes in a way that makes her the obvious candidate for Senate.
He’ll see what I mean.
grdred944 on December 17, 2008 at 5:36 PM
MadisonConservative,
Explain how Roger Calero fits in with your assumption that some official entities were checking eligibility before allowing people on the Presidential ballots.
Or, do you have the integrity to just admit that your assumption is just wrong, since 5 states allowed an OBVIOUSLY ineligible candidate on their Presidential ballots?
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:41 PM
I’m sorry, what was it that I said that was untrue?
And, if I may…assuming that a government agency didn’t do its job is rather a bit more reasonable than assuming that a guy with no birth certificate managed to get to the point of winning the presidency. Talk about a leap of faith.
Here’s a challenge: Answer without an insult being the only word in your first sentence.
As for the persecution complex that wise_man refers to, it would go away the minute he stops using his posting ability almost solely to talk about me, praise people for insulting me, etc.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Well, they did a hell of a good job since they let Roger Calero on the ballot in 5 states.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 5:44 PM
I’ve been over this with you. The fact that 10% of state elections divisions counted a guy who was never going to win the presidency on the ballot doesn’t prove that every single elections division is either so corrupt or incompetent as to ignore Barack Obama’s inability to meet three basic criteria for running as the president of the United States to such an extent that a month before the inauguration, not a single word has been uttered in protest by any of them.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM
See? He’s doing it again. Its a sickness.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM
So do you think that is it? You find this, and it is the end of your research, and you have all the answers?
The official spokesperson said Obama was born in Hawaii…
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 5:47 PM
I’ll repeat for the selectively literate: As for the persecution complex that wise_man refers to, it would go away the minute he stops using his posting ability almost solely to talk about me, praise people for insulting me, etc.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:47 PM
I imagine that most of the people who were supposed to certify PEBO just assumed that a sitting US Senator would never have the balls to run for the presidency if he wasn’t qualified by law.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 5:48 PM
This is the story you have been quoting. I just don’t read it the way you do.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Then why do they even exist, considering the number of Senators who run for POTUS?
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM
wise_man takes more abuse (about McCain) than just about any other regular poster on this site, and he’s pretty good natured about it. And the rest of us Proofers and Definers have been called all sorts of names, from the beginning, and coming right from the top (Ed, Allah and Michelle), so, excuse me if I don’t cry for any supposed abuse you might take on this thread.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM
and now he’s spamming the page with copies of what he already posted.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Huh? I don’t follow.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Well that’s good, because if that’s the case, someone else got ahold of his account:
Yeah, and that’s far from the first time he’s posted like that.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:53 PM
mrsmwp at 5:35
Exactly. I believe HI officials have also said that his birth certificate is sealed. That would indicate, Madison Conservative, that nobody from the “elections division” has seen it. The FEC was sued by Berg because they are the group which is to ensure a fair and valid election. The SOS’s of NJ and CT – both of which are REQUIRED BY THEIR STATE LAW to verify eligibility of all candidates whose names are placed on the ballot – have outright admitted that they DID NOT DO THEIR JOBS.
And just like with Blagojevich, there ain’t a dang thing we lowly citizens can do to insist that our vetted and voted leaders still have to FOLLOW THE LAW.
That’s what this is about. It’s about lawlessness and about rendering the whole US population impotent to hold their elected officials accountable to the law. Why is anybody checking into Blago’s alleged illegal activities? He was VETTED, for God’s sake. He can do no wrong! (So goes the logic behind a Congressman contacted by a constituent about certifying Obama’s eligibility. “He was vetted twice.” Well, so was Blago, so why are we checking up on him?)
I am so disgusted that Ed couldn’t even get it right what the HI officials said. BAsic factual errors. And I respected Ed. I have no interest in hearing from any of the “credible” people who bend over so the crooks in this nation can screw us all.
I’m out of here.
justincase on December 17, 2008 at 5:53 PM
*sigh*
It proves that any assumption that some official entities are certifying eligibility before allowing people on ballots is ill-founded, at best.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:53 PM
Since you are the densest human being on this site, I’ll lay it out straight: stop posting about me all the time, because it’s almost all you do. Stop posting about me. Stop.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:54 PM
Oh, really.
I copied this part of your supposedly verbatim quotation above — “hopefully this will put an end to the speculation” — and put it into Google. I got a whopping six million responses.
Oh, wait, I’m sorry. Did I say “six million?” I meant SIX.
That’s right, not2bright — SIX. And none of the links had anything to do with Obama’s birth certificate. Adding “Obama” to the search reduces the number from six to ONE.
But don’t worry — I won’t call you a dirty liar just yet. do what I did in my post — link your evidence.
Remember, you said it was spoken by ‘the Official spokesperson’ from Hawaii, so it had better. Get going.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 5:54 PM
I think you’ll live.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Because five out of fifty let a no-name with no chance on the ticket?
Again, a leap of faith.
My point is that Senators run all of the time for president. Strangely, every time there has been no huge outcry about a lack of media coverage of their verification of presidential candidates or winners. In other words, this outrage is a first.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:57 PM
So you approve of that kind of posting as long as the person is on your side. Nice.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 5:57 PM
See? He also bookmarks comments from other pages so he can make off-topic comments to feed his mental disorder and persecution complex.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 6:01 PM
I would think that a COLB that is accepted by every government agency in the world would be acceptable…a document that every Hawaiian born in Hawaii has been given for over 50 years would be acceptable.
If you were going to hire him, you would accept that, or you would never hire a Hawaiian…
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:01 PM
Just one allowing an ineligible candidate on the ballot is enough to prove the ASSUMPTION that candidates are being verified to be unfounded. Once you have one clear-cut case, then the onus is on you to find out if there actually are entities checking eligibility. Your intellectual right to assume has been taken away by the known counter-example. This is pretty straightforward stuff.
Approve? No. Am I terribly bothered by it? No.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Oh, I see what you mean. But still, with basically open borders and a global world we had best get some kind of standard and some group that must verify people from now going forward or we could continue to have these problems.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 6:04 PM
When I show this, you will apologize, and no longer post your nonsense about it not being official, correct?
BTW, your snide remark is probably an indication of your intelligence…I have linked this numerous times. But one more time, after you acknowledge you will apologize for your being snippy, and that you will drop this subject.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Oh, Madison, also, I believe this was actually started by Biden’s campaign against John McCain’s eligibility so he kind of opened the whole can of worms and gave Berg the idea.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 6:05 PM
I saw NOTHING! I know NOTHING! I was not there! I did not even get up the morning he was born!
OberfeldwebelSchultz on December 17, 2008 at 6:06 PM
They seek it here, they seek it there
The Constitutionalists seek it everywhere
If you should see it, please do give a yell!
That demmed elusive Obama birth certificate that could be from Hell
They seek it here, they seek it there
The Constitutionalists seek it everywhere
Oh, Barry, how the Constitutionalists do implore you
Simply to take it out of your lock box or from under your bed
With all your hiding
It’s a chore to look ahead!
They seek it here, they seek it there
Those Constitutionalists seek it everywhere!
Barry gives the Constitutionalists nothing but frustration
Sink me! He’s a spoilsport
Each and every demmed revelation
He and his lawyers have been able to cut short
They seek it here, they seek it there
The Constitutionalists seek it everywhere
Is it in Hawaii or in Kenya, do tell?
One thing we know for sure
This country’s Constitution sure seems to be going down the dell!
PercyB on December 17, 2008 at 6:15 PM
Okay right2bright, turn about is fairplay. I will provide you with your own assertions and you provide me with citations that support them:
1. An official Hawaiian State spokesperson in an official statement from the Hawaiian government has officially confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.
2. The original information on a birth certificate after an amendment has changed that information with also be reflected in a COLB as opposed to just the amended information
3. No person born outside of Hawaii has ever been issued a COLB indicating that they were born in Hawaii
4. A COLB “is accepted, and has been, as the official birth document by every state agency and every country in the world.”
I suspect that you are just making all this stuff up. I have seen the quotes and read the statutes. There are legitimate questions to which we do not have answers. The fact that you dismiss each question shows you are a shill for willing ignorance. Please, I know you can provide links, do so if you can…
tommylotto on December 17, 2008 at 6:15 PM
I agree, but as has been said oft, I question the timing. It seems like the group of people interested in the effort greatly overlap with the conservatives who are openly claiming to be proudly suffering from ODS, “not mah president”, all that kind of garbage. The apparent reasoning behind it comes less from looking out from the country, and more from a bunch of sore losers looking to keep dying hope alive. I’m not saying that is necessarily you, but plenty of posters here occupy both categories, and it’s eerily reminiscient of 2000.
Heh, um, backing up a 9/11 truther’s claim by saying Biden did the same thing doesn’t really bolster his credibility in my eyes. God love ya, what am I talkin about?
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 6:16 PM
Since when does an isolated example disprove all faith in 50 different agencies?
The logic used by birthers boggles my mind. They refuse to believe the most easily assumed things, but believe unprecedented things that have never happened in this nation’s history.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Well, as a recently registered chronic lurker, I have to say this is a low for HA.
Lumping those of us who have rather serious misgivings about the truthfulness of our president select and his background with 9/11 troofers… it’s like the blogs I used to like, trust and respect have gone batshit crazy, with Charles “Lenin” Johnson leading the way.
Sad and pathetic.
See you at Atlas Shrugs…
P.S. – Madison “Conservative” – you really, really seem like a dick.
TeamDub on December 17, 2008 at 6:19 PM
So do you. By the way, the “conservative” schtick is old and tired. After people like you have called Michelle Malkin “conservative”, I don’t really give a damn what you think about how conservative I am, because you’re wrong.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 6:22 PM
OK, tommylotto rules.
But none of those things will be proven. Except by citations to liberals in the news media. And they know the truth about this, just as they know Chicago is crooked.
No conspiracy, no evil secret group, just lousy, crooked people.
IlikedAUH2O on December 17, 2008 at 6:23 PM
see what he just did there? You criticize him, and then he makes a logical leap to suggest that you are also criticizing Michelle.
It’s a mental disorder.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 6:25 PM
right2bright wrote:
Dude, YOU are the one who posted this:
I did a search of what YOU posted. If it’s not what was actually said and/or written verbatim, that’s not MY fault. It’s YOUR fault.
A good indication of your intelligence is that you don’t know how to properly cut-and-paste or use quotation marks.
None of you people equating people who want this issue settled with 9/11 conspiratists have any right calling anybody else “snippy.”
You claim to have linked it “numerous times” but apparently, you’re not familiar enough with it to correctly quote it. And why not just do it again? What’s wrong with you, buddy? Are you a paraplegic who uses his toes to type, and linking is oppressively difficult for you? If not, you’ve got the same problem as B-HO: You claim a monopoly on the truth, but don’t feel like you should have to prove anything to anybody.
I have showed you the evidence proving my assertion. Think you can contradict me? Lay down your cards, if you got ‘em.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 6:27 PM
Spending every one of your posts talking about me? Yes, it is a mental disorder. Stop.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 6:28 PM
I am leaving #1 for your buddy after he acknowledges he will apoligize…as should you.
#3, I stand by that, do you have an example?…if not, then there is no example, ergo, proof of it ever happening.
#4, do you have a state or country that does not accept it? Then there is no example, ergo, proof of it not being accepted. That is after 50 years of being the official document for all Hawaiian’s.
#2, here
arguing with you tommylotto is like taking candy from a baby…
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:29 PM
hey I wanted you to stop lying about McCain, but you kept right on. so get stuffed, tough guy.
wise_man on December 17, 2008 at 6:31 PM
When you quit your sniveling, and act like a grown up, you will get what you respectfully ask for.
I am a parent, and I know enough not to give into temper tantrums.
Now all I ask, is that after I post this, will you apologize?
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:31 PM
I never did lie about McCain. Stop using every one of your posts to talk about me. Stop.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 6:32 PM
BTW, your buddy tommylotto also “Googled” and couldn’t find where the amended doc. was to be marked…you guys aren’t so good at that, are you?
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:33 PM
I went to the website about the ammending of certificates. It says when you ammend an original certificate of birth then the info is crossed out and they stamp “ammended” on it. This is exactly why we want to see the original certificate of birth. The COLB, which is all we’ve seen, would only reflect the new info on the original. Do you see what I’m saying? The COLB does not have the cross outs and the ammended stamp. That is only on the original vault copy. That is how I am reading the info you provided.
mrsmwp on December 17, 2008 at 6:37 PM
I am sure you people don’t want to hear this but:
1) I am not a 911 truther or Kennedy Assination nut.
2) My mother-in-law ran the Dept of Elections for an east coast state for decades. She was honest and worked hard.
3) I hold several degrees, including a JD.
4) I have been a success in life.
On 2, above, she never checked these things and just accepted paperwork from the parties and etc. Ironically, we used to (rarely) talk about a Manchurian Candidate or fake that was raised in the US but a fraud and how some group would do it.
And look where I stand on this.
IlikedAUH2O on December 17, 2008 at 6:39 PM
right2bright dodged further:
If you’re a parent, and this is the way you treat your children, excuse me while I get on my knees and thank Almighty God I was born to my father and not you. If your ego is so freaking delicate you can’t just provide proof of what you wrote on a blog without demanding an unnecessary conciliatory act, I sincerely hope your kids take after their mother.
The more you delay providing the link, the more I suspect you either can’t find it or just made the whole thing up.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 6:42 PM
hey right2bright and madisonconservative, good news for you two trolls , match.com now offers Men seeking men options, you 2 would make a great couple. trolling forums and insulting folks while looking at cosmo. seriously, ive read all the comments and every 5 posts madison put his 2cents in, why not just go to the daileykos and spew your bs there. Im not going to say your stupid because i’ve read your post and you make sense on every issue but this “birther” issue, but you are really annoying and arrogant. also you call others idiots for not accepting your arguments, while completely ignoring others logical argument
next- HI officials were not even permitted to say if obama was born there, they hinted at it, but they still have no proof. A statement without facts is nothing more than a statement.
lastly – if Obama were truly a US citizen then he would of at least shown somebody by now, such as minority leader so they can say “ive seen it, its real” but o well, With obama there will be many more and larger fish to fry
Donut on December 17, 2008 at 6:45 PM
10% worth of “isolated” examples which DISPROVE your assumption about those 5 states. On what does your assumption now rest for the remaining 45 states, now? Please be explicit, since I was explicit about why your assumption was totally incorrect for 5 of the states. I could also show you info to destroy your “assumption” for most of the others (SecStates saying that they counted on the parties to do the verifications – which is not official, in any Constitutional way), but I’d like to hear your argument for maintaining this “assumption”.
With the argument you just offered, I would caution you not to try and refer to logic. If you were in a logic class of mine, you would fail miserably.
Assuming is always easy. So what? I prefer not to assume what I can find out for sure and I prefer not to take the word of a known fraud, like the Precedent-Elect.
There were so many unprecedented things in, and about, this election that I am really surprised that you would offer this to support your view. I mean, really.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 6:48 PM
When you calm down, you can ask me politly, and I will give you the quotes…you won’t bully me.
If you really want to see them, you will ask like a gentleman.
So far I have answered every question, but you guys haven’t answered any of mine.
Please show me the link where Obama has spent $500,00 to $1,000,000 on defending this?
Now tell me, tommylotto had statements, and I answered them, and he never came back and said “good research, I missed that”.
So when I post these things, I don’t like get blown off especially when you say things like:
And if you were born to me, you would now be an either a the head of litigation for a Fortune 25 company, or like my son, the head of the legal contract department for a Fortune 100 company.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:53 PM
Well, if you were not so much like your other buddies and asked me nicely, I would have provided the quotes to back up what I am posting.
And he posted the COLB, no one has a problem but some internet guy who is a “self described” expert, he had 5 things wrong, and it turned out all 5 weren’t wrong…and then you have your leader Berg, who has a lawsuit against Bush for planning 9/11…yeah you keep real good company.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 6:57 PM
55 presidential elections in our nation’s history (I could be off by one or two), 50 state elections divisions. That’s more than just a few.
Your pronouncement that these offices are irrelevant, despite their being the authority in charge of exactly what you people are crowing about, is based on the adding of a candidate who was ineligible to the ballot by 5 of these states in one election. That, so far, leaves 45 states that did not in that election, plus every other election. Let’s do the math.
55 elections times 50 state election divisions = 2750 state elections overseen by a state election division. Of those 2750, you have produced for me, as evidence of their complete corruption, incompetence, or god knows what else, one election where 5 of these put a candidate on the ballot, who was ineligible, who had butkus for exposure, and had no chance of winning whatsoever.
Well, what can I say? You’ve convinced me. Sirhan Sirhan, Jimmy Hoffa, and Elvis are behind it all.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 7:02 PM
Thanks for that.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 7:03 PM
If you go to the website, pack one page (here) then you will see it is referencing the COLB
It is talking about the COLB is the document that must have it marked and stamped or noted as “altered” on the COLB. That was not on Obama’s COLB.
All of these things have been taken out of context.
The first indication was when they were saying “He wasn’t born in Hawaii” which was true, he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii didn’t exist when he was born…but they kept harping on this as “proof”, until it was brought out that Hawaii didn’t exist.
Then someone said you could change the COLB for $3, which was true…except there, as you can see, much more to it then that.
And it goes on and on. Each argument, has an answer, so to keep the controversy going, another one is presented.
9/11 have been doing that since 9/12…
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 7:09 PM
right2bright:
There must be something wrong with your keyboard. I think what you meant was this:
You again, delaying further:
Presuming that’s not a crock too, judging from your behavior here, they are probably the type of lawyers that contribute to the profession’s sterling reputation.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 7:10 PM
I already told you, you won’t bully me…if you ask me nicely, like mrsmwp did, then you would have had your answer an hour ago.
You must think being a “tough guy” poster is more important.
Or you don’t want the truth.
Now when I post this, you will say you’re sorry and that you has stepped out of line, right?
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 7:19 PM
Stick to this election, Einstein, because I pointed out 5 STATES, which means, by your dependable assumption method, that you would have to multiply that by the number of popular elections they have held for President and come up with, still, around 10%, depending on when they entered the Union and instituted their Presidential election mechanisms. Like I said, you would be failing logic class in an embarrassing way.
P.S. Certifying entities would do their work as one applies to be placed on the ballot, and that has nothing to do with exposure or the chance of winning (the threshold of which is passed in the petitions submitted), so stop with that bit of stupidity.
But, you have just completed the descent into total idiocy and blatant intellectual dishonesty, so there is nothing further to be gained by this. You are set in your ASSUMPTION. Good for you. Assume away. Deny all evidence that obviates your assumptions. That’s probably best for your mental health.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 7:19 PM
A reminder:
Still only six hits.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 7:20 PM
right2bright:
I want the truth. You’re the one that doesn’t want to admit it.
L.N. Smithee on December 17, 2008 at 7:22 PM
So now we’re assuming that because these five states put him on the ballot in one election, they were therefore undependable in every other election? Wow, it just keeps on getting better through your logic, doesn’t it?
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM
All I am asking is for one thing…if I post it, you will apologize for your ridiculous statements.
I was somewhat subdued, considering your attacks on my character. The problem with people like you, it that you attack, and when stood up to, you can’t handle it like a grown up. You think you can attack, and you think any retort or defense, is a counter attack.
Now I have offered you a chance to reverse that several times, but you refuse.
The choice is yours…either back off, or continue your attacks. It doesn’t matter to me, but I am willing to work with you; but on grown up terms, not your nasty terms.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Coming from someone assuming that the winner of the US presidential election doesn’t have a birth certificate, that’s rich. I’m looking down my nose at you over there because you’re making the unlikely assumption, and you’re looking down your nose at me because I’m making the likely assumption. We’re both working on assumptions, and yours doesn’t have the better odds. Not my fault.
MadisonConservative on December 17, 2008 at 7:35 PM
I dropped the link, but someone a few days ago had the link that showed the official who documents the validity of national candidates. The Federal official who, after the election, actually does register SSN, Certificates of Birth, Passport information, and some other items. It was kind of interesting that there actually is a person(s) that does that. I looked briefly but couldn’t find the link. It wasn’t a judge, I am pretty sure, it was a state dept. official.
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Ed, you obviously have not been following the legal writing on this issue. This issue will not be over as long as the future President Obama intends to sign new laws that have criminal penalties. Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D. writes “the defendant in this hypothetical criminal prosecution can invoke the Sixth Amendment: namely, “In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right * * * to have compulsory process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor * * * .” Presumably, a properly represented defendant would subpoena Obama himself as the indispensable witness, requiring him to bring into court whatever records were in his possession or subject to his control that in any way evidenced, related to, or referred to the time, place, and circumstances of his birth, or to his citizenship, application for citizenship, renunciation of citizenship, or oath of allegiance in or to any country. This would include the original of his supposed Hawaiian birth certificate; every subsequent Hawaiian “certification of live birth” or like document created by public authorities; every other “birth certificate” or equivalent document whenever, wherever, and by whomever generated in the name of “Barack Obama” or any of his several other names; every document submitted to an educational institution that contained information or representations concerning his place of birth or citizenship; and so on. In the interest of expediting the process, the custodians of records in Hawaii would also be subpoenaed to testify and to produce all relevant documents subject to their control. To be sure, Obama himself might invoke a privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment as the grounds for refusing to testify or to disgorge inculpatory papers. But custodians of public records in Hawaii or elsewhere throughout the United States have no such privilege. And no Hawaiian or other law of the States or the General Government purporting to make those records “confidential” can frustrate the Sixth Amendment.”
marti124 on December 17, 2008 at 7:37 PM
That’s an interesting website…a lot to go through, interesting on the 6th day of Jan. what will happen…
right2bright on December 17, 2008 at 7:43 PM
p.s. Ed, please provide a URL to a specific quote or written document by a Hawaii official in authority who “have publicly attested to the accuracy of the certification Obama released in June”. I have never seen such, only attestings to the fact that Obama has a Hawaii Birth Certificate and it’s in their files. I have never seen a quote that says any official has viewed the long form birth certificate. I asked this once before and the only thing you provided then was journalists concluding such or in one case, one Hawaii press official obviously concluding such and used such speculative verbage. As long as Hawaii allows (a) birth certificates for those born abroad or (b) amended short-form birth certificates, the public has no reliable evidence Obama meets the Constitutional requirements. The key word here is “reliable”. What Obama posted on his web site would not be deemed “reliable” in any court of law and no court has stated such. The cases denied so far were denied without comment without any judicial commentary on the merits of the case — at most judicial commentary has indicated “lack of standing” and nothing more, meaning the merits did not need a ruling or judicial review.
marti124 on December 17, 2008 at 7:45 PM
I see your grasp of English is as poor as your grasp of logic. I am assuming nothing. I want proof by an official body that has seen the original BC and verified it. That has not been done, so there is no place left but the SCOTUS.
And, for your info, I am less concderned about the BC than about the dual citizenship and the definition of natural-born citizen. I am one who believes that the intent of the ‘natural born citizen’ clause was to restrict the Presidency to people, born American, who have never held an allegiance to any nation but the US and I want the SCOTUS to rule on the actual parameters. But, I ASSUME that you think a US President who holds five different citizenships (just for an example) would have been perfectly okay with the Founders.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
progressoverpeace on December 17, 2008 at 7:46 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »