Quotes of the day

posted at 9:30 pm on August 1, 2009 by Allahpundit

“There may be perfectly benign answers to all of this. But the real question is: Why don’t the media — the watchdog legions who trekked to Sarah Palin’s Alaska hometown to scour for every kernel of gossip, and who were so desperate for Bush dirt that they ran with palpably forged military records — want to dig into Obama’s background?

Who cares that Hawaii’s full state records would doubtless confirm what we already know about Obama’s birthplace? They would also reveal interesting facts about Obama’s life: the delivering doctor, how his parents described themselves, which of them provided the pertinent information, etc. Wasn’t the press once in the business of interesting — and even not-so-interesting — news?…

The issue is: What is the true personal history of the man who has been sold to us based on nothing but his personal history? On that issue, Obama has demonstrated himself to be an unreliable source and, sadly, we can’t trust the media to get to the bottom of it. What’s wrong with saying, to a president who promised unprecedented ‘transparency’: Give us all the raw data and we’ll figure it out for ourselves?”

***
“But before liberals begin to smirk, here’s a poll from 2007, in which 35 percent of Democrats said that President Bush knew in advance about the 9/11 attacks, and 26 percent were not sure.

So if 58 percent of Republicans are living in a delusional fantasy world because they are out of power, then 61 percent of Democrats were doing the same thing until just recently (perhaps they still are). It’s a clean, apples-to-apples comparison with a clear lesson: People get a bit kooky when they’re out of power, Democrats about 3 points kookier — which is probably within the margin of error…

Tamryn then asked a good question: Back in the Bush Era, did any Democratic members of Congress avoid questions about whether ‘Bush Knew?’ On the spot, I couldn’t remember. But the truth is, they didn’t just avoid the question — they stoked the flames of conspiracy theories and in some cases embraced them.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 5 6 7

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM

You mean Gibbs. Obama is indifferent I think.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:30 AM

Putting the onus on Hawaii is a cop out. Obama is the sole proprietor of his BC.
You can keep saying that but it doesn’t change the fact that the document you seek is located in an office of the State of Hawaii. Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 10:59 AM

Disingenuous grasping at straws. As if Hawaii would not release a copy of the LFBC to Obama.

Time for another apology Pablo. Your posts are insulting. To yourself.

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 11:32 AM

I was on your side earlier in the thread but Pablo has made it pretty clear that he understands your point.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:25 AM

Of course he understands my point. That’s why he hasn’t answered it. He’s assuming that I’m a “birther”. My only question has been why, if the information on the COLB is the same as the BC … won’t Obama put the matter to rest by releasing it.

Continually saying the state of Hawaii seals all records is not an answer to that question.

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:27 AM

No, Obama loves his media because he knows the birthers will be mocked and denounced as kooks by his willing little mindless media hacks – just as their mentor Saul Alinsky instructs.

libertylady on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

You mean Gibbs. Obama is indifferent I think.

Oh, I’ll bet he giggles.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Don’t think it will happen before 2013 … better to win in 2012.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:21 AM

The courts, to include the USSC, are reactionary, stagnant until moved. Thus one enters a motion before the court. One moves the court.

Thus, when one files a motion, alleges a violation of law, or rights, whatever, one is asking the court to become involved. Until such is done, the courts are not to be involved. Basic, but pertinent.

When so moved, the court then responds.

A court can find merit in the motion, and the case moves to the docket.

A court can find that there is no prima facie evidence of merit…the case is rejected…the court refuses to be moved.

A court can refuse to hear a motion a priori if it believes that the individual making the motion has no standing before the court. For example, a citizen of Ohio who has never set foot in Idaho, filing a motion before an Idaho court for a transgression which is alleged to have happened in Michigan.

What the court will not do, and this is applicable to the USSC as well, will be to raise a case out of whole cloth, move on its own, and enter into deliberations as to the legal outcomes of such a case.

Unless or until the courts find that a person has legal standing before the court in making a motion to the court (several cases have been rejected thus so far) or unless the courts have before them a motion that indicates a violation of law has taken place and there is a prosecuting attorney/states attorney willing to pursue the case, no court will hear this.

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Of course he understands my point. That’s why he hasn’t answered it.

Morse code? Latin? Braille? Semaphore? What medium do you need my answer in? Written English doesn’t seem to be get through to you.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Very nice. But I think we’re basically in agreement ?

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

You see, states don’t just hand out BC’s, even if you tell them it’s OK to pass yours around.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:24 AM

I’m pretty sure the state of Hawaii would accommodate an Obama request to release it.

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

Yep. This thing won’t hit the courts for a long long time, if ever.

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:37 AM

No, Obama loves his media because he knows the birthers will be mocked and denounced as kooks by his willing little mindless media hacks – just as their mentor Saul Alinsky instructs.

libertylady on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Which requires a target, and the birthers provide a dandy one. He giggles, and he loves them for the distraction and the easy pickings they provide. They’re a barrel full of fish, ready for shooting.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:38 AM

I’m pretty sure the state of Hawaii would accommodate an Obama request to release it.

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

Oh, you are? That’s nice.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM

Obama request
darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

And he’ll be making that request as soon as the USSC rules on NBC.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM

Unless or until the courts find that a person has legal standing before the court in making a motion to the court (several cases have been rejected thus so far) or unless the courts have before them a motion that indicates a violation of law has taken place and there is a prosecuting attorney/states attorney willing to pursue the case, no court will hear this.

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Right. And even if it does happen, Obama will be long out of office before such a case is ever finally resolved.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Morse code? Latin? Braille? Semaphore? What medium do you need my answer in? Written English doesn’t seem to be get through to you.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM

Your reply to date is … the state of Hawaii seals all records, and it’s locked up in Hawaii and Obama isn’t in Hawaii, and he could release it but it’s locked up in Hawaii because they lock everything up, and states don’t show everyone your birth certificate even if you say it’s ok because they’re locked up and you don’t even have to be in Hawaii.

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:41 AM

And he’ll be making that request as soon as the USSC rules on NBC.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM

And, we will have to wait until someone with standing before the court files a motion in a lower federal or state court on the matter of NBC…and that case being accepted, and a ruling granted and then being contested.

Are there presently any cases regarding “natural born citizen” status advancing through the legal system?

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:43 AM

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Let me spell it out to you since you just don’t seem to get the point.

You’re arguing about the rules. The rules don’t matter if they are not enforced and Obama totally understands this.

So he’s not going to help you.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Your reply to date is … the state of Hawaii seals all records, and it’s locked up in Hawaii and Obama isn’t in Hawaii, and he could release it but it’s locked up in Hawaii because they lock everything up, and states don’t show everyone your birth certificate even if you say it’s ok because they’re locked up and you don’t even have to be in Hawaii.

GAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!! Are you blind? You freaking quoted it! Read it. Comprehend. Obama. Loves. Birthers. He doesn’t want this to go away. He wants to mock you. He wants to use you.

At this point, I’d be happy if you’d just read the stuff you quote.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Let me spell it out to you since you just don’t seem to get the point.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM

I tried that. It doesn’t work.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Are there presently any cases regarding “natural born citizen” status advancing through the legal system?

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Wikipedia claims that NBC has never been tested (over 200 years).

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Are there presently any cases regarding “natural born citizen” status advancing through the legal system?

well, there was one…

runner on August 2, 2009 at 11:49 AM

Let me spell it out to you since you just don’t seem to get the point.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Do you people not see the forest for the trees? You’re on and on bleating about “rules” and how Obama’s using it to mock people. You buy more into this than “birthers”.

This is hurting him. The only reason the Obama media comes out is to try to minimize the growing number of people who find this particular action by Obama questionable. It doesn’t work.

Good luck. Yes, Obama is using them … hahahahaha … we’re so smart. Oh those silly birthers! It’s locked up and Obama’s mocking them! hahahahahaha

Good Lord … get.out.of.the.box.obama’s.put.you.in

You’re the ones being used.

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:56 AM

This is hurting him.
darwin on August 2, 2009 at 11:56 AM

Not enough and too late.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 11:57 AM

I tried that. It doesn’t work.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:47 AM

I had your point from your first comment. Apparently you believe if you say something people have no recourse but to believe your awesome logic.

Good luck …

darwin on August 2, 2009 at 12:00 PM

I had your point from your first comment.

Apparently not.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM

I had your point from your first comment.

Apparently not.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM

Let’s try again.

Darwin. Do you think Gibbs even knows for sure whether Obama was born in Hawaii or Kenya? And do you think he cares?

The problem is that the time to challenge a candidate on a technical issue like this is 12 months before the election.

At first, I thought Pablo was just trying to blow you off but after a while (before he admitted he understood what you were saying) I realized that he was just not accepting your premise (that Obama might cooperate).

There are simply not enough people who think that this is an important question that it will ever matter. Sad but true.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:10 PM

This is showing up in Los Angeles of all places WOW.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/08/01/obama-joker-poster-popping-los-angeles

Dr Evil on August 2, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Obama. Loves. Birthers. He doesn’t want this to go away. He wants to mock you. He wants to use you.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Which birthers does he love, the ones who question the 1961 Hawaii birth or the ones who question the 1965 Selma birth? He can’t love both of them, can he?

Buddahpundit on August 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM

There is a reason he used the word “Audacity” in the title of his book. It really only takes Audacity doesn’t it.

Dr Evil on August 2, 2009 at 12:22 PM

There are simply not enough people who think that this is an important question…

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Yet.

backwoods conservative on August 2, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Dr Evil on August 2, 2009 at 12:22 PM

I think that’s the point. Sealing his records simply prevents scrutiny. This works in his favor no matter what they really say.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Yet.

backwoods conservative on August 2, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Ever.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:26 PM

If you don’t like Obama you’ll love this.

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/obamas51strip1.jpg

Click to enlarge.

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:33 PM

I think the south get it right that Obama is untrustworthy…the just express it in weird ways.

tomas on August 2, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Ever.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Maybe. Whether or not he ever releases his records, the concerns about his secrecy could add to the growing awareness of his incompetence in a way that might put enough pressure on him and his liberal cohorts that his radical agenda can be stopped. I certainly don’t expect him to cooperate out of the goodness of his America-hating heart.

If he keeps driving the economy into the ground, there’s no telling how many people might turn on him. Throw in some more “the police acted stupidly moments” and he could be toast.

backwoods conservative on August 2, 2009 at 12:38 PM

I don’t think I did. That was easy.

RightOFLeft on August 2, 2009 at 5:19 AM

Suit yourself.

You didn’t read it. You admitted it. Apparently, that I knew, right away, that you didn’t read it meant absolutely nothing to you was a reason for you to dig your heels in and refuse to read it at all.

For hours, you attacked the author without understanding what it took four pages to explain.

It only takes a few minutes to read.

Instead, you chose to assume you know what you’re talking about, while refusing to read it and expecting me to explain it.

I have my own children, I have no obligation to do it here.

“I don’t think I did. That was easy” is a child’s answer.

Saltysam on August 2, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Dr Evil on August 2, 2009 at 12:22 PM
I think that’s the point. Sealing his records simply prevents scrutiny. This works in his favor no matter what they really say. gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Only among the incurious who are easly put off. Plainly you don’t understand Momentum.( It took 2 years to bring Nixon down for the cover up of the break in at the the DNC headquarters). Calling people idiotic names for asking for production of qualifying documents relects badly on the name-caller, not the person making the reasonable request.

Once again. I have no better information on where Obama was born than the obfusking bleifers.

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM

If he keeps driving the economy into the ground, there’s no telling how many people might turn on him. Throw in some more “the police acted stupidly moments” and he could be toast.

backwoods conservative on August 2, 2009 at 12:38 PM

He can still win by cheating … the thing that makes him dangerous is that his “personal popularity is still at 74%. That tells you about how many people are paying attention. He’ll be playing the blame game for sure.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Look at how he won every election before the last one.

gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Perhaps it’s time for Gallup to poll the issue of Obama’s birth hospital. They could ask citizens whether he born at Queens, Kapiolani, or Other place of birth…

Then Obama could go with whichever answer was the most popular.

RD on August 2, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Look at how he won every election before the last one.
gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:46 PM

As his incompetence becomes clearer with each passing day, some in the media will regret not holding him to the same standards as everyone else. Given the fact that you don’t actualy have to be born in Hawaii to have your birth registered there, it’s a national disgrace that he wasn’t required to produce his LFBC.

This worm too will turn.

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Look at how he won every election before the last one.
gh on August 2, 2009 at 12:46 PM

All the more reason to demand he prove his eligibility with original documents.

Basilsbest on August 2, 2009 at 12:58 PM

You see, states don’t just hand out BC’s, even if you tell them it’s OK to pass yours around.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 11:24 AM

Incorrect.

Until recently, all birth/death/marriage certificates were considered public records, and a state would hand them out to whomever asked for it. The founding fathers would certainly have thought that these public records would remain so. But recently, some states have moved to limit access to them due to “identity theft” concerns.

Each state has different criteria, or no criteria, for whom they’ll issue a certificate. For example: if you were born in Massachusetts and your parents were married, they will indeed hand it out to anyone who pays the nominal fee. I think in Vermont, it is still considered a public record freely accessible to the asking.

If Obama unsealed his birth certificate, Hawaii would issue it for the asking, as they did before their identity theft legislation was passed. Since Obama’s identity is protected by the secret service, his sealing on the records is not within the spirit of the law, although it falls within the letter of the law.

Rebar on August 2, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Pablo, the American people don’t like uncertainty. Therefore, I’d humbly invite you to establish common cause with those trying to establish which hospital he was actually born in, which would demonstrate to everyone your good faith and make clear that your animus is directed only at those wild-eyed conspiracy theorists using this uncertainty to spawn rumors, and not at those who simply believe in the public’s right to know (namely, where he was born).

Not all of us are conspiracy theorists. I’m sure some of us simply wish to contribute money to the right hospital charity, and are prevented from doing so as long you nobly stand in the way of researching that particular fact, or discussing it here in peace.

RD on August 2, 2009 at 1:05 PM

This just broke on WND.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

Phildorex on August 2, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Phildorex on August 2, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Hmm… so it seems it’s a very good forgery. I wonder if I’ll turn blue if I hold my breath …

gh on August 2, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Phildorex on August 2, 2009 at 1:23 PM

documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University
records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Instead, what we get is contrivances to describe the man from the government-media-university-Obamacampaign-complex. The Christopher Buckleys of this nation have done everything to facilitate this fiction. Yet, we’re told by these very same people, even though they were wrong about Obama, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

I think this is what disturbs me the most, natural born or not.

Saltysam on August 2, 2009 at 2:09 PM

Hmm… so it seems it’s a very good forgery. I wonder if I’ll turn blue if I hold my breath …

gh on August 2, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Haven’t read the article yet, but doriangrey mentioned on the Michelle/Steph thread that this document was obtained via subpoena from Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Funny… didn’t know the Clintons were fully committed Burthers!)

Note that this doesn’t automatically mean he’s ineligible for the Presidency. If he can prove (via DNA presumably) that he’s not the son of Barack Sr., but actually the son of an American citizen, then he should be able to beat back those pesky Burfer claims. I hear Maury Povich is warming up the studio as we speak…

RD on August 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Saltysam on August 2, 2009 at 2:09 PM

Agree. Such dereliction leads to all kinds of absurdities, some merely humrous (like the Hospital fund-raiser controversy), others actually dangerous.

RD on August 2, 2009 at 2:34 PM

… doriangrey mentioned on the Michelle/Steph thread that this document was obtained via subpoena from Hillary Rodham Clinton…

To be fair, I really have no idea if Hillary was the source. Pablo may have indicated otherwise on the other thread…

RD on August 2, 2009 at 2:44 PM

Perhaps it’s time for Gallup to poll the issue of Obama’s birth hospital. They could ask citizens whether he born at Queens, Kapiolani, Coast General Hospital, or Other place of birth…

Then Obama could go with whichever answer was the most popular.

RD on August 2, 2009 at 12:48 PM

FIFM

RD on August 2, 2009 at 2:48 PM

Haven’t read the article yet, but doriangrey mentioned on the Michelle/Steph thread that this document was obtained via subpoena from Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Funny… didn’t know the Clintons were fully committed Burthers!)

RD on August 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Hillary Clinton is not the source of the Kenyan birth certificate. Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, is a defendant named by Orly Taitz in her latest motion concerning the birth certificate controversy.

I have no idea what Dorangrey is smoking, but I’d like some.

Phildorex on August 2, 2009 at 4:21 PM

I’m still going for the “Father Not Known” citation on the original birth certificate.

coldwarrior on August 2, 2009 at 8:57 AM

Could be, certainly not implausible, but personally. I think I would prefer “Father Not Known” to someone who basically took one look at me and left for the other side of the planet. At least with the “Father Not Known” my father could have been someone who didn’t even know he was my father and would not have abandoned me if he had known.

Luka on August 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM

It should have been obvious to anyone with just a few neurons to bounce signals around their skull that Obama was hiding something major when a mob of blind sheep were goaded into an Alinsky psychofrenzy of anti-birtherism last week

econavenger on August 2, 2009 at 10:01 AM

Hotair has again gone topsy-turvy with its latest parlour game
Some dress themselves in a Crown of Empty Air and battle Ghosts of Strawmen that are evermore lame
Ranting on and on about these dreaded “birthers” from night to morn
They seem to think that in those who dare to question their new Lord King, the Devil Himself had been reborn
But the Jackanape Suppressors are always runnin’ round with empty heads and empty blows
It’s unfortunate to note that concern for their increasing sheep like state just grows and grows

PercyB on August 2, 2009 at 5:59 PM

I seem to remember that Sarah Palin had to have a defense fund because of the numerous nuisance ethics complaints filed against her.

bullseye on August 2, 2009 at 10:10 AM

As it turns out, that’s the one ethics complaint that stuck. She could not have the defense fund as Governor (personal gain from her official office), and the decision on that recommended that the State pay her legal fees.

Pablo on August 2, 2009 at 10:21 AM

Sorry Pablo, you lose.

There has been NO official ruling. In fact, like all of the other 20 BOGUS ethics complaints, those involved in this broke Alaskan privacy law by publicizing it. That’s right, it’s against the law to publicize an ethics complaint before it is ruled on. Something everyone of the Obama operatives have done. That of course, is the point as they know a complaint because the Governor is photographed holding a friggin’ fish, giving an interview to the media, or heaven forbid, wearing a coat in below zero weather will get tossed out!!!!

The idea is to create the appearance of unethical behavior where there was none.

Moreover, the so-called “independent investigator” who was investigating the legal defense fund, is an Obama plant!

Thomas Daniel works for Perkins Coie. Perkins Coie is the attorney of record for Barack Obaam, as well as the democrat party.

Josh Painter put it all together:

http://texas4palin.blogspot.com/2009/07/latest-ap-smear-job-smells-like-rat.html

Oddly enough, Perkins Coie is who represents Obama in all of the birth certificate challenges! He’s paid ‘em almost a million bucks so far. I’m sure Thomas Daniel got a bonus out of it!

Perkins Coie, BTW, is the law firm the democrats use when the want to steal an election/manufacture votes out of thin air!

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jromano/2009/05/07/perkins-coie/

And since Barack Obama has been behind all of the attacks on Sarah Palin, including “Troopergate”, and all of the phony ethics complaints….

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13302

….it ain’t hard to believe that Thomas Daniel is on his payroll, nor is it not hard to believe that Obama in NOT a natural born citizen, and ineligible to be POTUS.

The only question is how do we remove him without bloodshed.
Personally, I hope none of this happens before the next Congress, where we will hopefully have a Republican majority House. I would MUCH rather have a Vice President John Boehner, than a Vice President Nancy Pelosi!!!

gary4205 on August 2, 2009 at 6:02 PM

Saltysam on August 2, 2009 at 12:39 PM

The funny thing is, if you even read my original post, I’m conditionally agreeing with him. He would have to go on to contradict everything he wrote in the QOTD to change its clear meaning. If that’s the case, I’m even less interested in reading the whole, tedious mess. Does he go on to make the argument that the media (including the conservative media) really is doing its job?

Look, I’m not going to waste my time reading through pages and pages of McCarthy’s stale whining about the media on the slim prospect that he’s said something that Ann Coulter hasn’t already written a hundred times. I’m certainly not going to take your word for it. You bluffed, I’m calling it. There’s no added context, there’s no nuance I’m missing, and you won’t provide any because you can’t.

RightOFLeft on August 2, 2009 at 6:24 PM

PercyB on August 2, 2009 at 5:59 PM

I’m not a sheep, but disagree with you.
You’re not asleep, so what are we to do?

Loxodonta on August 2, 2009 at 6:40 PM

If we wait for the darkest hour
Till we spring alive
Then with claws of fire
We will devour like a falcon in the dive!

PercyB on August 2, 2009 at 8:19 PM

And what kind of hearing was that? They passed a resolution to put the question to bed. They didn’t do it to McCain, they did it for McCain.
Pablo on August 2,

Good point Pablo.
BTW did you actually read that resolution?

Cuz if you did, how could you concluded Obama is eligible for the Office of the President.

110TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
S. RES. __
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

_______________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself and Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

_______________

RESOLUTION
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a ‘‘natural born Citizen’’ of the United States;

Whereas the term ‘‘natural born Citizen’’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the

Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to American citizens serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

The important part “born to American citizens” as in BOTH parents are American citizens.
Both of Obama’s parent’s were not “American citizens”.

FTR

“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military
base in the”

Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),
“Based on the understanding of the pertinent sources of constitutional meaning, it is widely believed that if someone is born to American citizens anywhere in the world they are natural born citizens”.

Again, “born to American citizensplural as in both parents are/were American citizens.

The intent of this requirement is to ensure the POTUS has loyalties only to the USA, and no other.

Obviously duel citizenship is a non-starter for POTUS.

Who woulda thunk it all that work trying to invalidate McCain would come back to invalidate Obama?

DSchoen on August 3, 2009 at 12:00 AM

interesting post DS

allrsn on August 3, 2009 at 12:15 AM

OK…I’m not really thrilled with our new President either, but I do have to say one thing about this issue of his birth…the document which was originally provided to prove his birth and citizenship is the same document my two son’s have from Kapiolani Hospital. I used the documents to obtain passports for both of them recently…So, it is my opinion and personal experience that I would consider this case closed. I also looked at the Honolulu Advertiser (our local newspaper) archieves…and, yes, a birth announcement of his birth was in the local paper during the time of his birth….Though I wish it weren’t true…I have to say it is…he was born in Hawaii.

jnrz on August 3, 2009 at 2:25 AM

The one thing I can say about Obama is that his sad story of growing up without money or means is a crock of bull! His grandmother was the second highest female executive in a bank…First Hawaiian Bank…which is one of the largest banks in the country…Obama also went to an elite private school which is so expensive I can’t even afford sending my kids there. Even if he went there with some scholarships (which I highly doubt since there is no proof), it wouldn’t pay for all of the tuition. Punahou School is very exclusive…it has to be one of if not the most elite schools in Hawaii…Also, Obama’s step-dad was an executive with an Indonesian company similar to ENRON…His step-dad too was a man of means. Lastly, every single person who knew “Barry” back in high school NEVER could imagine “Barry” being discriminated on…they were all in SHOCK at his allegations in his book…My thoughts are – the image of Obama is just a lie, or masked by those who fail to expose the truth.

jnrz on August 3, 2009 at 2:34 AM

the document which was originally provided to prove his birth and citizenship is the same document my two son’s have from Kapiolani Hospital.
jnrz on August 3, 2009 at 2:25 AM

Yeah, that’s what we want to see. The originally provided documents. You aren’t trying to tell me they gave you a COLB at your son’s birth, are you?

Buddahpundit on August 3, 2009 at 3:57 AM

Who cares that Hawaii’s full state records would doubtless confirm what we already know about Obama’s birthplace?

Is that the royal “we”?

“We” certainly does not include “me”.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 3, 2009 at 4:22 AM

A HUFFPO writer is now curious.

“I believe that the president should end the speculation by being transparent about all aspects of his background,” Swain said. “In fact, it can be argued that the president belongs to the people and to scholars, biographers and others who are entitled to know every aspect of his past. Only great men can ascend to this height, and their lives should be examined and studied for the lessons they offer.”

shooter on August 3, 2009 at 1:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7