Obama: You can disagree with me without questioning my citizenship

posted at 4:10 pm on February 4, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via Breitbart, a lecture on civility from the leader of a party whose elder statesmen have lately started dropping “teabagger” references into their fundraising e-mails. It’s newsworthy as a rare example of The One addressing Birthers directly and as proof of how useful this dopey controversy is to him, letting him take the high road — during a speech about faith, no less — vis-a-vis opponents looking to discredit him by all available means. The citizenship line is delivered almost as an afterthought, but I doubt it was unscripted: Remember, Birtherism is part of the Dems’ midterm strategy, to frighten indies into believing that the GOP’s too fringe-y to be trusted with governance. Expect more in this vein from The One as November approaches, especially if the economic recovery is sluggish. In that case, nothing less than full Bambi victim mode will do.

Exit question: Are there more Republican Birthers than there are Democratic Truthers? Hmmmm.


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 2 3 4

Anyone else wish to add to the list????

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 4, 2010 at 4:18 PM

Taste in women.

MB4 on February 4, 2010 at 5:14 PM

I suppose what he’s stating is a fact.

We can disagree with him without questioning his citizenship.

We can also disagree with him without being female (well, I can’t….not without a lot of surgeries and even then, genetically I’m still rocking XX).

We can disagree with him without shaving our heads.

We can disagree with him without eating too much food.

The list goes on and on.

If the birth certificate thing is an issue that bothers him, he can provide the documents that show everything is on the up and up. Clearly CoLB didn’t work for some. If it bothers him that there are still people demanding to see the long certificate or whatnot, he should just release it.

If it doesn’t really bother him, he should just stop mentioning it. Firstly, the number of people that bring it up are a minority. Why bother dealing with that at all when the majority of people that disagree with you do so on the merits of your proposal and not because they think you were born elsewhere?

Unless you’re having trouble refuting their arguments and you are looking for a strawman that you can refute instead….

JadeNYU on February 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM

If Obama has a passport, doesn’t that mean he showed his birth certificate to someone already?

Speedwagon82 on February 4, 2010 at 5:06 PM

NO! NO! NO! YOU CAN GET A PASSPORT IF YOU’RE A U.S> CITIZEN BORN IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY, BUT YOU CAN’T BE PRESIDENT! WHY DON’T SO MANY OF YOU PEOPLE SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT WHETEHR HE’S A CITIZEN OR NOT, BUT WHERE HE WAS BORN?!

max1 on February 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM

I am not questioning your citizenship ObowMao. I am relating what you and your wife have claimed in public and in print. You are the son of a British citizen. Where ever you were born you are a subject of the British Crown. You are not a natural born citizen. That means you were, are, and ever shall be NOT eligible for the office of President of these United States.

FREEDOM!

Blacksmith8 on February 4, 2010 at 4:27 PM

Bravo! Succinct and to the point. And I love your closing. Mind if I use it sometimes?

FREEDOM!

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM

What a stratergy!

Hey look! Here’s a guy that can’t take responsibility for anything and his feelings get hurt a lot when people ask him basic questions! Poor Bambi. I think he might also be lonely at the top or something.

Isn’t the real question here why he has spent millions trying to hide the birth certificate?

It doesn’t really mean that he is or is not qualified to be POTUS – it does mean that he’s gone way out of his way to hide something very basic about himself.

He’s weird.

Dorvillian on February 4, 2010 at 5:20 PM

Yet, here we sit, nearly 13 months into the screw, and we still have seen no proof that Obama is constitutionally eligible to hold the office he was elected to.

Other than his word, of course, which is apparently worth about the same as a pile of frozen dog squeeze.

I reserve the right to question anything I want about this man who, four years ago, no one outside of Chicago had ever even heard of, and who managed to somehow get himself elected POTUS, with a lot of help from a foreign billionaire who hates this country with a purple passion.

Dave R. on February 4, 2010 at 5:20 PM

they actually think this problem we face has something to do with college grades.

AnninCA

Grades are meaningless. If I ever need life saving brain surgery, I don’t care how poorly the surgeon did in school.

Here’s a clue for you….you think that a guy who couldn’t grasp the concepts of freshman economics might not be the best guy for solving our current economic issues?

xblade on February 4, 2010 at 5:21 PM

Obama: You can disagree with me without questioning my citizenship

He overestimates most of his critics (and underestimates the rest of us).

hicsuget on February 4, 2010 at 5:21 PM

Hey champ, we’re over it. We’ll deal with you as you are.

Thanks for bringing it up again. Trying for a little “they’re crazy” are ya?

JeffWeimer on February 4, 2010 at 5:21 PM

An utterly moronic strategy by Team Bam and proof positive that they are approaching full-blown desperation mode.

Obama got his Dumbo-eared rear end kicked the last year by trying to cast off his sizable opposition as extremists and birthers. All this foolish strategy does is remind people how much they hated that bullying, how few records Obama has actually ever released and how little they liked the Barry who was whining about not being like other Prezes on the dollar bill during the 2008 campaign.

This is idiocy on the level of the #demonsheep Fiorina ad fiasco. Just because a unit comes up with a midterm strategy doesn’t mean it is worth a damn. That’s where this bit fits.

If Barry and the Libs roll with this kind of self-pitying, demonize-your-opponents tact, then 2010 will be an even better haul for the GOP than it is already shaping up to be. By all means, Team Barry, please continue.

PhoenixUniversal on February 4, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Unless you’re having trouble refuting their arguments and you are looking for a strawman that you can refute instead….

JadeNYU on February 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM

Bingo.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 5:23 PM

Hey look! Here’s a guy that can’t take responsibility for anything and his feelings get hurt a lot when people ask him basic questions! Poor Bambi.

Dorvillian on February 4, 2010 at 5:20 PM

Barack Obama in the highest office in the land, parley-voo?
Barack Obama in the highest office in the land, parley-voo?
He can sink the economy and dither on Iran a great deal
But taking any responsibly to him just does not appeal
He has less class than the back of a hack
When he whines and cries the tears run down his back
If he would just take responsibility sometime somewhere
The MSM frogs would probably give him the Croix-de-Guerre
Hinky, dinky, parley-voo

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on February 4, 2010 at 5:24 PM

Yup. And it works, too, with birthers and others who are so highly partisan that they actually think this problem we face has something to do with college grades.

AnninCA on February 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM

Er … uh … the request for his college transcripts is not for his grades (though, I’m sure the classes and scores and standardized test scores would be a real hoot) but for whether he was registered as any sort of a foreign student or got aid based on foreign citizenship or ties. This is relevant to the issue of ‘natural born citizen’ status, which seems to be something that many people appear unable to comprehend in even the most elementary way.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 5:25 PM

SURELY you can disagree with me without questioning my citizenship.

Of course we can disagree with Obama while knowing that his father was NOT a US Citizen, but a Kenyan communist; which leaves Obama without the constitutionally required natural born citizen prerequisite for everyone regarding the Office of the POTUS.

And don’t call me Surely.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM

He overestimates most of his critics (and underestimates the rest of us).

hicsuget on February 4, 2010 at 5:21 PM

Grade school insults. Way to go!

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM

Oh, by the way: Allah’s link to the birther-truther Gadfly poll has 71% of American blacks as either Yes to Trutherism (50%!), or agnostically “Not Sure” (21%) if Bush blew up the towers.

71%

Jaibones on February 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Using ernesto’s standards, you have to add the “not sure” to the “yes” votes. Which gets us to 92% troothers.

MarkTheGreat on February 4, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Woah that’s an epic math fail.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 5:30 PM

JadeNYU on February 4, 2010 at 5:17 PM

Yep.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:31 PM

Woah that’s an epic math fail.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 5:30 PM

No, the math is correct. If you add 21 to 71, you do indeed get 92.

What Mark failed at here is careful reading, and you’ve failed at word choice.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 5:35 PM

It’s newsworthy as a rare example of The One addressing Birthers directly and as proof of how useful this dopey controversy is to him

That’s a crock. He dodged the issue, totally, misrepresenting it as a question fo citizenship and not even bothering to address the idea of a Chief Executive with multiple citizenships. Of course, you make the same “mistakes” every time you write about this. I know why you do it. Why don’t you know why The Precedent does it?

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Obama has become the Joe Isuzu of American politics.

MB4 on February 4, 2010 at 5:38 PM

Yeah, honestly – I’m pretty sure I’d prefer an inept Biden as prez than an Obama that’s intentionally trying to destroy/remake the economy/country.

I say ‘intentionally’ because I don’t think he’s either stupid or clueless. He’s intelligent enough, I think, to know full well the detrimental and devastating effects his policies will have on the country.

Midas on February 4, 2010 at 5:40 PM

Only Obama could show up at a prayer breakfast and think he was the most important One there.

tom on February 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Of course we can disagree with Obama while knowing that his father was NOT a US Citizen, but a Kenyan communist; which leaves Obama without the constitutionally required natural born citizen prerequisite for everyone regarding the Office of the POTUS.

And don’t call me Surely.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:26 PM

Ok, correct me if i’m wrong, but if YOU are born here, are YOU not a ‘natural born US citizen’, regardless of whether your parents were US citizens or not? Isn’t that why so many folks from elsewhere (eg: Mexico) try so hard to have their baby born *here*, so that they (the baby) are citizens?

Midas on February 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Allahpundit’s like a ‘fraidy cat unwilling to take the brunt of his own ridicule. He helped to fan the inappropriately used word “birther” and every time it crosses his path, he keeps clinching his jaw like the Cowardly Lion. “I do believe in spooks. I do believe in spooks. I do! I do! I do! I do believe in spooks. I do believe in spooks. I do! I do! I do! I do!”

The point to criticize Obama’s PRAYER address is that Obama failed to unite with our government officials to pray for America to be protected from terrorist attack. This failure to care about America is unforgivable in our President. His own administration announced that America will be attacked by terrorists within four months. It was a prayer meeting! And even an atheist should know that positive feelings go a long way in accomplishing monumental tasks like preserving our national security.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:46 PM

According to Hawaiian authorities, the paper copies were destroyed back when all of the records (for everyone, not just Barry) were converted to digital form. The COLB was created from the digital record. It’s as real as it gets. Those demanding more are just desperately grasping for a straw by which they hope they can undo the last election.

Can’t unring that bell.

MarkTheGreat on February 4, 2010 at 4:48 PM

You need to quit citing the “destroyed the records” story because as soon as it came out Fukino denied it and CNN retracted it. In any case as astutely pointed out by another commenter:

If this is true, then shouldn’t the digital format be the same as the original long form document it was copied from, containing all the information that was contained in the original? I know when I make digital copies of my documents, they don’t magically morph into an edited version containing only part of the data.

If they made a digital copy of his long form birth certificate, they could easily print out a copy of it.

xblade on February 4, 2010 at 5:08 PM

Either way, that argument doesn’t hold up.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Midas on February 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Natural born citizen is not the same as naturalized citizen.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Obama has become the Joe Isuzu of American politics.

MB4 on February 4, 2010 at 5:38 PM

Very true. But, what has allah become? :)

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Very true. But, what has allah become? :)

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Loki.

MB4 on February 4, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Either way, that argument doesn’t hold up.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Maybe not, but the document released is enough to have gotten Obama a passport. It has all the necessary information.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 5:51 PM

DaveS on February 4, 2010 at 4:37 PM

I used to be a birther but will quietly fold my tent based on the Hawaiian official’s statements.

Two questions:

Hadn’t a trial been scheduled by Judge Carter for Jan 21st of this year?

Are you aware that one of The One complaints is that divulging His BC would just lead to other questions about Him?

Oh — if only Dick Nixon could get away with a posture like that!

Bill O.’s theory about the newspaper ads is stupid. I knew a doting aunt who had notices of her niece’s graduation from law school put in three papers. The whole town was impressed. Wanted a young lawyer.

There was a small problem, though. You see,her niece was about to get a paralegal certificate but the lady just wanted clippings. So those Honolulu ads mean nothing. Might have been grandma doting like a “typical white person” and proud of having a grandson.

IlikedAUH2O on February 4, 2010 at 5:52 PM

Expect more in this vein from The One as November approaches, especially if the economic recovery is sluggish. In that case, nothing less than full Bambi victim mode will do.

I’m reminded of how in 2008 all we heard was “post-racial, post-racial!!!”, while The One ran around talking about how McCain was going to try to scare the country because B. Huseein had a funny name and “didn’t look like the other guys on the dollar bills”… And that’s not the half of it.

That said, I still want the long form BC released.

RightWinged on February 4, 2010 at 5:54 PM

Is it still OK to disagree with him
while questioning his patriotism?

mrt721 on February 4, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Midas on February 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Natural Born Citizen

Do your own homework.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:55 PM

mrt721 on February 4, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Was it ever ok?

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:56 PM

Listening to this whiny, petulant child deliver a “faith” talk this morning almost made me puke up my cornflakes. Feh! Can FOX, at least, not air Obama speeches, PLEASE?!

evergreen on February 4, 2010 at 5:57 PM

Barry is mentally unwell.

BHO Jonestown on February 4, 2010 at 5:57 PM

Obama: You can disagree with me without questioning my citizenship

Of course we can, but it’s more fun to question your citizenship, too, Hussein.

misterpeasea on February 4, 2010 at 5:58 PM

The consensus dismissing the constitutional natural born citizen potus prerequisite at Ace’s boiled down to inconvenience.

maverick muse on February 4, 2010 at 5:59 PM

But…but…but… It’s so much nicer to be able to disagree with you and question your citizenship at the same time…

unclesmrgol on February 4, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 5:51 PM

Obama likely got his passport as a young adult. He had to have some passport to travel from US to Pakistan. Perhaps he was using a foreign one? Who knows? But if he got a US passport he probably showed his long-form which he acknowledges finding according to his own book:

I mention “Dreams of My Father”, first published in 1995 when Obama was first starting out in his political career, because in a brief citing, he mentions one item that has haunted him for months- his birth certificate.

On Page 26 of “Dreams of My Father”, Obama writes:

“I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school,”

While this brief quote does not state WHAT article it is that Obama found, it does mention that he found it WITH his BIRTH CERTIFICATE. This would have been in the mid 70’s, so this birth certificate would not have been a computer generated document.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:03 PM

Sorry, screwed up the link thing. The above quote came from this website.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:06 PM

This would have been in the mid 70’s, so this birth certificate would not have been a computer generated document.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:03 PM

It would have been if he lost the original. Most people do.

Either way, what was presented to us and is still available to look at online, is something considered good enough for a passport.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:06 PM

It would have been if he lost the original. Most people do.

Either way, what was presented to us and is still available to look at online, is something considered good enough for a passport.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:06 PM

No, not computer generated. It would have been a microfiche copy, which is what most people have. That is totally different than computer generated. It is a literal copy.

None of this matters anyway. He could be born in Timbukto and due to his dual citizenship at birth he is unable to be considered natural born.

This issue is bigger than Obama. We need to get the Natural Born requirements laid out in the Constitution and for gosh sakes someone needs to be responsible for vetting presidential and vice presidential candidates. As it is now it is a free for all with no one taking responsibility.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:12 PM

As it is now it is a free for all with no one taking responsibility.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:12 PM

Honestly, it’s not as though he wasn’t checked. He was. And Chief Justice Roberts swore him in, twice.

This really needs to be dropped.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:14 PM

I question his humanity.

Maquis on February 4, 2010 at 6:14 PM

How about I disagree with you and question whatever I want to. Now sit down and prepare to copy.

ted c on February 4, 2010 at 6:17 PM

@Baldi
Got it…straw man. Missed you earlier, I was seeking some guidance.

This would have been in the mid 70’s, so this birth certificate would not have been a computer generated document.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:03 PM

If you are so sure and the information proving your point is truly available, then why is it so difficult for you and like-minded people to get your facts heard clearly?

We are riding the crest of an information tsunami but you guys can’t seem to find your way to a one solid fact about this issue.

The Race Card on February 4, 2010 at 6:21 PM

You won’t, though, because you want this as a club to use against people.

teke184 on February 4, 2010 at 4:14 PM

Give that man a kewpie doll!!

JohnGalt23 on February 4, 2010 at 6:21 PM

Honestly, it’s not as though he wasn’t checked. He was.

Actually, he wasn’t. Not that anyone has ever been made publicly aware of. The various Sce States who did testify had said that they took the parties’ words for the eligibility issue and no one else bothered to check anything. From the Democrats, we have the truly odd occurrence of two different candidacy letters drafted, with one explicitly claiming Constitutional eligibility and the other not.

And Chief Justice Roberts swore him in, twice.

This really needs to be dropped.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:14 PM

The fact that Roberts thought the minor mistake of a messed up word or two important enough to warrant a retaking of the oath shows what the danger of allowing a legally unfulfilled oath to hang is considered to be. Roberts’ second administration of the oath goes to the importance of having a strict, legal resolution to the questions – which have never been officially checked in any way.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 6:25 PM

This really needs to be dropped.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Are you pulling a Napolitano and saying “the system worked”? If so, I give you Roger Caldero who made it onto the presidential ballot in 10 states despite being a foreigner.

If all the wimps and cowards are too afwaid to go after poor wittle Bawack. Let’s at least get it right the next time and make 100% sure that the person is CONSTITUTIONALLY eligible. It’s not rocket science.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:26 PM

The Race Card on February 4, 2010 at 6:21 PM

Umm, the quote was from BARACK OBAMA’S BOOK DREAMS FROM MY FATHER.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Okay. The two things are unrelated. Although one doesn’t need to disagree with outright lies, merely show them to be willfully uttered falsehood. Of which there have been so many from Lord Bozo they are too numerous to enumerate.

On the issue of his citizenship, one cannot prove that with invalid documents, especially when the issuing party handed them out in large numbers to people who were not citizens. So many in fact, they got caught and stopped the practice.

And he could end all the chatter on the subject by showing his actual long form birth certificate, instead of sending out squads of attorneys to prevent its exposure.

dogsoldier on February 4, 2010 at 6:30 PM

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Feel free to play up Robert’s belief that all the rules had to be followed. That only helps my case.

Are you pulling a Napolitano and saying “the system worked”? If so, I give you Roger Caldero who made it onto the presidential ballot in 10 states despite being a foreigner.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:26 PM

Are you under the impression that Caldero would have been sworn in if he’d won?

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:32 PM

I dunno, I like birtherism. Quite frankly, it seems to me the founding fathers failed in ensuring our country is safe from mancurian candidates by not making it constitutionally required for all office seekers to release their vaulted birth records.

astonerii on February 4, 2010 at 6:36 PM

Feel free to play up Robert’s belief that all the rules had to be followed. That only helps my case.

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:32 PM

It really doesn’t, Esthier. Without having Constitutional eligibility legally established, the oath of office – both of them – are in question and will remain so. If messing up a couple of words was enough to force a readministration of an oath, then the admission by a person of having held Kenyan citizenship (as The Precedent has done), along with the strong evidence that he held Indonesian, too, demands that the court rule on whether that is consistent with the Constitutional eligibility requirement of ‘natural born citizen’ and whether The Precedent is even able to take the oath.

Future historians will have no difficulty seeing this.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 6:37 PM

Are you under the impression that Caldero would have been sworn in if he’d won?

Esthier on February 4, 2010 at 6:32 PM

Of course not. However, it makes my point that there is no one checking!

If Obama had been (all) white and Republican do you think he would have been sworn in? Not no but heck no unless he coughed up every conceivable piece of proof he had that he was qualified.

P.S. I’m not trying to pick on you it’s just nice to debate with someone who isn’t vitriolic! :)

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Ok, correct me if i’m wrong, but if YOU are born here, are YOU not a ‘natural born US citizen’, regardless of whether your parents were US citizens or not? Isn’t that why so many folks from elsewhere (eg: Mexico) try so hard to have their baby born *here*, so that they (the baby) are citizens?

Midas on February 4, 2010 at 5:45 PM

Nope, he would be a citizen, but under the origional intent of the Natural Born clause, he would NOT be Natural Born.

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 1866:

[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…[6]

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html

Or… even better…

Minor v. Happersett – wherein the Supreme Court stated:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.

Where the ONLY definition of Natual Born which has NEVER been in doubt, is born on American Soil, of American Citizen parents.

Remember, this clause was put IN to ensure that the Commander in Chief would NEVER have been the citizen of another country (as dual citizen was not legal back then).

Romeo13 on February 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM

P.S. I’m not trying to pick on you it’s just nice to debate with someone who isn’t vitriolic! :)

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Yes. Esthier is good people.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM

I could be wrong but it seems to me that bringing this up at the National Prayer Breakfast is not exactly taking the high road.

Missy on February 4, 2010 at 4:47 PM

When dealing in matters of Birtherism, there is hardly a way to take a lower road than the Birthers.

JohnGalt23 on February 4, 2010 at 6:53 PM

If messing up a couple of words was enough to force a readministration of an oath, then the admission by a person of having held Kenyan citizenship (as The Precedent has done), along with the strong evidence that he held Indonesian, too, demands that the court rule on whether that is consistent with the Constitutional eligibility requirement of ‘natural born citizen’ and whether The Precedent is even able to take the oath.

Post #33482 where progressoverpeace establishes that he knows absolutely nothing about law. The SCOTUS can’t just randomly rule on things because they feel like it. Someone needs to bring a case before the court with a “federal question”, and they need to have standing to do so. To have standing you must have. 1) An imminent, palpable injury recognized by the law (not an abstract injury) 2) caused by the defendant 3) likely to be remedied or addressed by a judicial order. None of the suits brought by nuts like you have survived 12(b)(6) motions, because you can’t even state a claim. You don’t have standing. You don’t have an imminent, palpable injury the law would recognize. None of your brain-dead ramblings will change that. If you’re going to mainstram your nuttiness, it ain’t gonna be through the courts. So stop acting like you have a real chance of doing so.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 6:54 PM

I was a borderline Birther (wanted him to show it so it could be put to rest) until I looked at my own Birth Certificate that I have carried for years. It has everything that so many of you claim must be on it for it to be the real deal. Then I looked at the top of the page and it says Certificate of Live Birth.

That document has gotten me into the United States Army, a security clearance while serving and from the TSA in order to be licensed in my profession.

While I truly despise the man in office I really believe this debate should be ended on our side. It serves us no benefit whatsoever. As has been stated before, it is just a weapon to bludgeon us with by the President and his supporters. Quit feeding the beast!

Besides, the alternative at this point would be the ascendancy of Joe Biden into the Oval Office. And while I believe that Obamao is the worst President since James Earl Carter, if not ever, it would be extremely dangerous to the safety of the free world if Biden were to ever become President. That man is a complete, bumbling idiot, on a level that Palin bashers wish she was. A year and a half after being announced as VP candidate, I’ve still yet to hear someone say how wonderful a pick it was other than being as a flack jacket for BO.

rmel80 on February 4, 2010 at 6:54 PM

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 6:37 PM

You’ve obviously done your research, so have I, I just can’t match your patience. Good job!

DanaSmiles on February 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM

So he wants civility? It’s like a criminal insisting that you speak to him with respect while he’s busy robbing you.

Mojave Mark on February 4, 2010 at 6:56 PM

Turning a truth into a lie is fixing it?

MarkTheGreat on February 4, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Well, that’s the Chicago Way. What do you think they mean when they refer to “fixers”.

Blacksmith should be very proud. he has finally become that which he seeks to defeat.

JohnGalt23 on February 4, 2010 at 6:59 PM

The SCOTUS can’t just randomly rule on things because they feel like it. Someone needs to bring a case before the court with a “federal question”, and they need to have standing to do so. To have standing you must have. 1) An imminent, palpable injury recognized by the law (not an abstract injury) 2) caused by the defendant 3) likely to be remedied or addressed by a judicial order. None of the suits brought by nuts like you have survived 12(b)(6) motions, because you can’t even state a claim. You don’t have standing. You don’t have an imminent, palpable injury the law would recognize. None of your brain-dead ramblings will change that. If you’re going to mainstram your nuttiness, it ain’t gonna be through the courts. So stop acting like you have a real chance of doing so.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 6:54 PM

Obviously, I am well aware of how our judicial system works and made no mistake in what I wrote. They should take one of the eligibility cases (the SCOTUS or a lower court that has one in the works) and rule on it. The lack-of-standing arguments have been ridiculous and even lefty loons like Jonathan Turley have said so. They are destructive of our system and everyone with a brain knows that they are insane, especially in light of direct injury that is allowed to pass for the left’s many asinine “Equal Protection” arguments and race-card cases.

Try and grab hold of a real point, numbnuts.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Romeo13 on February 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM

In the one case you cite, the court didn\’t even address the question of whether children born to aliens on U.S. soil are natural born citizens. How is that at all controlling? In contrast, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) does directly address that question, and there the court held that children born in the United States to alien parents are considered natural born citizens.Birthers are consistently wrong on the facts, wrong on the law, and wrong on history. They have no arguments, and must always resort to lies and distortions.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:02 PM

rmel80 on February 4, 2010 at 6:54 PM

One theory I have on this… is its actualy all about his adoption by Soteoro.

Its common practice, during an adoption, to reissue a birth cert with the new parent on it… and seal the origional.

After the divorce, it could then have been amended by either his Mother, Grandparents, or himself, back to the “origional”… HOWEVER…

Any newly generated Birth Doc would have been marked that it had been amended…

Which is why I continue to question the online Cert.

Not saying he was born in Kenya… but there is somthing weird that he has spent a lot of money hiding.

Romeo13 on February 4, 2010 at 7:03 PM

rmel80 on February 4, 2010 at 6:54 PM

You have a CERTIFICATE of Live Birth

Obama has a CERTIFICATION of Live Birth.

And yes, there is a huge difference.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 7:04 PM

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Sigh, this is the ONLY case where Natural born Citizen is discussed by the Supremes.

All other cases say CITIZEN.

Which is why it is instructive.

So… go do some research… epic fail.

Romeo13 on February 4, 2010 at 7:04 PM

DanaSmiles on February 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Thanks, Dana. Keep strong. Usually, after The Precedent makes a comment about eligibility (always misstated and obviously silly) there comes a few articles that start taking the angle, “So What if he Is Ineligible?” to lament how we can’t do anything about it, and shouldn’t even try.

People know that this issue is exceedingly bothersome, especially the way many are begging us to intentionally ignore any Constitutional requirements, and most don’t find The Precedent’s actions honest or his words credible on this.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

As if Obama didn’t want this whole “birther” controversy. Obama could have ended all of this stuff by just showing his birth certificate. But he chose not to because he loves seeing Republicans make fools of themselves.

SoulGlo on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Wong Kim was made a CITIZEN, not Natural Born Citizen…

Romeo13 on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

Obviously, I am well aware of how our judicial system works and made no mistake in what I wrote. They should take one of the eligibility cases (the SCOTUS or a lower court that has one in the works) and rule on it. The lack-of-standing arguments have been ridiculous and even lefty loons like Jonathan Turley have said so. They are destructive of our system and everyone with a brain knows that they are insane, especially in light of direct injury that is allowed to pass for the left’s many asinine “Equal Protection” arguments and race-card cases.

No, in all of those equal protection cases there was a real, legally cognizable injury, (i.e. being denied service at a diner, being denied admittance to a school) and the cases that didn’t have an injury in fact were dismissed (such as McCabe v. Atchison). What’s your legally cognizable injury? What gives you standing? Simply saying “uhhh I don’t think he’s a citizen and that offends me” doesn’t give you standing. You’re not aware of how are judicial system works. You’re a professional bullsh**er.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

As if Obama didn’t want this whole “birther” controversy. Obama could have ended all of this stuff by just showing his birth certificate. But he chose not to because he loves seeing Republicans make fools of themselves.

SoulGlo on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

The big problem with your theory is that the eligibility issue very much predates any Republican participation. It started long back in the Dem primaries and was known about, widely, even at the time that the Indonesian imbecile was a co-sponsor (I believe) for the Senate non-binding resolution on McCain’s ‘natural born citizen’ status.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:09 PM

No, in all of those equal protection cases there was a real, legally cognizable injury, (i.e. being denied service at a diner, being denied admittance to a school) and the cases that didn’t have an injury in fact were dismissed (such as McCabe v. Atchison).

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 PM

LOL. In “all” of them? Huh?

So, you would be happy to dismiss any probabilistic arguments that were used to show “injury” to a specific individual, I guess? Can I assume that you have this minimal level of consistency, or are you just totally batsh#t insane?

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:13 PM

how useful this dopey controversy is to him

Uh, ever consider that this just may be a sensitive issue for him?

Seems like they ignored it for the longest time, but the more this unresolved issue hangs around…

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 4, 2010 at 7:15 PM

So, you would be happy to dismiss any probabilistic arguments that were used to show “injury” to a specific individual, I guess? Can I assume that you have this minimal level of consistency, or are you just totally batsh#t insane?

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:13 PM

If there wasn’t a legally cognizable injury and it wasn’t dismissed…then it should have been. Every civil rights case I’ve read contained one. If you want to see an example of a court dismissing a civil rights case for lack of standing, read the one I cited above.

Anyway, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “specific individual”….but I’m sure you read a substantive legal article from WorldNetDaily and are very excited to post it. So go ahead.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:18 PM

You still haven’t answered the question. What’s your legally cognizable injury? Be “specific”.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:19 PM

What’s your legally cognizable injury? Be “specific”.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Oh, please. Go read the various suits, which address their injuries. The plaintiffs vary from individual voters who have had their votes rendered nearly worthless (which was an injury that civil rights people are pretty familiar with and that the courts used to love to have all sorts of trials and hearings about, with discovery running to every paper on Earth … but with The Precedent … not so much) to other candidates and those suing various states to carry out the laws that are on their own books (about needing to check eligibility of candidates appearing on their ballots0 to the Quo Warranto cases of serveral military personnel.

Give me a friggin’ break, man.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Oh, please. Go read the various suits, which address their injuries.

I have actually, read several of them. Each has been dismissed, with prejudice. Individual voters may have had their votes rendered “worthless” IF Obama were not a citizen. But that’s not what they’re claiming. They’re claiming that they need to have further proof that Obama is a citizen so that their votes are NOT rendered worthless. Which of course, is completely frivolous. It’s not an legally cognizable injury to say “oh, I may be injured if the defendant isn’t qualified, so the court should enjoin him to provide proof that he is qualified”. You’re simply saying it’s possible that you’re injured, and the court must act to remove that possibility. That isn’t a claim the law recognizes.

Anyway, if you think the reasoning which allowed the court to find standing in these shadowy civil rights cases that you refuse to cite was so bad, why are your relying on similar reasoning yourself?

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Give me a friggin’ break, man.

neurosculptor on February 4, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Nope. Although you definitely need one.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:45 PM

I just want to see that paper he wrote about Mutual Nuclear Disarmament.

SURELY he can speak to the citizens without always sounding so patronizing.

NTWR on February 4, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Can Dems disagree with the politics of others without calling them teabaggers; ie cocksockers or mouthfockers?

scottm on February 4, 2010 at 7:53 PM

There’s nothing more dangerous than a thin skinned (light too!) megalomaniac, bent on a failed ideology. See Hugo Chavez for example. This is a dangerous man to have in such a strategic position.

wepeople on February 4, 2010 at 8:01 PM

Yes, I’m sure Obama is spending millions of dollars on lawyers to keep all his records hidden just so he has an issue to attack Republicans with. Even though if it did come out that he wasn’t eligible to be President the MSM would cover it up so 50% of the country never heard about it and all you week-kneed “conservatives” trembling over the birther label or Biden being promoted would run away from the issue too. Yeah, what political brilliance. I bow to your sage-like wisdom. The man is dirty and he is hiding something big.

chicagojedi on February 4, 2010 at 8:07 PM

Hey Obama, prove it.

Weber48IDA on February 4, 2010 at 8:26 PM

It’s newsworthy as a rare example of The One addressing Birthers directly and as proof of how useful this dopey controversy is to him, letting him take the high road — during a speech about faith, no less — vis-a-vis opponents looking to discredit him by all available means.

And of course the great fair and balanced Allahpundit has no problem letting him get away with his strawman arguments.

No one has questioned his citizenship. What has been questioned is his natural born citizenship. Honestly, AP, are you just as dumb and illogical as Obama and his cronies or do you just play the part on the blogosphere?

2Brave2Bscared on February 4, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Is it still OK to disagree with him
while questioning his patriotism?

mrt721 on February 4, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Worth a cut and paste.

ronnyraygun on February 4, 2010 at 9:05 PM

When dealing in matters of Birtherism, there is hardly a way to take a lower road than the Birthers.

JohnGalt23 on February 4, 2010 at 6:53 PM

Yet Obama managed.

KittyLowrey on February 4, 2010 at 9:15 PM

I’m afraid my post may have gotten eaten. Must-read: http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/red-flags-in-hawaii-2/

The DOH has already confirmed that the Factcheck and Fight the Smears COLB’s are forgeries. Much more at the site.

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 9:17 PM

In contrast, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) does directly address that question, and there the court held that children born in the United States to alien parents are considered natural born citizens.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Wrong, moron.

2Brave2Bscared on February 4, 2010 at 9:20 PM

You’re a professional bullsh**er.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 7:06 P

You would certainly know…

2Brave2Bscared on February 4, 2010 at 9:22 PM

Why are my posts being eaten?

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 9:27 PM

ll you week-kneed “conservatives” trembling over the birther label or Biden being promoted would run away from the issue too. Yeah, what political brilliance. I bow to your sage-like wisdom. The man is dirty and he is hiding something big.

chicagojedi on February 4, 2010 at 8:07 PM

First of all, it’s weak, not week. Secondly, I’m not a “conservative,” I am a conservative and proud of it. Unlike many of you, I’m not hung up on an issue that is now moot since Obamao has already been President for a year. What is the end game with your argument? If everything you say is true, what do you think will happen? Do you think they’re going to have a special election to decide who the President should be? Not likely. Biden would get the gig and that would be far worse for America. Obamao’s agenda can be reversed. Biden’s track record of being wrong on practically every foreign policy issue of the past 38 years could be catastrophic and irreversible.

Being labeled a Birther does matter. If you’re trying to get people to see things your way it doesn’t help if people think you are bat-crap crazy. Obamao has given us more than enough ammunition to attack him. His agenda is a bigger concern to those that agree with me than what his Birth Certificate says. There were dozens of reasons for why he shouldn’t have been elected and another 10 trillion reasons why he shouldn’t be reelected.

Look at it this way, Rep. Ron Paul has great credibility when it comes to fiscal conservatism but his connection to the Truthers preclude him from ever having any serious impact on the country in terms of the discussion of what the Democrats are doing to this republic.

I agree that he is dirty. I’ve never heard of a Dem from Chicago not being dirty but what’s done is done. We can’t change the past. We can only limit the damage that this Chicago thug is seeking to inflict in the present and future. We need to focus on spreading the conservative message and demonstrating the differences between liberals and us rather than this nonsense. It’s not helping us one bit. Conservatism and a return to the principles of the Founding Fathers is far more important than this.

As far as spending millions of dollars on lawyers to keep the records closed is pretty simple. When you rake in $500M in your campaign, a couple of million dollars to some lawyers is a drop in a bucket when you have the opportunity to paint your opposition as nutballs. I’m sure the Obamao campaign got more bang for their buck this way than any ad they ran in 2008. You’re doing the work for them.

rmel80 on February 4, 2010 at 9:45 PM

2Brave2Bscared on February 4, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Umm….did you even read your own link? The only language that really supports your contention is in the dissenting opinion. Dissenting opinions are not binding.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 9:51 PM

Anyway, looks like progressoverpeace skittered away. Shocking.

crr6 on February 4, 2010 at 9:52 PM

The poor victim.

diogenes on February 4, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Maybe progressoverpeace is being censored on this issue, as I’m being censored. Unless my posts are being held in moderation for a long time, but why would that be?

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 10:06 PM

Let me try again. The DOH has confirmed that they give the certificate numbers on the day the BC is filed with the state registrar. The Factcheck BC was filed at the DOH 3 days before the Nordyke BC but still has a later number. There is no way the certificate number on Factcheck could have the date of filing it has.

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 10:12 PM

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 10:06 PM

This actually happened to me the other day on a birth certificate post. I wondered if it was because I linked to WND. There was literally nothing controversial in what I said nor any foul language. Not even #%&@ kind of symbols. It’s almost like someone doesn’t want us to educate people with truth and facts. Paranoid? Hmmmm….

Also, thanks for the post about Hawaii DOH. Do you go to Citizen Wells blog? They are very up on the BC issue.

mrsmwp on February 4, 2010 at 10:17 PM

The D O H has confirmed that they assign c e r t n u m b e r s when they get the c e r t i f i c a t e s in ther office. The F a c t c h e c k C O L B was at the D O H 3 days before the N o r d y k e c e r t s but still have a later c e r t i f i c a t e n u m b e r. There is no way that a c e r t i f i c a t e could have the number that the F a c t c h e c k one has and still have the f i l i n g date that is has.

Let’s see if this gets through.

justincase on February 4, 2010 at 10:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4