For the resolution ... not for the birthplace statement. You forget that politicians who challenge anything about Obama's eligibility get instantly demonized by faither politicians and media, and there would be no point in stalling a statehood resolution over a toothless political statement. Here you show the judge relying on complete hearsay and logical fallacy .... not official documentation of Obama's citizenship.
Obama doesn’t have to “prove” his citizenship. Vice President Cheney certified his electoral college votes at a Joint Session of Congress, without objection and Chief Justice Roberts swore him in. He IS the president.
Certifiying the votes is not the same as certifying eligibility ... either these people chose to remain ignorant, not get involved and/or made calculated moves to avoid political demonization ... of course, you forgot to mention how Obama botched his oath. He may be a a defacto president, but he's not a constitutionally qualified president.
Obama’s eligibility opponents have to “prove” his ineligiblity which to date they have been unable to do in more than 70 attempts in lawsuits heard in civil courts.
Of course not. The courts hide behind standing so they don't have to deal with the eligibility issue. That's not something to be proud of. Second, it ignores that some states, like Hawaii, have laws that allow citizens to challenge the eligibility of candidates. Unfortunately no one realized soon enough that they could use these laws, which would grant standing to plaintiffs who don't get proper hearings and resolutions on the matter. Such won't be the case in 2012.
Well I agree with you on one point, the Courts definitely hide behind the Constitution and historical precedent.
That’s why the eligibility legal scorecard is Obama: 69/ Birthers: 0.
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
Birther attorneys are too incomptent to present a plaintiff who would be granted standing and there is no requirement for standing in a criminal investigation of election fraud or forgery. Grand juries can investigate (and subpoena) anything they want to investigate.