Replies

If the law required it then I'd say that Obama should provide it. Since the law does not then I don't think he should be forced to do what no other president has had to do.

Thank you for your answer that appears to be your sincere opinion.

However, please allow me to press you one more time:

What I wished to address was the ethical and moral issues of the case: divorced from the legal aspects.

In plain language - those actions that are GOOD and NOBEL.

Not all actions that are Good and Nobel are bound by law.

For instance, one time some punks (in my presence) tried to rob an older man of his wallet, and I intervened.

The law did NOT require me to "interfere," (I could have kept walking)however, my code of right and wrong would not allow me to look the other way.

Recently, it was in the NEWS how a girl was raped, in broad daylight, as a large crowed looked on and did nothing to stop it (nor, by LAW, were they required to stop it) and, in fact, some even cheered the rapists on!

Now There are some -- call them "birthers" "patriots" "constitutionalist" -- that see their country being raped through evisceration of the constitution and the obliteration of the lofty vision of it's framers; by tin gods, such as Obama, that openly declare that our constitution is "fundamentally flawed!"

So we each have a moral choice to make as to where we stand:

We can do the right and Nobel thing, or we can turn are faces away -- because the law doesn't require us to fight evil.

Or worse, we can cheer the evil doers on!

Has the "home of the brave" become a nation of cowards?

So let me ask this:

Shouldn't our President, as leader of the free world, be the one to take the "high road" -- the noble road -- rather than the "easy" way out?

What is he hiding in the dark that he is so afraid may be revealed to the light?

I am sorry, but his behaver in the matter of his vital record's may or may not be legal, but it certainly isn't ethical or Nobel or brave.

So I ask wouldn't you agree that going to court and showing his birth certificate -- irrespective of whether the law compels him to go -- be the right and Nobel thing for him do?

Keep in mind that just because other Presidents have behaved in a certain way does not shield the actions of a sitting President from legitimate criticism.

Founder John Adams wrote:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Thank you for your time.

STE=Q

Just for the sake of argument, Barack Obama posted his Certification of Live Birth on the internet over a year ago for the entire world to see. That document contained ALL of the constitutionally required information: Place of birth in the US and age over 35 years old.
The State of Hawaii has verified the information on that document.
Do you really think that Barack Obama’s policies will change in any way shape or form after showing his long form birth certificate instead of the short form?

Hawaii: Obama birth certificate is real
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm
By Dan Nakaso, The Honolulu Advertiser

In an attempt to quash persistent rumors that President Obama was not born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961, Hawaii’s health director reiterated that she has personally seen Obama’s birth certificate in the Health Department’s archives:
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.
I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago....”

On Oct. 31, Fukino originally tried to put an end to the belief among “birthers” that Obama was born in Kenya and thus was ineligible to run for the office of president.

Despite Fukino’s statements, the issue has continued to resonate from Capitol Hill to the national airwaves.

CNN’s Lou Dobbs demanded Obama’s original birth certificate. CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein told staffers of Lou Dobbs Tonight that the issue is a “dead” story, Kline told the Los Angeles Times in an interview published Sunday.

In an e-mail, the Times reported, Klein wrote that CNN researchers determined that Obama’s 1961 birth certificate no longer exists because Hawaiian officials had discarded paper documents in 2001 — a claim denied Monday by Hawaiian health officials.

In 2001, Hawaii’s paper documents were reproduced in electronic format, but “any paper data prior to that still exists,” Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo said.

Okubo would not say where Obama’s original birth certificate is but said, “We have backups for all of our backups.”

A congressional resolution introduced by Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, to commemorate the 50th anniversary of island statehood was delayed Monday.

The resolution includes a clause noting Obama’s Hawaiian birthplace. The line “Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961” appeared to be construed by birthers as a thinly veiled attempt to get Congress to affirm Obama’s U.S. citizenship, said Dave Helfert, an Abercrombie spokesman.

As the issue came to a vote, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., rose to object, saying there was not a quorum present. The House later voted 378-0 to approve the resolution. Bachmann voted in favor of the resolution.

Birthers denounce the notion that Obama was born in Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961, despite court rulings and statements by Fukino and Hawaii’s Republican governor, Linda Lingle.