Posted on 03/12/2009 7:47:44 AM PDT by Hillary'sMoralVoid
There are at least five ways that Barack Obama can be declared ineligible for the presidency. Here is a list:
1. Obama was not born in the United States. The Certification of Live Birth that he posts on his web site proves nothing. Only the original paper certificate can address this issue, Obama refuses to release it.
2. Dual Citizenship issue: Obama could have British and American citizenship due to his father being a British subject at the time of his birth.
3. Dual Citizenship issue: Obama could have dual citizenship with Indonesia if he was adopted. His school records from Inonesia indicate he was Indonesian. He also traveled to Pakistan, but under what passport?
4. Mother's age at birth. Hawaiian laws on the books at the time of his birth hold that U.S. citizenship may only pass to a child born overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the former was at least 19. Stanley Ann Dunham was only 18 at the time of Obama's birth.
5. Failure to formally renounce dual citizenship described above and reestablish American citizenship at some point and show proof of same.
Obama supporters have unrealistically simplified this issue down to the COLB. There are possibly more issues out there still to be investigated, perhaps willful misconduct on the potential forging of the COLB, etc.
I think that those who are bringing this issue to the attention of the courts need to step back and address the big picture first and then fill in the details.
Are there other potentially disqualifying factors missing from this list?
Would you agree that the fact that there is a difference is significant? Wouldn't you expect something like that to be standardized across the state? If they can't even standardize on the form from one office to the next, what else have they not standardized?
And what are we to infer about a non-standard form for the purposes of qualifying the highest office in the land?
-PJ
That was before he posted it on the internet and made it available at his campaign office. After he did that, Geraghty and virtually every other big name in the conservative movement was satisfied. Ditto for the St. Petersburn Times.
I have yet to see a single reporter claim he was denied access to the hard copy after Factcheck was allowed to see it.
Not unless there's either Hawaii state law or the DOH somewhere officially indicates the difference is meaningful. As far as I can tell, there is nothing to this effect. Therefore, I don't think the difference means anything.
Putting out an image on the net of a dubious document hasn't done so well for people who can think for themselves.
I have yet to see a single reporter claim he was denied access to the hard copy after Factcheck was allowed to see it.
Oh, Really?
Where is the evidence of that? Where is that reporter who went to "Factcheck".org HQ to see Obama's COLB? Does "Factcheck" still have Obama's COLB in their possession?
Has any reporter ever reported to have seen the Obama COLB in person before or after “factcheck”.org and the DailyKOS posted it online? Any?
Also, did you notice the little document ID/Rev # in the lower left of the document? If all documents have this same ID and revision #, shouldn't they all look the same?
-PJ
-PJ
It's astonishing. This is something that hasn't been mentioned much here or any anywhere. Musical chair formats for official Hawaiian documents.
Origina of Obama birth certificate hunt:
April 18, 2009 -- St. Petersberg Times tries to debunk an internet email citing Obama's middle name as Mohammed: No Muhammed or Mohammed in Obama's name. Investigated all available documents, refused by campaign to see birth certificate.
Michelle Malkin picks up on the story on June 9, 2008: Obama Could Debunk Some Rumors By Releasing His Birth Certificate.
June 10, 2008: The first FreeRepublic post on the topic.
So, this wasn't about trying to prove Obama's eligibility via natural born status, until he made it so by raising suspicions by his behavior around what seemed to be a simple request by journalists from a regional newspaper.
-PJ
Actually only one way - if he wasn't born in the U.S.
FactCheck was never in possession of the COLB. They went to Obama's Chicago campaign HQ to photograph it, and posted the photos of it on August 21 -- the same day, I believe, that Berg filed his original lawsuit in Philadephia.
A question I find more interesting is why Berg never challenged Obama to let him send a credentialed expert to examine the COLB that FactCheck photographed. Berg claimed from the beginning that the image posted at KOS was a forgery, so when FactCheck posted photographs, and reported that the document was in Chicago, why didn't Berg ask to check it out?
The nature of the question stays the same. Has any reporter seen the Obama COLB in person before or after "FactCheck".org posted it online no matter where the dubious COLB is located? And no, DailyKommie.com (DailyKOS) doesn't count.
Answer: no reporter has seen it in person.
Obama should have left his COLB with "factcheck". The thing is only worth 10 dollars. Obama can order reams of COLBs if he wants at that cheap price and have them out like candy.
have = hand them...
Accept what you will. However, until you find some evidence that the difference has any substance, your attempt to attach significance to it has no validity.
It's virtually impossible to enforce complete uniformity within any large organization. There will always be minor differences between documents and formats no matter how hard anyone tries to eliminate them. This is true of virtually every state agency, even of large corporations.
However, so long as the differences aren't important, as in this case, I don't see why anyone should be particularly concerned.
You would have a point if large numbers of reporters were asking to see hard copies. As far as I know, however, since factcheck photographed it, no reporter has asked to see it and been denied.
And before FactCheck was invited, all reporters were denied.
-PJ
So?
Hawaii birth, marriage and death certificates are issued through only one office: The State Dept. of Health in Honolulu. There are no "local offices" where you can obtain them. I suppose it's possible that in the past the other islands issued their own certs, but Honolulu has never had more than one centralized state office.
The "changes" you refer to are changes made by the state in its forms through the years, not by "the whim of local offices." If you look at the various certificates -- originals and COLBs from the '60's and '70s that have been posted on the internet, they all indicate "Dept. of Health, State of Hawaii," (rather than city or county) and if the image posted has an official signature, it's always that of a state official.
Reporters are not going to go through the formality of requesting Obama's COLB or his birth certificate when he will not show it in court without being ordered. Obama silly lawyers only gave the court a hyperlink to the images at "factcheck". His COLB is only worth $10 bucks. The thing must be forgery.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.