Posted on 03/06/2009 4:27:07 PM PST by AJ in NYC
It is an article of faith in the loopier precincts of the Internet, impervious to evidence to the contrary, that Barack Obama is ineligible to be president of the United States because he is not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution requires.
All this would be quite harmless, like believing in the Illuminati or alien abduction, except that the extra-chromosome true believers have taken to filing suit in the federal courts basically seeking to overturn the election.
(Excerpt) Read more at scrippsnews.com ...
The same document most of us have to submit to Government Agents several times in a lifetime -- Yet Obama refuses..
This can mean only one thing -- He doesn't have the document to prove what he must prove...
The bozo who wrote this article looks exactly like I expected the Obama sausage swallower to look,
Extra Chromosome? Could that be projection on Mr. McFeaters’ part?
That’s absurd!
The same way the COLB was scanned, his original birth certificate could have been scanned and this would have been a non-issue,and nothing in this world is stopping him from doing so even now.
You know it
I know it
and anyone that reads this knows it!
There is no legitimate reason why he cannot show his original birth certificate if he is everything he claims to be.
But if you have one reason other than he doesn’t have to I want to hear it....
Then why give the court a link to an image in the first place since it's more than the court asked for? You always point out that no court has asked for it. If you're going to show an image of the document to the court, show the real thing.
Not only is he not a citizen, but lots of prophetic evidence exists that he very well may be the Antichrist. Wouldn’t want to be there on judgement day trying to answer why I cast a vote for him.
I guarantee that somewhere down the line he and his thugs will begin taking steps to put all born-again Christians in detention camps as a first step to eliminating them. We better prepare ourselves and be ready.
except that most people out there who believe in this will not consider any evidence brought out to be real. Case in point were the Hawaiian officials saying they had his certificate....they’d just say that that certificate was fabricated during this time and didn’t prove anything. And the reason why he doesn’t give in is the moment he does someone else will think of something else to bog him down with. If you give an inch you give a mile
The people of the United States are asking for proof.
Don't you ask yourself why Barack Obama wouldn't have put THIS matter to rest months ago?
Why not?
I've sort of established, for my own use, that there are two types here. One is the democrat, who is mildly retarded, and mistakes "progressive thought" (a belief that envy of wealth without question is morally acceptable) for intelligence. He's stupid, but as long as he hangs with other stupids, he feels comfortable. However, in an office, he's listening to two Marines, talking about what happened when a Ma Deuce wasn't head spaced. He only catches every third word, but since he's been told by his handlers that a degree in third world literature grants an entitlement, he sneers.
The other, what I call a communist, for lack of a better term, is willing to use any lie to make him more equal that the rest. A communist is evil. He does not want to argue, he wants to dominate. He wants to steal, (redirect wealth), he wants to kill, (pro choice, death with dignity). He will never admit to error, and he will deny, or call names, or go deaf when asked for proof.
The question is, in a year or so, who is going to be kneeling at the edge of a fresh dug ditch...
Citizens have standing, problem is they think we are serfs.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
Yeah, I read the book.
No evidence produced thus far is worthy of consideration.
The Hawaiian officials saying they have an original birth certificate doesn't mean a thing if they won't produce it.
The COLB that was issued isn't even one that is consistent with something issued in 1961. It's a laser-printed copy from a database onto a form that has an issue date that is far more recent. It's probably fine for someone who is signing their kid up for Little League. Not so good for proving eligibility for POTUS.
Teacher has it right... the burden of proof is on 0bama. If the vault-copy certificate is like those issued in 1961 and has real signatures and the like, then most of us that question will go away. We won't be happy, but we'll go away. If it looks recent (like the supposed Bush National Guard docs of a few years ago that were manufactured) then more questions will be asked. If it's only the 1961 COLB and not a real birth certificate, then more questions will be asked.
If the vault-copy certificate does prove 0bama to be eligible, I would like to know now WHY he has hidden it for so long.
We were asking beforehand too. Those responsible for following up to ensure 0bama's eligibility were negligent because they did not do so.
It would seem that it was put to rest. Enough so that the requisite number of electors were appointed, and the requisite number of electoral votes were cast, those votes were certified by Congress, and Obama was sworn into office by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
No, it was not put to rest, it was ignored. The electors, votes, certification, and swearing in are secondary. Producing the genuine 1961 document would put it to rest.
Or even say if it shows Hawaii as the place of birth. An Hawaiian BC will be issued to a foreign born child under certain circumstances.
It's probably fine for someone who is signing their kid up for Little League.
It's insufficient for Pop Warner League.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
Yes, I realize that. This is a situation that requires examination of the original document. If the State of Hawaii (c. 1961) only issued that document to those born in the state, that would be sufficient evidence. As the situation goes, it is not.
Where exactly does this burden of proof originate? Where in the Constitution or in federal statute say that anyone must prove anything with regard to Article II qualifications? And to whom exactly does it say the proof needs to be presented to?
Not everything is explained explicitly. That said, anyone who has sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution should have been asking for such proof. Generally, there is no question whether the candidates are Natural-born, so the question usually does not need to be asked. IIRC, I believe that the issue was settled for McCain when he produced a long-form BC for Congress.
Until you can show me that, then the only burden of proof is on those claiming he's not eligible.
We'd love to. The only problem is that the State of Hawaii won't release the form. Since one cannot prove a negative, the only manner of solving the issue is to prove the positive. The ball is in 0bama's court.
The moral equivalent of:
Kind of late for that now. The kidnapping's over.
Normal people want the kid returned to his home.
except that the burden of proof in the vast majority of civil and criminal cases lies with the plaintiff, for the specific reason that the defendant could not just be systematically harassed...the only time there’s a reverse onus on the defendant is during drug possession cases and speeding tickets and their ilk, when the defendant has to give a reason why they were speeding or why there were drugs in their possession etc. Otherwise the onus lies on the plaintiff to prove what accusations they are bringing before the court, or we’d get a bunch of cases saying that so and so was a traitor, and it would be impossible to prove one wasn’t as there’d always be the possibility. Its why reverse onus rarely works, and why the onus is on you to prove that he wasn’t born in Hawaii and isn’t a natural born citizen.
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.