Skip to comments.Paul Ryan Has News For The Birthers: He’s Not One Of Them
Posted on 10/06/2012 12:09:40 PM PDT by Kleon
click here to read article
He’s another who checked his huevoes at the city limit of D.C.
The whining on this thread will be fierce.
The ruling elites obviously are counting on Obama being defeated in November so the whole eligibility issue can be swept under the rug.
I’m glad he’s not getting side-tracked with this. History may present the full birth story eventually, but it is not Ryan’s job to deal with. He needs to make the positive case for Romney/Ryan, and show how bad another Obama four years would be.
There is no need for anything to be under any rug. There is no evidence that Obozo was born anywhere but Hawaii. The prevailing legal opinion is that a US citizen is either born or naturalized.
But think how much easier would it be just to disqualify someone who was never eligible for office. Why does that guy deserve to run again??
The prevailing Constitutional requirement for president is to be a natural born citizen, not just a U.S. citizen, and especially not by simply being “born or naturalized.” It’s why the SCOTUS said the 14th amendment does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens. There’s a material difference between these classes of citizens. Obama is not and cannot be eligible.
Looks like you decided to beat the rush.
I’m not sure if your comment qualifies as a whine, but it’s close.
I'm a semi-birther myself in that I think he was a foreign student of some kind, but if I were Ryan I'd send these politically-naive agitators who are bugging him a manual on how to win elections in modern-day America.
i am a “birther”. i do not believe that he should have been president because his father was not a natural citizen. that made it for me, along with the fact that he had a book out that declared that he was a “kenyon”.
sorry, you can’t go on for years and then recant. you correct things immediately, unless you are hiding the truth.
his birth certificate is false. let the him defend it. \
i paid no attention to this in ‘08. i do now.
as far as i am concerned, he should have been vetted, should prove who he is, and at the least should provide his college transcripts and his admission papers.
Trump is right about this.’
Ryan and Romney haven’t won anything yet. McCain certainly couldn’t beat Obama, so it’s rather naive to assume that one tactic will prevail over someone who is irrationally popular, when it would be Constitutionally correct simply to have Obam disqualified from office.
The Constitution describes only three types of US citizen. Currently one is either natural born or naturalized. There is no fourth category. Only naturalized citizens are barred from the Presidency.
Ryan should say it’s not the proper time for him to deal with this right now, but that it will be dealt with.
Hawaii state registrar Alvin Onaka has already confirmed that the HI birth record for Obama is not legally valid so no birth facts can be certified as the way the birth actually happened. And he has confirmed that the White House image is NOT “a true and accurate representation of the original record on file”.
Though the claims actually entered on the WH BC image “match” the claims on the HDOH record, the claims are NOT “identical” - presumably because the WH record leaves blank one or more items that contain actual content in the HDOH record.
The 2 items that were left blank on the WH image are mother’s mailing address and evidence submitted for late and altered BC’s. And the HDOH has already indirectly confirmed that Obama amended his BC in late 2006 or January of 2007, and former OIP Director Paul Tsukiyama has indirectly confirmed that there are affidavits filed to support the claims on Obama’s BC - which would not be necessary if it was a routine Kapiolani birth that was reported, as the BC now claims.
The 1960-64 birth index has been proven to contain at least 2 name from non-valid BC’s, so Obama’s presence on that index says nothing about the legal validity of his record.
Fukino’s statement never verified that Obama WAS born in Hawaii - only that she had seen the vital records (plural) verifying that Obama was born in Hawaii. That is referring to the affidavits that Tsukiyama confirmed exist - affidavits “verify” (swear to) a claim. The word that Onaka used when referring to what the official record claims was “indicating”; he did not say that the birth certificate “verifies” a Honolulu birth.
So there is nothing that Hawaii officials have brought forth which refutes Onaka’s disclosures. Indeed, his disclosure fits very well with what Gov Abercrombie said to his friend Mike Evans.
The truth needs to get out there, but not by Ryan or Romney. Still, R&R should simply say that it will be dealt with in its proper time.
The SCOTUS said the definition of NBC is found OUTSIDE of the Constitution. It’s why they said the 14th amendment does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens. The SCOTUS acknowledged at least four different types of citizens, if not more in the Minor decision. Read it. While the 14th amendment contemplates two types of citizenship, it doesn’t describe every way of becoming a citizen. The requirement for president is NBC, and only those persons who are born in the country to citizen parents meet this requirement. The court was very clear.
agreed. Much more evidence shows a a Hawaii birth than any alternative. There is question around the birth certificate, no doubt, and there are a TON of questions about Obama’s life. Whether it is in his education, career or upbringing. At this stage it is not enough to sidetrack what is important in November 2012.
The only thing that might be of interest from an election standpoint would be his college funding. If he did lie about being a foreigner for either entry or funding, that is a legitimate character issue and one that would impact many voters. Unless there is clear cut, inarguable evidence, I wouldn’t even go there.
Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obamas lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obamas birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is irrelevant to his placement on the ballot.
No one’s perfect. . .