Posted on 10/03/2008 8:51:01 AM PDT by bonnieblue4me
Update on latest information from Berg v. Obama regarding eligibility for POTUS.
Simple. I'm not a liberal, I'm not a lawyer, and I wasn't assigned here by anyone.
Any other questions?
hey guys... we have a Birth Certificate troll
Someone please invite the Viking Kitties, per Free Republic tradition.
You know that won’t hold up in court.
“0bama says he was born in Honolulu.”
“He produced what he claims is a certificate...”
I figured you for a better lawyer than that. Either that or 0bama isn’t paying you enough to do your job properly.
Why would it go away?
Would you be satisfied if Obama simply produced his original Hawaiian birth certificate even if that meant that he may still not be eligible under Article II because of Indonesian citizenship?
I'm just trying to understand just what the actual issue here is.
Is the issue only his Hawaiian birth certificate? Or is the issue Article II of the Constitution?
Sure.
You show up 2 days ago on a conservative forum, one that is well known for our stellar record of picking apart lame liberal lies, and you defend the most liberal socialist running for President in the history of America, and you think we wouldn't take notice? Why would I believe you?
Is the issue only his Hawaiian birth certificate? Or is the issue Article II of the Constitution?
***The issue is whether he’s natural born, per the requirements for eligibility of the president in the constitution. If he’s natural born and an Indonesian citizen, it won’t matter much because I’m sure the courts and all the liberals in guvmint will just fall all over themselves to allow him a pass on whatever is needed.
So, basically if he produces a birth certificate to whomever asks, the same way McCain has done, the issue goes away for him. Guys like me will move on to some other aspect of this campaign and the only ones left will be real serious Berg/Truther/crackpots. It’s Simple to produce it if he has it. But he hasn’t done it. And it appears to be costing him, so if this was all some kind of trap, he should have sprung it by now.
I didn't say anything about it holding up in court in my previous reply.
I was trying to make sense of what you said.
What you said was that it was evidence that Obama produced an unacceptable form of identification.
I asked you how was it evidence that Obama produced an unacceptable form of identification when the information in the AP photo was consistent with with the identification Obama produced.
So let me try again.
How is it evidence that Obama produced an unacceptable form of identification? What information in that photo is evidence that Obama produced an unacceptable form of identification?
Peerless ~ What proof do you have of this?
First, I'm not defending anyone.
Second, why would one only be interested in picking apart lies that may be committed only by those of a certain political stripe? I'm libertarian. So should I only care about lies committed by others and not other libertarians?
If so, then I'm sorry, that's not how I was raised. I was raised to not have any prejudice as to where the truth may lay. And I'd like to think that's how conservatives were raised as well.
Because if we're only prepared to accept that the truth may only lay one way and never the other, then we simply end up lying to ourselves.
Why would I believe you?
That's not for me to say. All I can do is express my opinions and what I believe to be the facts and leave others to decide for themselves whether to take them or leave them.
Ok. But all Article II says is "natural born." There seems to be some argument as to exactly what qualifies one to be "natural born."
If he’s natural born and an Indonesian citizen, it won’t matter much...
But according to Berg's lawsuit, that matters a great deal. Berg argues that if he is or ever was an Indonesian citizen, or even a Kenyan citizen by virtue of his father's citizenship, that disqualifies him as being "natural born," and that his being born in Hawaii is irrelevant.
But if that doesn't matter to you, then why does it matter whether he was born in Hawaii or not?
I'm just trying to make sense of what you're trying to say.
I don't know. What proof am I supposed to have?
I was discussing the Berg lawsuit. I said nothing of the birth certificate until someone else brought it into the discussion (it may have been you).
As I said, because Berg's primary argument is that Obama is not a "natural born" citizen due to his having or having had Indonesian citizenship, I see the birth certificate as a non-issue, as well as whether he was born in Kenya or Hawaii or whether the certificate is fake or real.
Berg himself says in his response to the motion to dismiss:
Even if Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii, he lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother re-married and moved to Indonesia with her Indonesian husband.
So I don't see how you get that I'm a "Birth Certificate troll." I've only been responding to what you have brought into the discussion, even though as I've said, I don't see it being particularly relevant with regard to the Berg case which is the subject of this article.
Ok. But all Article II says is “natural born.” There seems to be some argument as to exactly what qualifies one to be “natural born.”
***I see you didn’t click on the link I provided. So you sign up here a couple of days ago and start bloviating about something that you haven’t even come up to speed on. OK. That usually means there’s Ozone in your Future.
But according to Berg’s lawsuit, that matters a great deal. Berg argues that if he is or ever was an Indonesian citizen, or even a Kenyan citizen by virtue of his father’s citizenship, that disqualifies him as being “natural born,” and that his being born in Hawaii is irrelevant.
***He might be right. I just happen to think the likelihood of this particular argument winning the day is about 2% while the birth certificate (Proven to be a forgery) knocking Obama around will be significantly higher.
But if that doesn’t matter to you, then why does it matter whether he was born in Hawaii or not?
***Because if he was born in Hawaii, he’s natural born. If he was born in Kenya, he’s a naturalized (ahem, illegally naturalized) citizen and he’s disqualified in the constitution. It’s just as if someone were to prove he’s 30 years old — he wouldn’t meet the age requirement.
I’m just trying to make sense of what you’re trying to say.
***I don’t get that impression. I get the impression you’re trying to steer the conversation to Berg rather than address the very, very, very simple (and as yet unanswered) question of WHY hasn’t Obama produced a birth certificate just like McCain did?
was discussing the Berg lawsuit.
***The Berg Lawsuit is all about the Birth Certificate and Obama producing his “vault” copy.
Obama Conundrum: If a total stranger can do it, then why not Obama?
The Greater Evil ^ | 10/02/08 | Polarik
Posted on Friday, October 03, 2008 8:39:29 AM by Polarik
Fight The Smears changed their web page which displayed their smaller copy of it, by putting in the following lead-in line:
‘Smears claiming Barack Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate aren’t actually about that piece of paper — they’re about manipulating people into thinking Barack is not an American citizen.’
We never said that Obama “doesn’t have a birth certificate.” We all have a birth certificate, but we also do not substitute a forged image in place of that piece of paper.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2096169/posts
He “lost” his thesis on Soviet nuclear policy (see “Where in the World is Obama’s Missing Thesis“ which might provide insight regarding his seeming lack of knowledge about Soviet policy during the Kennedy years).
He won’t answer questions about his days at Harvard Law School.
He “lost” his Illinois Senate records.
He will only release a simple one-page letter from his doctor on his medical condition.
He won’t release his application to the state bar, which, as National Review’s Jim Geraghty notes raises questions about whether he told the truth about parking tickets and drug use, among other issues.
He won’t disclose list of his clients from his law firm days or the nature of the work he did for them as a lawyer (his clients include the indicted political fixer Tony Rezko).
He walks away from uncomfortable questions about Rezko at a news conference.
His cultists try to shut down inquiry into his stewardship of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge by sliming a journalist investigating his days at the helm of that group, which blew through $100 million dollars with no discernible benefit for the schools and students that it was putatively designed to help (what does the constitutional law lecturer say to the chilling of free speech by his acolytes?).
He tries to muddle his long-standing ties with Pastor Wright by producing a version of his attendance record at Trinity Church that is sharply at variance with previous versions he has given (”Obama Re-invents his Trinity Church History“).
What I am up to speed on is Berg's lawsuit. That is what this article is about. And that is what I was discussing.
He might be right.
Well at least you acknowledge that Berg argues that it matters.
I just happen to think the likelihood of this particular argument winning the day is about 2% while the birth certificate (Proven to be a forgery) knocking Obama around will be significantly higher.
Fine. And I just happen to think that the claims made by Berg in his lawsuit make the birth certificate a non-issue
Because if he was born in Hawaii, he’s natural born.
But Berg argues that his Indonesian citizenship trumps whatever status he may have had as "natural born" by being born in Hawaii.
If he was born in Kenya, he’s a naturalized (ahem, illegally naturalized) citizen and he’s disqualified in the constitution.
But I haven't seen any evidence that he was born in Kenya. Whereas I have seen evidence that he was born in Hawaii. Both the photos of what Obama claims to be a certification of birth issued by the State of Hawaii and giving a date of birth of August 4, 1961, and the photo of the Jakarta school record which states he was born in Honolulu and also gives a date of birth of August 4, 1961.
I don’t get that impression. I get the impression you’re trying to steer the conversation to Berg...
Trying to steer the conversation to Berg? The subject of this article is Berg's lawsuit. The title says "US State Department Subpoena Denial in Obama Eligibility Suit." The subtitle says "Update on latest information from Berg v. Obama regarding eligibility for POTUS."
So if I am trying to steer the conversation to Berg, it's only because that's what I was led to believe this conversation was about.
...rather than address the very, very, very simple (and as yet unanswered) question of WHY hasn’t Obama produced a birth certificate just like McCain did?
A couple of reasons.
First, because it wasn't the subject of this article. The subject of the article was Berg's lawsuit.
Second, I can't answer that question. Nor do I see that anyone but Obama can answer that question. Anything else is just speculation. And speculation doesn't get one any closer to any meaningful answer so I don't see the point.
Personally I'd be curious to see his full form birth certificate. But speculating about why he hasn't produced it isn't going to get me any closer to seeing it nor provide me with any answers.
No, the lawsuit is not all about the birth certificate. That should be evident to anyone who has read it. And I've already quoted you Berg's claim that Obama lost whatever "natural born" US citizenship he may have had when his mother re-married and moved to Indonesia with Soetoro, which as I've said makes the birth certificate issue meaningless in terms of Article II.
He “lost” his thesis on Soviet nuclear policy (see “Where in the World is Obama’s Missing Thesis“ which might provide insight regarding his seeming lack of knowledge about Soviet policy during the Kennedy years).
He won’t answer questions about his days at Harvard Law School.
Etc.
But none of this has anything to do with Berg's lawsuit or Article II eligibility.
And it seems this isn't going to get back on topic so I'll just bow out and let you guys discuss this other stuff.
Have a great weekend.
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.