Let’s see you come up with a winning plan.
A winning plan for tilting at windmills?
I'll get right to work on that.
Um, how about finding and nurturing electable conservative candidates to take back congress in 2010 and an electable conservative candidate to take back the presidency in 2012? It's better than relying on birther fantasies that have about as much chance of bearing fruit as I do at winning the Powerball.
People need to put down their crack pipes if they think any of these eligiblity cases will ever succeed in removing Obama from the White House. It ain't gonna happen.
Let’s see you come up with a winning plan.
I've got a "sure fire winning plan" -- if you think the "birth certificate" is the issue here. I've said, since right after the election, that individual states should enact legislation to require any candidate to produce his birth certificate or else he cannot be on the ballot in that state.
Several states attempted that last year, and I'm sure they'll be at it again. In my state, it failed in the Senate, but I see no reason for something like that to not be done (the state was Oklahoma, the other states were Arizona, Texas and Missouri).
That's a sure-fire method for getting the birth certificate shown.
BUT, if you're of the other segment of the birthers and think it's the citizenship of the parents, then you better hurry and get a Supreme Court decision on the matter of whether the citizenship of parents affect the natural born status of a person. It's only by that Supreme Court decision that you're going to get the final answer on that one.
So, those are the two methods for answering the problems, but I don't hold out very much hope for the Supreme Court decision. The state legislation has the best chance of anything to succeed though.
The issue of Obama's birthplace, though..., has been definitely answered...
First, you go to the main State of Hawaii, Department of Health webpage (as shown below in the first link, then you go to the Archived Press Releases (as shown in the second link) and lastly, you go to the actual press release from the State of Hawaii, Department of Health, in PDF format. You'll notice that all the links are the official website each one tracks to the next one, and to the actual press release itself.
It is the following information, presented here text (not formatted exactly the same way, but all the same words), on that PDF file, with the official State of Hawaii seal on it...
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 -- 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i 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.”
###
As far as addressing the issue from an official State of Hawaii pronouncement, since they are the holders of the original information, and have certified as a statement from the State of Hawaii (again the original maintainers and certifiers of that information) regarding the birth of Barack Obama -- this seems to wrap it up.
It doesn't get any more original or any more certified than this, as far as state records are concerned.
OK --
(a) Get rid of Oily Taitz as the poster child for the birther movement. Although her heart may be in the right place, she is clearly over-matched in the courtroom, and she really does not seem to understand the litigation process.
(b) Nearly every state, if not every state, has a very specific procedure for challenging the qualifications of candidates for office at the federal, state, and local level. In most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations begins to run at or about the time the candidate's name is placed on the ballot. The time to initiate the challenge is very short to ensure that that these disputes are litigated before the election and not after the winner is sworn into office. Even the appeals process is expedited to ensure appellate review prior to the election. Why? Because elections are expensive, and public policy dictates that we resolve "qualification disputes" before the ballots are printed, the elections are held, and winner is sworn into office. Indeed, the only challenges that are allowed after the election relate to the qualifications of the voters, the conduct of the election, and the accuracy of the count.
(c) The time is now to end the legal challenges to 0bama's qualifications with respect to the 2008 election. The focus now should be on formulating a plan to timely challenge his qualifications in several key Red States as soon as his name is placed on the ballot. The law suits should be commenced in several states in the name of an opposition candidate and/or opposition party, and not some soldier that doesn't want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan. The law suit would challenge Obama's qualifications to appear on the ballot on a state-by-state basis, much the way a candidate challenges the authenticity of signatures on their opponent's nominating petition or challenges the qualifications of a candidate based upon his of her residency.