Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evidence Aside, State Lawmakers Debate ‘Birther’ Bills
The New York Times ^ | 4/21/2011 | Kirk Johnson

Posted on 04/21/2011 11:39:53 PM PDT by jdoug666

Investigations have concluded that President Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii in 1961, as he has always said.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: allegedlyamerican; allegedlyeligible; allegedlyhawaiian; birthcertificate; birther; brewer; bs; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; nyslimes; obama; trump
Arizona legislature must override Brewer's veto and Oklahoma's Governor Fallin should sign the pending legislation. Corsi's book release next month will be a bombshell. The Grand Usurper will be forced from POTUS, notwithstanding all the siren shilling by the Gray Lady!
1 posted on 04/21/2011 11:39:56 PM PDT by jdoug666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jdoug666
Longform BC please!Until then,STFU!
2 posted on 04/21/2011 11:42:09 PM PDT by taxtruth (Don't end the fed,jail the fed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

These liars never learn.


3 posted on 04/21/2011 11:46:42 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxtruth

AMEN!!!!


4 posted on 04/21/2011 11:48:05 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Release Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and let him and his family get on with their lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

I love how the “Investigations” the left did to confirm Obummers citizenship are never revealed. They never show their work. If no one has found the long form, what exactly did they look into? Screw you NYT.


5 posted on 04/21/2011 11:50:08 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

Consider the source!


6 posted on 04/21/2011 11:53:48 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

“Evidence aside.”

Too funny for words.


7 posted on 04/21/2011 11:55:01 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (What part of NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE do you fail to understand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

Oh pleeezzzz. Show the long form.


8 posted on 04/22/2011 12:04:19 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666
Evidence Aside, State Lawmakers Debate ‘Birther’ Bills
The New York Times ^ | 4/21/2011 | Kirk Johnson

Kirk Johnson,the NY Times reporter with no evidence and a story about a president with no BC while Trump is barking up o’s wagon train.We need to call this man ASAP at the NY SLIMES and ask for the LONG FORM BC.Call Kirk in the morning and get his inside scoop of cowplop he shovels.

9 posted on 04/22/2011 12:06:21 AM PDT by taxtruth (Don't end the fed,jail the fed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666
Investigations have concluded that President Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii in 1961, as he has always said.

LoL sure NY Slimes. Obama didn't say he was born in Hawaii. He spoke in the third person stating others have said he was born in Hawaii. Obama said, "Most people feel...he...he... he..." to that sycophant and minion member Gergie Steffufugus.

10 posted on 04/22/2011 12:15:59 AM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

I think they mean the PDF file posted by snopes...

Yup...that’s a PDF file alright...now lets see the BC!


11 posted on 04/22/2011 12:31:37 AM PDT by Crim (Palin / West '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666
The next sentence is

Just this week, on the news program “Good Morning America” on ABC, George Stephanopoulos produced a copy of the president’s Certification of Live Birth, causing a potential presidential aspirant, Michele Bachmann, the Republican congresswoman from Minnesota, to say that the issue appeared settled.

So the "evidence consists of a piece of paper that Stephanopoulos claims has a seal and whatnot. Since such a document can only come through Obama's permission, Stephanopoulos evidently was either fed the document by Obama or he is fabricating it. But where is a copy on ABC News Good Morning America, or other ABC News, website? Even if it were produced, it is only a copy of a Certification, and not a real birth certificate. Stephanopoulos seems to have no new information, and has produced nothing new for the public to see, but ABC News and the NY Times treat his claim and a guarded conditional statement by Bachmann after being sandbagged by Stephanopoulos on live national TV as one of several "investigations" which "conclude" Obama was born in Hawaii, despite the possibility he was born elsewhere and Hawaii issued the certification by proxy on the basis of a relative's statement around the date of birth, etc. The NY Times sentence above contains an embedded link to a youtube video which does not even seem to be the official ABC News video (it is posted by youtube user "designermite" who seems to have no explicit affiliation to either ABC News or the NY Times). The combined logical stretch from conjecture to conditional to conclusion by ABC News, "designermite," and the NY Times seems very desperate. They all evidently must have been stonewalled by Obama as no one quite comes out and says Obama produced anything new.

It is amazing to see how much in Obama's corner the MSM is these days.

Here is the youtube link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb7cm00a7cA

12 posted on 04/22/2011 12:34:40 AM PDT by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; jdoug666
Evidence Aside, State Lawmakers Debate ‘Birther’ Bills

And they ought to! This isn't the first time this issue has come up. It's long overdue for being settled by law. No more juvenile games.

Democrats played the "NBC" card against Republican Charles Evans Hughes in 1916 when he ran against Wilson. Hughes' father was a British citizen. Sound familiar?

Here's the historical piece from "Chicago Legal News" laying the Democrats' argument: IS MR. CHARLES EVANS HUGHES A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTION?

13 posted on 04/22/2011 12:58:12 AM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxtruth
It's NOT whether he was born in Hawaii, or any other State....it's whether his parents were BOTH U.S. Citizens, and whether he is a "Natural Born Citizen", or not.

The coverup continues, and it's been too long to rule now that his fraudulent Ascendancy to the Throne means ALL his Appointments, signings, etc., are null and void.

The damage is DONE.

14 posted on 04/22/2011 2:23:55 AM PDT by traditional1 ("Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

The birther issue would be totally worthless in a general election. I assume the idea is to get rid of Obunga prior to 2012.


15 posted on 04/22/2011 2:31:43 AM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

I think the requirement should have been there from day one. Put those bills through and nary a word need be said about his birth again until he has to prove himself to get on the ballot.


16 posted on 04/22/2011 2:34:18 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

“But down the hall, an assistant Democratic floor leader in the House, Al McAffrey, said the bill was the embarrassment. “
“Asked in an interview whether he was concerned about embarrassing the leader of his own party,”
“Opponents of the birther bills say they are unnecessary and are designed to score political points more than safeguard democracy, certainly in Mr. Obama’s case. “
How can anyone be against this sort of a bill? Why would anyone be embarrassed by one? Is there a logical reason for a candidate to not prove their legitimacy?


17 posted on 04/22/2011 2:44:14 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

I actually agreed with brewer - the proposed law was too vague with too many loopholes - circumcision certificates? baptism certificates? please. Back to rewrite and then give it to her again and she will sign.


18 posted on 04/22/2011 2:56:19 AM PDT by blueplum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

Read the comments and a good 60% cry racism. I won’t point out an obvious fact to them because theres no way i am going to post on the NYT website.
Go back to the first election. Any documents that were taken from one place to another went by horseback. Move ahead. In 1869 they drove the golden spike into the ground joining both coasts by rail. Still a several day cross country trip. People didn’t sit in front of their televisions or computers and have information fed to them.
The fact is the obligation to prove oneself eligible for office should have always been a requirement but wasn’t always feasible. Heck,i didn’t even touch on record keeping 150 years ago.
To the left,like it or not,Obama’s own actions with all his records has stirred up and kept alive this controversy. To cry racism over this issue only shows your own fears over the issue,only serves to point out your own nagging doubts.
The notion that a candidate has to prove his or her self is so simply logical that anyone opposing it must be very fearful of the results.


19 posted on 04/22/2011 3:09:50 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueplum

Getting it right should be simple and easy. Sadly we’re talking about a room full of elected officials.


20 posted on 04/22/2011 3:11:53 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wiggen
“But down the hall, an assistant Democratic floor leader in the House, Al McAffrey, said the bill was the embarrassment. “

“Asked in an interview whether he was concerned about embarrassing the leader of his own party,”

“Opponents of the birther bills say they are unnecessary and are designed to score political points more than safeguard democracy, certainly in Mr. Obama’s case. “

How can anyone be against this sort of a bill? Why would anyone be embarrassed by one? Is there a logical reason for a candidate to not prove their legitimacy?

*******

Yes. Why would anyone running for public office be embarrassed to show his long form birth certificate?

That is, what could possibly be on a long form birth certificate that would be embarrassing to a person running for the office of President of the United States?

For instance, is there anything on your birth certificate that would embarrass you if you were required to show election officials, local or national officials, your long form birth certificate?

To me, if a person is ashamed or embarrassed about some details that are on his birth certificate, then I say that he should not run for public office.

But offhand, I can't think of anything that would be on a person's birth certificate that would be embarrassing to someone. For instance, a person's religion is not listed on the long form birth certificates that I have seen on the internet.

So if anyone here can think of information on a long form birth certificate that would be embarrassing to a candidate for public office, please let me know.

21 posted on 04/22/2011 4:02:15 AM PDT by john mirse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: john mirse

Not to mention one has no control over who their parents are. Its what you do with your own life that matters,not the circumstances of ones birth.


22 posted on 04/22/2011 4:08:12 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

Birther control bills!!!


23 posted on 04/22/2011 4:29:08 AM PDT by sodpoodle (Is it 2012 yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: john mirse

You are eferring to embarrassment by most people. There are many thins that could be on Obama’s Birth Certificate that could be embarrassing to him. Including the real father.


24 posted on 04/22/2011 4:48:02 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
Thank you for that link.

The Supreme Court of the United States…has said that one born of alien parents in the territorial limits of the United States is not a “natural born citizen” within the meaning of the presidential qualification clause and, further, said that “such (persons) not being citizens can only become citizens * * * by being naturalized in the United States.” (Elk v . Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94.)

The founders set different citizenship requirements for occupants of the highest levels of offices established by the Constitution. It is indeed ludicrous that anyone would believe the founders would require less than the highest known form of citizenship of candidates for the two highest offices.

The argument further supports the proposition that, as most here know, “anchor baby” citizenship is a liberal myth with no foundation in the law.

So long as state eligibility bills are silent as to the second leg of NBC, citizen parents, those bills are worse than fatally flawed, they tend to provide the way to an anchor baby president.

Is Trump the only one left to defend our Constitution (in a peaceful manner)?

25 posted on 04/22/2011 5:27:56 AM PDT by frog in a pot (Islamic and Communist totalitarians share the same goal - global domination via jihad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666; Jet Jaguar; Lady Jag; Slings and Arrows; maggief; Dog; BP2; Candor7; martin_fierro; ...

constitutionalist ping


26 posted on 04/22/2011 5:37:12 AM PDT by bitt ( ..Congress - either investigate Obama ...or yourselves, for complicity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham

logic as per uncle sham:

“Just based upon what is currently KNOWN, even without a birth certificate we can PROVE he is not eligible.

Fact Number One
Congress is REQUIRED to ensure that the President elect is eligible for the office or they must name a replacement if the Vice President elect is also ineligible. (Twentieth Amendment, section three)

”3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”

Fact Number Two
The burden of proof is on the President elect to prove eligibility. The sequence of words from section three stating “if the President elect shall have failed” is describing an action by the “President elect” that he failed at.

Fact Number Three
The eligibility requirements in Article Two, section one clearly state that NO PERSON who fails to meet the eligibility requirements can serve as President. “No Person” leaves absolutely no wiggle room for anyone who might possibly fool his way into being sworn in through fraudulent representation or Congressional neglect in enforcing section three of the Twentieth amendment.

” No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Fact Number Four
Since Congress must act if the President elect fails to qualify, Congress must be made aware of whether they must act or not. This means that a legal “qualification” is fully known by Congress and that there is no mystery whether someone was eligible to serve or not. That is, if that “qualification” was made.

Fact Number Five
We have mystery about the eligibility of the person currently calling himself “President”. Nothing but mystery.

Fact Number Six
Since we have “mystery” this means that a “qualification” was NOT made and thus the President elect has “failed to qualify” and cannot be serving legally as President.

Fact Number Seven
“We have no birth certificate” EQUALS “We have a usurper”.

Fact Number Eight
It is the duty of Congress to immediately address this issue as per section three of the Twentieth amendment or they are breaking their oath of office from Article Six to “support this Constitution”.

Add up the facts and we have usurpation along with a Congress unwilling to address it. “


27 posted on 04/22/2011 5:41:05 AM PDT by bitt ( ..Congress - either investigate Obama ...or yourselves, for complicity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: frog in a pot
Excuse me, I misquoted. The USSC words are only those the author quoted.

The Supreme Court of the United States…has said that one born of alien parents in the territorial limits of the United States is not a “natural born citizen” within the meaning of the presidential qualification clause and, further, said that “such (persons) not being citizens can only become citizens * * * by being naturalized in the United States.” Elk v . (Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94.)

28 posted on 04/22/2011 5:45:43 AM PDT by frog in a pot (Islamic and Communist totalitarians share the same goal - global domination via jihad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bitt

bump


29 posted on 04/22/2011 5:47:47 AM PDT by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jdoug666

I gotta say Michelle Bachmann comes off like a clueless ditz when Steph held up that ridiculous photoshopped COLB on GMA.

And now look what her wide-eyed, doe-like wonder and “duh, well, then that settles it” remark has spawned.

ATTENTION: WOULD YOU HIGH PROFILE REPUBLICANS ***PLEASE*** DO AT LEAST A BARE MINIMUM OF RESEARCH AND EDUCATING OF YOURSELVES BEFORE YOU GO OFF HALF-COCKED WITH UNINFORMED OPINIONS ON THE FRAUDULENT OBAMA.


30 posted on 04/22/2011 5:49:50 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cycle of discernment
I gotta say Michelle Bachmann comes off like a clueless ditz when Steph held up that ridiculous photoshopped COLB on GMA. And now look what her wide-eyed, doe-like wonder and “duh, well, then that settles it” remark has spawned.

ATTENTION: WOULD YOU HIGH PROFILE REPUBLICANS ***PLEASE*** DO AT LEAST A BARE MINIMUM OF RESEARCH AND EDUCATING OF YOURSELVES BEFORE YOU GO OFF HALF-COCKED WITH UNINFORMED OPINIONS ON THE FRAUDULENT OBAMA.

You nailed it. What a disappointment Michelle Bachmann turned out to be.

31 posted on 04/22/2011 6:40:56 AM PDT by Menehune56 ("Let them hate so long as they fear" (Oderint Dum Metuant), Lucius Accius, (170 BC - 86 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bitt

Thanks for the ping!


32 posted on 04/22/2011 7:01:04 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bitt

The L/MSM know full well things are not as they appear. They will continue to hoodwink the general public. Lots at stake for them.


33 posted on 04/22/2011 8:21:11 AM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned....Duncan Hunter Sr. for POTUS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bitt

THX THX

So . . . are the globalists about to throw othuga under the bus?


34 posted on 04/22/2011 9:13:04 AM PDT by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bitt; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks bitt.


35 posted on 04/22/2011 10:50:16 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson