We have had at least 172 precedents, 43 presidents & 43 vice presidents times two (winning and losing) that have never had to demonstrate their qualifications to suit you & your over inflated ego personally.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And...everyone of those presidents and vice presidents has dozens upon dozens of witnesses to their newborn infancy. These relatives friends and neighbors knew the mother and father, could point to the home or hospital where this presidential candidate was born. Many attended the christenings. In many cases there are photos of the newborn.
So?...Where are the friends, relatives, photos, and neighbors of Obama who can witness that they visited his mother in the hospital and saw him swaddled in a receiving blanket in the newborn nursery? Where are the witnesses who can name his obstetrician? Who witnessed his coming home from the hospital. Who visited the new mother and baby after his birth?
Geeze! I am in my 60 and there are still many in my life that could tell you that they saw me in the newborn nursery and attended my christening.
Given the **GROSS** lack of person history, lack of friends, neighbors, and other witnesses, it is not at all unreasonable to ask Obama to present a birth certificate. It is **NOT** a burden to present a $10 document. It is **HIGHLY ** suspicious to have multiple law firms blocking its release.
"
And...everyone of those presidents and vice presidents has dozens upon dozens of witnesses to their newborn infancy"
You're not making a serious legal argument are you? Ten bucks says Abraham Lincoln didn't have anyone other than his mother as a witness when he took office. My oldest son was born ten days after I was transferred to a new base. Five days after I arrived I left for a TDY about 2500 miles away and didn't get back until both my wife and son had returned home to our apartment. There are no witnesses to his birth other than medical staff and his mother. Does that mean he was born in Kenya?
Here's the real kicker. You're simply trying to prove a negative. How do you know that there aren't 100's of witnesses to his birth. Have you interviewed the planet already?
Where are the witnesses who can name his obstetrician?...
The total, utter, and complete lack of witnesses on August 4, 1961 is the most compelling reason to suspect that the Hawaiian birth scenario is a fabrication. Not ONE medical person has come forward. Isn't it extremely odd that nobody wants to bask in the glory of having been present at the birth of supposedly the most "historic" presidential candidate of all time (not to mention the opportunity for lucrative book deals, interviews, etc.)? Zero medical records have been produced. The hospital itself has not been identified. You would think that if Obama knew himself to have really been born in Honolulu, he would be falling all over himself to squash all these horrible rumours about his ineligibility. Instead, he exacerbates the doubt by hiding the one document that could prove his case conclusively.
Until he or his sycophants can explain this illogical behavior, this elephant stays in the room. Obviously, this won't stop his election, but it will taint his legitimacy, and this can effervesce for four years and become an indelible mark against him to be used in 2012.